Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CP 2012-02-28 (amended)
City Council City of Coppell, Texas Meeting Agenda 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 Council Chambers5:30 PMTuesday, February 28, 2012 DOUG STOVER MARSHA TUNNELL Mayor Mayor Pro Tem TIM BRANCHEAU BILLY FAUGHT Place 1 Place 5 BOB MAHALIK MARVIN FRANKLIN Place 2 Place 6 BRIANNA HINOJOSA-FLORES KAREN HUNT Place 3 Place 7 CLAY PHILLIPS City Manager Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas will meet in Regular Called Session at 5:30 p.m. for Executive Session, Work Session will follow immediately thereafter, and Regular Session will begin at 7:30 p.m., to be held at Town Center, 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas. 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 item listed herein. The City of Coppell reserves the right to reconvene, recess or realign the Work Session or called Executive Session or order of business at any time prior to adjournment. 1.Call to Order 2.Executive Session (Closed to the Public) 1st Floor Conference Room Section 551.087, Texas Government Code - Economic Development Negotiations. A.Economic Development Prospects north of Dividend Road and west of Belt Line Road. B.Economic Development prospect north of Northpoint and east of Royal Lane. C.Economic Development prospects south of Dividend Road and west of Belt Line Road. Page 1 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 2/25/2012 February 28, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda Section 551.071, Texas Government Code - Consultation with City Attorney. D.Seek legal advice from the City Attorney concerning the settlement and land purchase agreements with the Billingsleys at Northlake. E.Seek legal advice from the City Attorney and have discussion regarding potential to annex property north of Sandy Lake and east of MacArthur. Section 551.072, Texas Government Code - Deliberation regarding Real Property. F.Discussion regarding property closings and related construction matters at Northlake. 3.Work Session (Open to the Public) 1st Floor Conference Room A.Presentation regarding Incentives for Energy Conservation in Residential Home Improvements. B.Discussion regarding the Amendment to the Property Maintenance Ordinance. C.Discussion regarding Non-Profit Funding. D.Discussion of Agenda Items. Regular Session (Open to the Public) 4.Invocation 7:30 p.m. 5.Pledge of Allegiance 6.Citizens’ Appearance 7.Consent Agenda A.Consider approval of minutes: February 14, 2012. Minutes for February 14, 2012.pdfAttachments: B.Consider approval to cancel the March 13, 2012 City Council Meeting due to the date falling during Spring Break. C.Consider approval of a Resolution calling for a Public Hearing on April 10, 2012 to consider updates for Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plans and the imposition of Impact Fees for Water, Waste Water and Roadway, in accordance with Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code, and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Page 2 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 2/25/2012 February 28, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda Impact Fee Public Hearing Memo.pdf Impact Fee Public Hearing Press Release.pdf Impact Fee Public Hearing Resolution.pdf Attachments: D.Consider approval of a Resolution suspending the proposed rate change of Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division, providing that the rates of said company shall remain unchanged during the period of suspension, providing for notice hereof to said company and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Staff Report Suspension Resolution.pdf List of ACSC Cities.pdf Suspension Resolution Atmos.pdf Attachments: E.Consider approval of a Resolution approving a Tax Abatement Agreement between the City of Coppell and Genera Corporation, and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Resolution Memo.pdf Resolution.pdf Tax Abatement Agreement.pdf Attachments: F.Consider approval of an Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances by amending Chapter 9, “General Regulations”, Article 9-12, “Emergency Alarm Systems,” Section 9-12-4, “Service Fees for False Alarms”, by amending the fee for false alarms; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Ordinance.pdfAttachments: End of Consent Agenda 8.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of Case No. PD-246R-SF-12, Carter Addition PH III, a zoning change request from SF-12 (Single Family-12) & A (Agricultural) to PD-246R-SF-12 (Planned Development-246 Revised-Single Family-12), to attach a Detail Site Plan to permit 23 single-family lots and one common area lot on 20.28 acres of property located on the south side of Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road. Postponement Request.pdf Staff Report.pdf Support letter from Rolling Hills.pdf e-mail from Dean Wilkerson 5/1/12.pdf Response memo from MatthewAlexander.pdf e-mail from Andy Louis 1/11/12.pdf Attachments to the Responses in Opposition from Carter.pdf e-mail from Dean Wilkerson 1.12.12.pdf Detail Site Plan.pdf Tree Survey.pdf Attachments: 9.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of the Carter Addition PH III, Revised Replat, being a replat of the Page 3 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 2/25/2012 February 28, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda Carter Addition Phase III to re-subdivide the existing 24 single-family lots and two common area lots into 23 single-family lots and one common area lot on 20.28 acres of property located on the south side of Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road. Staff Report.pdf Replat.pdf Attachments: 10.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of Case No. PD-214R5-C, Arbor Manors Retail, a zoning change request from PD-214R2-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 2-Commercial) to PD-214R5-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 5-Commercial) to attach a Detail Plan to allow the development of an 11,000-square-foot retail building to contain retail and office uses including two restaurants, one of which will have drive-thru service on 1.5 acres of property located at 143 South Denton Tap Road, approximately 145 feet north of West Braewood Drive. Staff Report.pdf Overall Color Elevations.pdf Smash Burger Signage.pdf Einstein Bros Bagels Signage.pdf Site Plan.pdf Landscape Plan.pdf Tree Survey.pdf Elevations.pdf Dumpster Monument Sign Details .pdf Attachments: 11.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of the Arbor Manors Addition, Lot 4R2R, Block A, Replat, being a replat of Lot 4R2, Block A of the Arbor Manors Addition, to relocate the existing fire lane and mutual access easement and to establish easements to allow the development of an 11,000-square-foot retail building on 1.5 acres of property located at 143 South Denton Tap Road, approximately 145 feet north of West Braewood Drive. Staff Report.pdf Replat.pdf Attachments: 12.Consider approval to purchase fifteen (15) Brazos Technology ticket writers in the amount of $86,903 to be purchased from the Court Technology Fund (50%) and the Police department capital funds (50% - as budgeted for in the FY 11/12 budget); and authorizing the City Manager to sign. Brazos Ticket Writers Memo Brazos Ticket Writers Quote Attachments: 13.Consider approval of Contract Amendment Number 6 in the amount of $74,785.00 to the Freese and Nichols, Inc. design contract to the Bethel Road and Coppell Road Improvements contract; and authorizing the City Manager to sign any necessary documents. Page 4 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 2/25/2012 February 28, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda Contract amendment #6 Bethel-Coppell Road Memo.pdf Contract amendment #6 Bethel-Coppell Exhibit.pdf Contract amendment #6 Bethel-Coppell Road-Amendment.pdf Attachments: 14.Consider approval of awarding Bid #Q-0212-01 “Raised Pavement Markings” to Highway Technologies in the amount of $106,367.92, and approval of a contingency amount of $8,632.08, for a total award of $115,000.00, as previously budgeted in the IMF funds; and authorizing the City Manager to sign and execute any necessary documents. Pavement Markings Contract memo.pdf Pavement Markings Contract award Bid tab.pdf Pavement Markings Contract exhibit.pdf Attachments: 15.An Ordinance of the City of Coppell, Texas, amending the Code of Ordinances by amending Chapter 15 Article 15-14 to the International Property Maintenance Code 2009 Edition; amending Sections 15-14-2; providing a Severability Clause; providing a Repealing Clause; providing a Savings Clause; providing a Penalty for Violation of this Ordinance not to exceed the sum of five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each offense, except however, where a different penalty has been established by State or Law for such offense which is a violation of Provision of Law that governs Fire Safety, Zoning, or Public Health and Sanitation, including dumping of refuse, the penalty shall be a fine not to exceed the sum of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense; authorizing the Mayor to sign; and providing an effective date. Staff Memo.pdf Property Maintenance Ordinance current.pdf Property Maintenance ordinance proposed.pdf Attachments: 16.Consider approval of award of a Professional Services Agreement with Teague Nall and Perkins, in the amount of $174,800.00, to provide engineering and surveying services related to the planning and design of erosion mitigation and trail protection at Andrew Brown Park East, and authorizing the President of the CRDC and the City Manager to sign. Staff Memo.pdf Erosion Improvements Contract.pdf Aerial Map.pdf Site Map.pdf Attachments: 17.Consider approval of award of a Professional Services Agreement with Nathan D. Maier Consulting Engineers, Inc., in the amount of $90,025.00 to provide a Preliminary Route Study for the Hike/Bike Trail along the TXU/Oncor Right of Way/Easement, and authorizing the President of the CRDC and the City Manager to sign the necessary documents. Staff Memo.pdf TXU Trail Agreement.pdf Aerial Map.pdf OHP Utility Corridor Trail.pdf Attachments: Page 5 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 2/25/2012 February 28, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda 18.Consider approval of a Resolution calling for the General Municipal Election for Councilmembers Place 2, 4, 6 and Mayor for Saturday, May 12, 2012; and to call a Special Election on May 12, 2012 to fill an unexpected term for Councilmember Place 7; authorize the Mayor to sign; and, authorize the City Manager to execute a Joint Election Agreement with Dallas County for conducting said Municipal Elections. A considerarse la aprobación de una resolución para convocar a Elecciones Municipales Generales con el fin de elegir a los Concejales que ocuparán los escaños 2, 4, y 6 y al Alcalde; el día sábado 12 de mayo de 2012 y a convocar una Elección Especial el día 12 de mayo de 2012 para ocupar el escaño de los Concejales 7de una gestión suspendida inesperadamente; autorizar al Alcalde a firmar, y autorizar al Regente de la Ciudad a ejecutar un Convenio de Elecciones Conjuntas con el Condado de Dallas y llevar a cabo las Elecciones Municipales. Resolution English.pdf Resolution Spanish.pdf Attachments: 19.City Manager Reports Project Updates and Future Agendas. 20.Council Committee Reports A.Carrollton/Farmers Branch ISD/Lewisville ISD - Tunnell. B.Coppell ISD - Mahalik and Hinojosa-Flores. C.Coppell Seniors - Brancheau and Faught. D.Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition - Hunt. E.International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) - Brancheau F.Metrocrest Hospital Authority - Tunnell. G.Metrocrest Medical Foundation - Mahalik. H.Metrocrest Medical Services - Hinojosa-Flores. I.Metrocrest Social Services - Franklin. J.North Texas Council of Governments - Tunnell. K.North Texas Commission - Hunt. L.Senior Adult Services - Franklin. 21.Public Service Announcements concerning items of community interest and no Council action or deliberation is permitted. 22.Necessary Action from Executive Session Adjournment ________________________ Douglas N. Stover, Mayor Page 6 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 2/26/2012 February 28, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda CERTIFICATE I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Coppell, Texas on this 24th day of February, 2012, at _____________. ______________________________ Christel Pettinos, City Secretary PUBLIC NOTICE - STATEMENT FOR ADA COMPLIANCE The City of Coppell acknowledges its responsibility to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. Thus, in order to assist individuals with disabilities who require special services (i.e. sign interpretative services, alternative audio/visual devices, and amanuenses) for participation in or access to the City of Coppell sponsored public programs, services and/or meetings, the City requests that individuals makes requests for these services forty-eight (48) hours ahead of the scheduled program, service, and/or meeting. To make arrangements, contact Vivyon V. Bowman, ADA Coordinator or other designated official at (972) 462-0022, or (TDD 1-800-RELAY, TX 1-800-735-2989). Page 7 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 2/25/2012 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478City of Coppell, Texas Minutes - Draft City Council 6:00 PM Council ChambersTuesday, February 14, 2012 DOUG STOVER MARSHA TUNNELL Mayor Mayor Pro Tem TIM BRANCHEAU BILLY FAUGHT Place 1 Place 5 BOB MAHALIK MARVIN FRANKLIN Place 2 Place 6 BRIANNA HINOJOSA-FLORES KAREN HUNT Place 3 Place 7 CLAY PHILLIPS City Manager Also present were City Manager Clay Phillips, City Secretary Christel Pettinos and City Attorney Robert Hager. The City Council of the City of Coppell met in Regular Called Session on Tuesday, February 14, 2012, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of Town Center, 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas. Call to Order1. Mayor Stover called the meeting to order, determined that a quorum was present and convened into Executive Session at 6:21 p.m. Councilmember Mahalik arrived prior to convening Executive Session. Douglas N. Stover;Tim Brancheau;Bob Mahalik;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Marsha Tunnell;Billy Faught and Karen Hunt Present 7 - Marvin FranklinAbsent1 - Executive Session (Closed to the Public) 1st Floor Conference Room 2. Section 551.071, Texas Government Code - Consultation with City Attorney. Seek legal advice from the City Attorney concerning the settlement and land Page 1City of Coppell, Texas February 14, 2012City Council Minutes - Draft purchase agreements with the Billingsleys at Northlake. Discussed under Executive Session Section 551.072, Texas Government Code - Deliberation regarding Real Property. Discussion regarding property closings and related construction matters at Northlake. Discussed under Executive Session Mayor Stover adjourned the Executive Session at 6:33 p.m. and opened the Work Session. Work Session (Open to the Public) 1st Floor Conference Room3. A.Update regarding the Coppell Aquatic and Recreation Center Expansion Project. B.Discussion regarding City Council Meeting dates. C.Discussion of Agenda Items. Presented in Work Session Mayor Stover adjourned the Work Session and opened the Regular Session. Regular Session (Open to the Public) Invocation 7:30 p.m.4. Pastor Dale Patterson with Hackberry Creek Church gave the invocation. Pledge of Allegiance5. Mayor Stover led the Pledge of Allegiance. 6.Severe Weather Awareness Week Mayor Stover read the proclamation for the record and presented the same to Deputy Chief Gregg Loyd. A motion was made by Councilmember Billy Faught, seconded by Councilmember Karen Hunt, that this Agenda Item be Approved . The motion PASSED by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Tim Brancheau;Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:6 - Citizens’ Appearance7. Mayor Stover advised that no one signed up to speak. Page 2City of Coppell, Texas February 14, 2012City Council Minutes - Draft Consent Agenda8. A.Consider approval of minutes: January 24, 2012 and January 30, 2012. A motion was made by Councilmember Bob Mahalik, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell, that Agenda Items A & B be approved on the Consent Agenda. This motion passed by unanimous vote. B.Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. S-1233R-LI, AT&T, a zoning change from LI (Light Industrial) to S-1233R-LI (Special Use Permit-1233 Revised-Light Industrial), to allow nine (9) flush-mounted panel telecommunication antennae to be mounted on an existing water tower and an equipment cabinet within the base of the water tower located at 510 Southwestern Boulevard and authorizing the Mayor to sign. A motion was made by Councilmember Bob Mahalik, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell, that Agenda Items A & B be approved on the Consent Agenda. This motion passed by unanimous vote. Enactment No: 91500-A-577 End of Consent Agenda 9.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of Case No. PD-246R-SF-12, Carter Addition PH III, a zoning change request from SF-12 (Single Family-12) & A (Agricultural) to PD-246R-SF-12 (Planned Development-246 Revised-Single Family-12), to attach a Detail Site Plan to permit 23 single-family lots and one common area lot on 20.28 acres of property located on the south side of Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road. Mayor Stover opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak. Presentation: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning, made a presentation to Council. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell, seconded by Councilmember Karen Hunt, to continue the Public Hearing to the February 28th meeting. The motion PASSED by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Tim Brancheau;Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:6 - 10.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of the Carter Addition PH III, Revised Replat, being a replat of the Carter Addition Phase III to re-subdivide the existing 24 single-family lots and two common area lots into 23 single-family lots and one common area lot on 20.28 acres of property located on the south side of Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road. Mayor Stover opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak. Presentation: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning, made a presentation to Council. Page 3City of Coppell, Texas February 14, 2012City Council Minutes - Draft A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell, seconded by Councilmember Tim Brancheau, to close the Public Hearing and deny this Agenda Item. The motion PASSED by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Tim Brancheau;Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:6 - 11.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of Case No. PD-214R5-C, Arbor Manors Retail, a zoning change request from PD-214R2-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 2-Commercial) to PD-214R5-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 5-Commercial) to attach a Detail Plan to allow the development of an 11,000-square-foot retail building to contain retail and office uses including two restaurants, one of which will have drive-thru service on 1.5 acres of property located at 143 South Denton Tap Road, approximately 145 feet north of West Braewood Drive. Mayor Stover opened the Public Hearing and advised no one signed up to speak. Presentation: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning, made a presentation to Council. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell, seconded by Councilmember Tim Brancheau, to continue the Public Hearing to the February 28th meeting. The motion PASSED by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Tim Brancheau;Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:6 - 12.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of the Arbor Manors Addition, Lot 4R2R, Block A, Replat, being a replat of Lot 4R2, Block A of the Arbor Manors Addition, to relocate the existing fire lane and mutual access easement and to establish easements to allow the development of an 11,000-square-foot retail building on 1.5 acres of property located at 143 South Denton Tap Road, approximately 145 feet north of West Braewood Drive. Mayor Stover opened the Public Hearing and advised no one signed up to speak. Presentation: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning, made a presentation to Council. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell, seconded by Councilmember Billy Faught, to close the Public Hearing and deny this Agenda Item. The motion PASSED by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Tim Brancheau;Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:6 - 13.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of Case No. PD-251R-SF-12, Rosebriar Estates, a zoning change request from SF-12 (Single Family-12) to PD-251R-SF-12 (Planned Development-251 Revised-Single Family-12), to allow the development of six (6) single-family lots, with a minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet and three (3) common area lots on 2.8 acres of property located south of East Sandy Lake Road between Dobecka Drive and Castlebury Court. At this time, Councilmember Brancheau recused himself from items 13, 14 and 15 Page 4City of Coppell, Texas February 14, 2012City Council Minutes - Draft due to a filed Conflict of Interest Affidavit. Presentation: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning, made a presentation to Council. Mayor Stover opened the Public Hearing and asked for the following to speak: 1) Brad Meyer, applicant, addressed Council. 2) Renetta Hamilton, 118 Dobecka, asked a couple of questions of Council and the developer and spoke in favor of the motion. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell, seconded by Councilmember Karen Hunt, to close the Public Hearing and approve subject to the following condition: 1) The wooden fence along the west side continue to the end of Lot 6. The motion PASSED by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:5 - 14.Consider approval of the Rosebriar Estates, Preliminary Plat, to allow the subdivision of 2.8 acres of property into six (6) single-family lots and three (3) common area lots on property located south of East Sandy Lake Road between Dobecka Drive and Castlebury Court. Presentation: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning, made a presentation to Council. A motion was made by Councilmember Karen Hunt, seconded by Councilmember Bob Mahalik, that Agenda Items 14 and 15 be approved. The motion PASSED by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:5 - 15.Consider granting the Planning & Zoning Commission authority for final plat approval of Rosebriar Estates, to allow the subdivision of 2.8 acres of property into six (6) single-family lots and three (3) common area lots on property located south of Sandy Lake Road between Dobecka Drive and Castlebury Court. Presentation: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning, made a presentation to Council. See the minutes for item 14. Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:5 - 16.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of Case No. S-1256-R/O, Signature Living at Denton Creek, a zoning change request from R (Retail) & O (Office) to S-1256-R/O (Special Use Permit-Retail/Office), to allow a 57,708-square-foot (74 units, 79 beds) assisted living and memory care facility on 5.3 acres of property located along the north side of East Sandy Lake Road, east of Riverview Drive. At this time, Councilmember Brancheau returned to the meeting. Mayor Stover opened the Public Hearing and advised no one signed up to speak. Page 5City of Coppell, Texas February 14, 2012City Council Minutes - Draft Presentation: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning, made a presentation to Council. 1) Steven Homeyer, applicant, addressed questions of Council. 2) Sharee Cummings, VP of Signature Senior Living, answered questions of Council. A motion was made by Councilmember Karen Hunt, seconded by Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores, to close the Public Hearing and approve subject to the following conditions: 1) The materials and colors shall be representative of the initial color rendering submittal. All plans and the color board should be revised accordingly. 2) Obtain and retain the appropriate state licensing. The motion PASSED by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Tim Brancheau;Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:6 - 17.Consider approval of the Signature Living at Denton Creek, Lots 1 & 2, Block A, Minor Plat, to establish a building site with required easements and fire lanes to allow a 57,708-square-foot assisted living and memory care facility on Lot 1, Block A (5.3 acres of property) with the remainder of vacant land being platted as Lot 2, Block A (6.1 acres of property) located along the north side of East Sandy Lake Road, east of Riverview Drive. Presentation: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning, made a presentation to Council. A motion was made by Councilmember Tim Brancheau, seconded by Councilmember Bob Mahalik, that this Agenda Item be approved. The motion PASSED by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Tim Brancheau;Councilmember Bob Mahalik;Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Mayor Pro Tem Marsha Tunnell;Councilmember Billy Faught and Councilmember Karen Hunt Aye:6 - City Manager Reports18. Project Updates and Future Agendas. City Manager Clay Phillips announced that the Old Coppell Project continues to move along in good fashion. The first concrete pour for Main Street could be any day. The Aquatic and Recreation Center's renovations could be completed by the end of the month. Mr. Phillips said we will look to have a public reopening in the near future. Finally, the March 13th Council Meeting has been canceled due to Spring Break. The planning items held over will be heard at the February 28th Council Meeting. Read and Filed Mayor and Council Reports19. Report by Mayor Stover regarding Metroplex Mayors’ Meeting. Page 6City of Coppell, Texas February 14, 2012City Council Minutes - Draft Nothing to report. Read and Filed Public Service Announcements concerning items of community interest and no Council action or deliberation is permitted. 20. Nothing to report. Necessary Action from Executive Session21. Nothing to report. Adjournment ________________________ Douglas N. Stover, Mayor CERTIFICATE I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Coppell, Texas on this 10th day of February, 2012, at _____________. ______________________________ Christel Pettinos, City Secretary PUBLIC NOTICE - STATEMENT FOR ADA COMPLIANCE The City of Coppell acknowledges its responsibility to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. Thus, in order to assist individuals with disabilities who require special services (i.e. sign interpretative services, alternative audio/visual devices, and amanuenses) for participation in or access to the City of Coppell sponsored public programs, services and/or meetings, the City requests that individuals makes requests for these services forty-eight (48) hours ahead of the scheduled program, service, and/or meeting. To make arrangements, contact Vivyon V. Bowman, ADA Coordinator or other designated official at (972) 462-0022, or (TDD 1-800-RELAY, TX 1-800-735-2989). Page 7City of Coppell, Texas MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council VIA: Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E., Director of Engineering and Public Works FROM: George S. Marshall, P.E., Civil Engineer DATE: February 28, 2012 REF: Consider approval of a Resolution calling for a Public Hearing on April 10, 2012 to consider updates for Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plans and the imposition of Impact Fees for Water, Waste Water and Roadway, in accordance with Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code, and authorizing the Mayor to sign. The assessment of impact fees is governed by Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code (LGC). This Code requires cities imposing impact fees to review their plan every 5 years and either determine no change is needed, or perform an update to the Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan and the imposition of impact fees. On April 26, 2011 the City of Coppell entered into a contract with Freese and Nichols, Inc. to perform an Impact Fee Study for revisions to the City’s current Capital Improvements Plan, and to make recommendations on the Impact Fees needed to implement the Capital Improvement Plan. This study was performed due to the recently updated 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The impact fee process is as follows: Develop updated Land Use Assumptions (LUA) Perform capacity analysis to develop Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) Conduct Impact Fee analysis and calculations Present LUA, CIP, and Impact Fees to Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC) Public Hearing at City Council meeting City Council approval Update Fee Ordinance This item is to set a public hearing, per LGC 395, to discuss the Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plans and the imposition of Impact fees for Water, Waste Water and Roadway. Staff will be available to answer any questions. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENT OF IMPACT FEES A Public Hearing will be held at 7:30 p.m. on April 10, 2012 in the City Council Chambers at 255 Parkway Blvd., Coppell, Texas. The purpose of the Public Hearing is to consider the amendment of Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvement Plan and the imposition of an Impact Fee. Any member of the public has the right to appear at the time of the Public Hearing to present evidence either for or against the amendment to the Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvement Plan and the imposition of an Impact Fee. ### 1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF COPPELL RESOLUTION NO. ______________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC HEARING DATE TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS OT THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN AND IMPACT FEES FOR WATER, WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY FACILITIES; PROVIDING FOR THE GIVING OF NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas previously adopted land use assumptions, a capital improvements plan, and impact fees for water, wastewater and roadway facilities, as required by Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires the governing body of the City of Coppell conduct a public hearing to discuss the amendments to the land use assumptions, the capital improvements plans, and impact fees for water, wastewater and roadway facilities; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, shall conduct a public hearing on April 10, 2012 at 7:30 p.m. to consider the adoption of amendments to the land use assumptions, the capital improvements plans, and impact fees for water, wastewater and roadway facilities. SECTION 2. That on or before the date of the first publication of the notice of the hearing on the amendments, the land use assumptions, the capital improvements plans, and impact fees for water, wastewater and roadway facilities, including the amount of any proposed amended impact fee per service unit, shall be made available to the public. SECTION 3. That pursuant to Section 395.055 of the Texas Local Government Code, the Director of Engineering and Public Works is directed to cause a Notice of Public Hearing on Amendment of Impact Fees to be published in the City’s official newspaper. The notice shall 2 appear on or before the 30th day before the date set for the hearing. The notice shall contain the following: (1) a headline to read as follows: “NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENT OF IMPACT FEES’; (2) the time, date, and location of the hearing; (3) a statement that the purpose of the hearing is to consider the amendment of land use assumptions and a capital improvements plan and the imposition of an impact fee; and (4) a statement that any member of the public has the right to appear at the hearing and present evidence for or against the update. SECTION 4. This resolution shall become effective e immediately from and after its passage, as the law and charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED and approved on this the __________ day of ____________________, 2012. APPROVED: _________________________ DOUGLAS N. STOVER, MAYOR ATTEST: _________________________ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ CITY ATTORNEY 1790994.1 STAFF REPORT SUPPORTING RESOLUTION SUSPENDING ATMOS MID-TEX’S PROPOSED MARCH 6, 2012 EFFECTIVE DATE FOR A RATE INCREASE The City, along with approximately 153 other cities served by Atmos Energy Corp., Mid- Tex Division (“Atmos Mid-Tex” or “Company”), is a member of the Atmos Cities Steering Committee (“ACSC” or “Steering Committee”). On or about January 31, 2012, Atmos Mid-Tex filed with the City a Statement of Intent to increase rates within the City. Background In 2003, TXU Gas filed a statewide rate case which became known at the Railroad Commission of Texas (“RRC”) as Gas Utilities Docket (“GUD”) No. 9400. That same year the Texas Legislature passed legislation referred to as the Gas Reliability Infrastructure Program (“GRIP”) which authorized annual piecemeal rate reviews that Texas courts have concluded significantly restrict city jurisdiction, participation, and input. Shortly after GUD No. 9400 was decided in 2004, Atmos Energy purchased TXU Gas and created what is known as Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division. The City is within the Atmos Mid-Tex Division. Atmos Mid-Tex filed four GRIP cases before filing a traditional rate case in September, 2007. As part of Cities’ Settlement Agreement with Atmos of the 2007 rate case, ACSC and Atmos created a substitute process for annual piecemeal GRIP cases. That substitute process was called a Rate Review Mechanism (“RRM”) and was intended as an expedited but comprehensive rate review that included a number of fixed values and constraints. The RRM was intended as a three-year experiment. Last year, it was extended for a fourth year with some slight modifications to the original formulas. ACSC negotiated with Atmos in the final quarter of last year to further extend the RRM process, but no agreement was reached. Atmos has expressed a desire to reach a settlement of the January 31, 2012 filing that includes a revised RRM process. Enclosed are frequently asked questions (“FAQ”) on ACSC and the RRM ratemaking process. Discussion and Purpose Atmos Mid-Tex filed a Statement of Intent on January 31, 2012, seeking to increase system-wide base rates (which exclude the cost of gas) by approximately $49 million or 11.94%. However, the Company is requesting an increase of 13.6%, excluding gas costs, for its residential customers. Additionally, the application would change the way that rates are collected, by increasing the residential fixed-monthly (or customer) charge from $7.50 to $18.00 and decreasing the consumption charge from $0.25 per 100 cubic feet (“ccf”) to $0.07 per ccf. The law provides that a rate request made by a gas utility cannot become effective until at least 35 days following the filing of the application to change rates. Atmos has proposed an effective date of March 6, 2012. The law permits the City to suspend the rate change for 90 days after the date the rate change would otherwise be effective. If the City fails to take some action 1790994.1 regarding the filing before the effective date, Atmos’ rate request is deemed administratively approved. The purpose of the resolution is to extend the effective date of Atmos Mid-Tex’s proposed rate increase to give the City time to review the rate-filing package. The resolution suspends the March 6, 2012 effective date of the Company’s rate increase for the maximum period permitted by law to allow the City, working in conjunction with the other ACSC cities, to evaluate the filing, determine whether the filing complies with law, and if lawful, to determine what further strategy to pursue, including settlement and ultimately to approve reasonable rates. Explanation of “Be It Resolved Paragraphs” Section 1. The City is authorized to suspend the rate change for 90 days after the date that the rate change would otherwise be effective so long as the City has a legitimate purpose. Time to study and investigate the application is always a legitimate purpose. Please note that the resolution refers to the suspension period as the “maximum period allowed by law” rather than ending by a specific date. This is because the Company controls the effective date and can extend its effective date and, therefore, extend the deadline for final city action to increase the time that the City retains jurisdiction (for example, if necessary to reach settlement on the case). If the suspension period is not otherwise extended by the Company, the City must take final action on Atmos Mid-Tex’s request to raise rates by June 4, 2012. Section 2. This provision recognizes the City’s membership in ACSC and authorizes the City to participate with other similarly situated cities served by Atmos Mid-Tex in order to more efficiently represent the interests of the City and its citizens. Section 3. By law, the Company must reimburse the cities for their reasonable rate case expenses. Legal counsel and consultants approved by ACSC will present their invoices to the City of Arlington which will then seek reimbursement from Atmos Mid-Tex. The City will not incur liability for payment of rate case expenses by adopting a suspension resolution. Section 4. This section merely recites that the resolution was passed at a meeting that was open to the public and that the consideration of the resolution was properly noticed. Section 5. This section provides that both Atmos Mid-Tex’s designated representative and counsel for ACSC will be notified of the City’s action by sending a copy of the approved and signed resolution to certain designated individuals. Recommendation The City Staff recommends adoption of the resolution suspending the effective date of Atmos Mid-Tex’s proposed rate increase. ACSC Cities (154 Total) 1262979 Updated 03.02.11 Abilene Addison Allen Alvarado Angus Anna Argyle Arlington Bedford Bellmead Benbrook Beverly Hills Blossom Blue Ridge Bowie Boyd Bridgeport Brownwood Buffalo Burkburnett Burleson Caddo Mills Carrollton Cedar Hill Celeste Celina Cisco Cleburne Clyde College Station Colleyville Colorado City Comanche Coolidge Coppell Corinth Corral City Crandall Crowley Dalworthington Gardens Denison DeSoto Duncanville Eastland Edgecliff Village Emory Ennis Euless Everman Fairview Farmers Branch Farmersville Fate Flower Mound Forest Hill Fort Worth Frisco Frost Gainesville Garland Garrett Grand Prairie Grapevine Haltom City Harker Heights Haskell Haslet Hewitt Highland Park Highland Village Honey Grove Hurst Iowa Park Irving Justin Kaufman Keene Keller Kemp Kennedale Kerrville Killeen Krum Lakeside Lake Worth Lancaster Lewisville Lincoln Park Little Elm Lorena Madisonville Malakoff Mansfield McKinney Melissa Mesquite Midlothian Murphy Newark Nocona North Richland Hills Northlake Oak Leaf Ovilla Palestine Pantego Paris Parker Pecan Hill Plano Ponder Pottsboro Prosper Quitman Red Oak Reno (Parker County) Richardson Richland Richland Hills River Oaks Roanoke Robinson Rockwall Roscoe Rowlett Royse City Sachse Saginaw Seagoville Sherman Snyder Southlake Springtown Stamford Stephenville Sulphur Springs Sweetwater Temple Terrell The Colony Trophy Club Tyler University Park Venus Vernon Waco Watauga Waxahachie Westlake Whitesboro White Settlement Wichita Falls Woodway Wylie 1790958 1 RESOLUTION NO. ____________________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF COPPELL SUSPENDING THE MARCH 6, 2012, EFFECTIVE DATE OF ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION (“ATMOS MID- TEX”) REQUESTED RATE CHANGE TO PERMIT THE CITY TIME TO STUDY THE REQUEST AND TO ESTABLISH REASONABLE RATES; APPROVING COOPERATION WITH ATMOS CITIES STEERING COMMITTEE (“ACSC”) AND OTHER CITIES IN THE ATMOS MID-TEX SERVICE AREA TO HIRE LEGAL AND CONSULTING SERVICES AND TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE COMPANY AND DIRECT ANY NECESSARY LITIGATION AND APPEALS; REQUIRING REIMBURSEMENT OF CITIES’ RATE CASE EXPENSES; FINDING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION IS PASSED IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW; REQUIRING NOTICE OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE COMPANY AND ACSC’S LEGAL COUNSEL WHEREAS, on or about January 31, 2012, Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division (“Atmos Mid-Tex” or “Company”), pursuant to Gas Utility Regulatory Act § 104.102 filed with the City of Coppell (“City”) a Statement of Intent to change gas rates in all municipalities exercising original jurisdiction within its Mid-Tex Division service area, effective March 6, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City is a regulatory authority under the Gas Utility Regulatory Act (“GURA”) and under Chapter 104, §104.001 et seq. of GURA has exclusive original jurisdiction over Atmos Mid-Tex’s rates, operations, and services within the City; and WHEREAS, in order to maximize the efficient use of resources and expertise, it is reasonable for the City to maintain its involvement in the Atmos Cities Steering Committee (“ACSC”) and to cooperate with the more than 150 similarly situated city members of ACSC and other city participants in conducting a review of the Company’s application and to hire and direct legal counsel and consultants and to prepare a common response and to negotiate with the Company and direct any necessary litigation; and WHEREAS, Atmos Mid-Tex proposed March 6, 2012, as the effective date for its requested increase in rates; and WHEREAS, it is not possible for the City to complete its review of Atmos Mid-Tex’s filing by March 6, 2012; and 1790958 2 WHEREAS, the City will need an adequate amount of time to review and evaluate Atmos Mid-Tex’s rate application to enable the City to adopt a final decision as a local regulatory authority with regard to Atmos Mid-Tex’s requested rate increase; and WHEREAS, the Gas Utility Regulatory Act § 104.107 grants local regulatory authorities the right to suspend the effective date of proposed rate changes for ninety (90) days; and WHEREAS, the Gas Utility Regulatory Act § 103.022 provides that costs incurred by Cities in ratemaking activities are to be reimbursed by the regulated utility. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: 1. That the March 6, 2012, effective date of the rate request submitted by Atmos Mid-Tex on January 31, 2012, be suspended for the maximum period allowed by law to permit adequate time to review the proposed changes and to establish reasonable rates. 2. That the City is authorized to cooperate with ACSC and its member cities in the Mid-Tex service area and under the direction of the ACSC Executive Committee to hire and direct legal counsel and consultants, negotiate with the Company, make recommendations to the City regarding reasonable rates, and to direct any necessary administrative proceedings or court litigation associated with an appeal of a rate ordinance and the rate case filed with the City or Railroad Commission. 3. That the City’s reasonable rate case expenses shall be reimbursed by Atmos. 4. That it is hereby officially found and determined that the meeting at which this Resolution is passed is open to the public as required by law and the public notice of the time, place, and purpose of said meeting was given as required. 5. A copy of this Resolution shall be sent to Atmos, care of David Park, Vice President Rates & Regulatory Affairs, at Atmos Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division, 5420 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1862, Dallas, Texas 75240, and to Geoffrey Gay, General Counsel to ACSC, at Lloyd Gosselink Rochelle & Townsend, P.C., P.O. Box 1725, Austin, Texas 78767-1725. PASSED AND APPROVED this __________ day of ___________________, 2012. ATTEST: ___________________________________ ____________________________________ City Secretary Douglas N. Stover, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ City Attorney Date: February 28, 2012 From: Mindi Hurley, Economic Development Coordinator RE: Genera Corporation - Resolution Genera Corporation will be leasing 150,000 square feet of space at 600 Freeport Parkway. Genera Corporation will lease this space to serve as a warehouse and distribution center for automotive parts. This new location is an expansion of an existing Coppell business; however, Genera outgrew their existing space at 306 Airline Drive and had to relocate to meet their expansion needs. Reinvestment Zone No. 68 was created for Genera Corporation by ordinance on December 13, 2011. The resolution and abatement that coincide with that reinvestment zone will grant a 75%, 5 year tax abatement on the tangible personal property for Genera Corporation. The Economic Development Committee unanimously recommended approval of this abatement. 1 RESOLUTION NO. ________________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A TAX ABATEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AND GENERA CORPORATION; AUTHORIZING ITS EXECUTION BY THE MAYOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council has been presented a proposed Tax Abatement Agreement by and between the City of Coppell, Texas and Genera Corporation, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, upon full review and consideration of the Agreement, and all matters related thereto, the City Council is of the opinion and finds that the terms and conditions thereof should be approved, and that the Mayor should be authorized to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City of Coppell, Texas; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The Agreement attached hereto having been reviewed by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, and found to be acceptable and in the best interest of the City and its citizens, be, and the same is hereby, in all things approved, and the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City of Coppell, Texas. SECTION 2. The Council finds that the improvements proposed to be built upon the Premises described in the Agreement will enhance the economic vitality of the community through a combination of new capital investment, increased sales tax revenues, and the creation of additional job opportunities. SECTION 3. The tax abatement to be granted by the Agreement will not include inventory, and supplies. SECTION 4. The improvements proposed for the Premises will accomplish the tax abatement guidelines of the City of Coppell, Texas. 2 SECTION 5. The City Manager delivered to the presiding officer of the governing body of each taxing unit in which the property subject to the Agreement is located, a written notice that the City of Coppell, Texas, intends to enter into the Agreement. The notice given by the City Manager included a copy of the Agreement approved by this Resolution. SECTION 6. This Resolution and the Tax Abatement Agreement are hereby approved by the affirmative vote of the majority of the members of the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. SECTION 7. This Resolution shall become effective immediately from and after its passage. DULY RESOLVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, on this the ______ day of ________________, 2012. CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ___________________________________________ DOUGLAS N. STOVER, MAYOR ATTEST: ___________________________________________ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY (PGS:11-23-11:TM 52594) 3 EXHIBIT “A” (copy of Tax Abatement Agreement to be attached) Page 1 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) STATE OF TEXAS § § TAX ABATEMENT AGREEMENT COUNTY OF DALLAS § This Tax Abatement Agreement (the “Agreement”) is entered into by and between the City of Coppell, Texas (the “City”), and Genera Corporation, a California corporation (the “Lessee”), acting by and through their authorized representatives. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas (the “City”), passed an Ordinance (the “Ordinance”) establishing Tax Abatement Reinvestment Zone No. 68 (the “Zone”) for the real property described in Exhibit “A” (the “Land”), for commercial/industrial tax abatement, as authorized by the Property Redevelopment and Tax Abatement Act, Chapter 312 of the Texas Tax Code, as amended (the “Tax Code”); and WHEREAS, the City has adopted guidelines for tax abatement (the “Tax Abatement Guidelines”); and WHEREAS, the Tax Abatement Guidelines contain appropriate guidelines and criteria governing tax abatement agreements to be entered into by the City as contemplated by the Tax Code; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted a resolution stating that it elects to be eligible to participate in tax abatement; and WHEREAS, in order to maintain and enhance the corporate commercial and industrial economic and employment base of the Coppell area, it is in the best interests of the taxpayers for the City to enter into this Agreement in accordance with said Ordinance, the Tax Abatement Guidelines and the Tax Code; and WHEREAS, Lessee has leased or intends to lease approximately 150,000 square feet of office and warehouse/distribution space at 600 Freeport Parkway, Coppell, Texas (hereinafter defined as the “Leased Premises”), to serve a distribution facility for automotive parts, for a period of at least five (5) years (hereinafter defined as the “Lease”), and intends to locate and maintain Tangible Personal Property (hereinafter defined) at the Leased Premises; and WHEREAS, the parties believe that the development efforts of the Lessee described herein will create permanent new jobs in the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the contemplated use of the Improvements, and the other terms hereof are consistent with encouraging development of the Zone in accordance with the purposes for its creation and/or in compliance with the Tax Abatement Guidelines, the Ordinance adopted by the City, the Tax Code and all other applicable laws; and Page 2 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Improvements (hereinafter defined) sought are feasible and practicable and would be of benefit to the Land to be included in the Zone and to the City after expiration of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, a copy of this Agreement has been furnished, in the manner prescribed by the Tax Code, to the presiding officers of the governing bodies of each of the taxing units in which the Property is located; and WHEREAS, the City desires to enter into an agreement with the Lessee for the abatement of taxes pursuant to Chapter 312 of the Tax Code as amended; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits and promises contained herein and for good and other valuable consideration, the adequacy and receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, including the anticipated expansion of primary employment, the attraction of major investment in the Zone, which contributes to the economic development of the City and the enhancement of the tax base in the City, the parties agree as follows: Article I Definitions Wherever used in this Agreement, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them: “Bankruptcy or Insolvency” shall mean the dissolution or termination of a party’s existence as a going business, insolvency, appointment of receiver for any part of a party’s property and such appointment is not terminated within ninety (90) days after such appointment is initially made, any general assignment for the benefit of creditors, or the commencement of any proceeding under any bankruptcy or insolvency laws by or against such party, and such proceeding is not dismissed within ninety (90) days after the filing thereof. “City” shall mean the City of Coppell, Texas. “Effective Date” shall mean the last date of execution of this Agreement. “First Year of Abatement” shall mean January 1, 2013. “Force Majeure” shall mean any contingency or cause beyond the reasonable control of a party including, without limitation, acts of God or the public enemy, war, riot, civil commotion, insurrection, adverse weather, government or de facto governmental action (unless caused by acts or omissions of such party), fires, explosions or floods, strikes, slowdowns or work stoppages. “Freeport Goods” shall have the same meaning as assigned by Section 11.251 of the Tax Code and Article VIII, Section 1-j of the Texas Constitution and located on the Property. Freeport Goods does not include “Goods in Transit” as defined by Tax Code, Section 11.253. Page 3 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) “Goods in Transit” shall have the same meaning assigned by Tax Code, Section 11.253. “Improvements” shall mean the existing building on the Land located at 600 Freeport Parkway, Coppell, Texas. “knowledge” means, when used herein or in a certification provided by a party pursuant to this Agreement, that the president or other chief executive officer of the party as to which the term “knowledge” then is being applied does not, as of the date hereof or at the time of such execution, as applicable, have then-current actual knowledge of facts that are contrary to the matter as to which the term “knowledge” then is being applied, without any duty being imposed or implied on such person to conduct any investigation or to make any inquiry about any of the matters as to which the term “knowledge” then is being applied. “Land” means the real property described in Exhibit “A”. “Lease” shall mean the lease of the Leased Premises by Lessee for a period of not less than five (5) years commencing on the Lease Inception Date. “Lease Inception Date” shall mean the date the term of the Lease commences but not later than August 31, 2012. “Leased Premises” shall mean approximately 150,000 square feet of office and warehouse/distribution space in the Improvements. “Lessee” shall mean Genera Corporation, a California corporation. “Premises” shall mean collectively, the Land and Improvements, but excluding the Tangible Personal Property. “Tangible Personal Property” shall mean tangible personal property, equipment, inventory and fixtures (but excluding supplies, Freeport Goods and Goods in Transit) owned or leased by Lessee that is added to the Leased Premises subsequent to the execution of this Agreement. “Taxable Value” means the appraised value as certified by the Appraisal District as of January 1 of a given year. Article II General Provisions 2.1 The Lessee has entered into or intends to enter into the Lease. The Lessee intends to locate and maintain Tangible Personal Property at the Leased Premises. 2.2 The Premises are not in an improvement project financed by tax increment bonds. Page 4 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) 2.3 This Agreement is entered into subject to the rights of the holders of outstanding bonds of the City. 2.4 The Premises and Tangible Personal Property are not owned or leased by any member of the Coppell City Council or any member of the Coppell Planning and Zoning Commission, or any member of the governing body of any taxing units joining in or adopting this Agreement. 2.5 Lessee shall before May 1, of each calendar year that the Agreement is in effect, certify in writing to the City that it is, to its knowledge, in compliance with each of its covenants contained in this Agreement. 2.6 The Land and the Improvements constructed thereon at all times shall be used in the manner (i) that to Lessee’s knowledge is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended, and (ii) that, during the period taxes are abated hereunder, is consistent with the general purposes of encouraging development or redevelopment within the Zone. Article III Tax Abatement Authorized 3.1 This Agreement is authorized by the Tax Code and in accordance with the City Tax Abatement Guidelines, and approved by resolution of the City Council. 3.2 Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the City hereby grants Lessee an abatement of seventy-five percent (75%) of the Taxable Value of the Tangible Personal Property for a period of five (5) consecutive years beginning with the First Year of Tax Abatement. The actual percentage of Taxable Value of the Tangible Personal Property subject to abatement for each year this Agreement is in effect will apply only to the Tangible Personal Property that is added to the Premises. 3.3 The period of tax abatement herein authorized shall be for a period of five (5) consecutive years beginning with the First Year of Tax Abatement. 3.4 During the period of tax abatement herein authorized, Lessee shall be subject to all taxation not abated, including but not limited to sales tax and ad valorem taxation on land, inventory and supplies, to the extent the same would be payable by Lessee in the absence of this Agreement. 3.5 The Lessee agrees to locate and maintain Tangible Personal Property at the Leased Premises with a Taxable Value of at least Five Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($5,700,000.00) as of the First Year of Abatement and as of January 1 of each calendar year thereafter during the term of this Agreement. Page 5 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) 3.6 The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and continue until March 1 of the calendar year following the sixth (6th) anniversary date of the First Year of Abatement, unless sooner terminated as provided herein. Article IV Improvements 4.1 Nothing in this Agreement obligates the Lessee to enter into the Lease and/or occupy the Leased Premises, but said action is a condition precedent to tax abatement pursuant to this Agreement. 4.2 As a condition precedent to the initiation of the Lessee’s tax abatement pursuant to this Agreement, Lessee shall have entered into the Lease on or before August 31, 2012. If Lessee shall have entered into the Lease, Lessee agrees and covenants to continuously lease and occupy the Leased Premises for a period of at least five (5) years commencing on a day that is not later than ninety (90) days after the landlord under the Lease shall have delivered the Leased Premises to Lessee in the condition required by the Lease. 4.3 Lessee agrees, but only to the extent the Lease obligates Lessee, rather than the landlord under the Lease, to do so, to maintain the Leased Premises during the term of this Agreement in accordance with all applicable state and local laws, codes, and regulations. 4.4 The City, its agents and employees shall have the right of access to the Leased Premises during Lessee’s occupancy of the Leased Premises to inspect the Leased Premises at reasonable times during business hours and with reasonable prior notice to Lessee, and in accordance with Lessee’s visitor access and security policies, in order to insure that the use of the Leased Premises are in accordance with this Agreement and all applicable state and local laws and regulations (or valid waiver thereof). Article V Default: Recapture of Tax Revenue 5.1 In the event Lessee: (i) fails to occupy the Leased Premises in accordance with this Agreement or in accordance with applicable State or local laws, codes or regulations; (ii) has delinquent ad valorem or sales taxes owed to the City (provided Lessee retains its right to timely and properly protest such taxes or assessment); (iii) suffers an event of “Bankruptcy or Insolvency”; or (iv) breaches any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, which in each such event which is not otherwise cured within the applicable cure period as specified in Section 5.2 below, then Lessee after the expiration of the notice and cure periods described below, shall be in default of this Agreement. As liquidated damages in the event of such default beyond applicable cure periods, the Lessee shall, within thirty (30) days after termination, pay to the City all taxes which otherwise would have been paid by the Lessee to the City without benefit of a tax abatement for the Tangible Personal Property, with interest at the statutory rate for delinquent taxes as determined by Section 33.01 of the Tax Code, as amended, but without penalty. The parties acknowledge that actual damages in the event of default termination would be speculative and Page 6 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) difficult to determine. The parties further agree that any abated tax, including interest as a result of this Agreement, shall be recoverable against the Lessee, its successors and assigns and shall constitute a tax lien against the Tangible Personal Property, and shall become due, owing and shall be paid to the City within thirty (30) days after termination. 5.2 Upon breach by Lessee of any obligations under this Agreement, or if any of the other events specified in the first sentence Section 5.1 should occur (such breach or event is referred to in this Section 5.2 as a “default”) the City shall notify the Lessee in writing, who shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of the notice in which to cure any such default. If the default cannot reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) day period, and the Lessee has diligently pursued such remedies as shall be reasonably necessary to cure such default, then the City shall extend the period in which the default must be cured for an additional thirty (30) day period. 5.3 If the Lessee fails to cure the default within the time provided as specified above, as such time period may be extended, then the City at its sole option shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, by written notice to the Lessee. 5.4 Upon termination of this Agreement by City, all tax abated as a result of this Agreement, shall become a debt to the City as liquidated damages, as set forth in Section 5.1 above, and shall become due and payable not later than thirty (30) days after a notice of termination is provided. The City shall have all remedies for the collection of the abated tax provided generally in the Tax Code for the collection of delinquent property tax. The City at its sole discretion has the option to provide a repayment schedule. The computation of the abated tax for the purposes of the Agreement shall be based upon the full Taxable Value of the Tangible Personal Property, without tax abatement for the years in which tax abatement hereunder was received by the Lessee, as determined by the Appraisal District, multiplied by the tax rate of the years in question, as calculated by the City Tax Assessor-Collector. The liquidated damages shall incur penalties as provided for delinquent taxes and shall commence to accrue after expiration of the thirty (30) day payment period. Article VI Annual Application for Tax Exemption It shall be the responsibility of the Lessee pursuant to the Tax Code, to file an annual exemption application form with the Chief Appraiser of the Appraisal District in which the eligible taxable property has situs. A copy of the exemption application shall be submitted to the City upon request. Notwithstanding the requirements of the Tax Code to annually file an exemption application with the chief appraiser for the Appraisal District, the Lessee is not required to annually submit an application for exemption to the City. Article VII Annual Rendition The Lessee shall annually render the value of the Tangible Personal Property to the Appraisal District and provide a copy of the same to the City upon written request. Page 7 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) Article VIII Miscellaneous 8.1 Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be delivered hereunder addressed to the party at the addresses specified below and shall be deemed received (x) on the day actually received (as evidenced by the signed return receipt) or when delivery is refused, if sent by United States Mail, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed or (y) on the day actually received if sent by courier or otherwise hand delivered: If intended for Lessee, to: Genera Corporation 2800 Saturn Street Brea, California 92821 Attn: Mr. Jackson Kwok, President With a copy to: Fragner Seifert Pace & Winograd, LLP 1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 920 Los Angeles, California 90067 Attn: Norbert M. Seifert If intended for City, to: Attn: City Manager City of Coppell, Texas P. O. Box 478 Coppell, Texas 75019 Telephone: 972.304.3677 Facsimile: 972.304.3673 With a copy to: Peter G. Smith Nichols, Jackson, Dillard, Hager & Smith, L.L.P. 1800 Lincoln Plaza 500 N. Akard Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone: 214.968.9900 Facsimile: 214.968.0010 Email: psmith@njdhs.com Page 8 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) 8.2 Authorization. This Agreement was authorized by resolution of the City Council approved by its Council meeting authorizing the Mayor to execute this Agreement on behalf of the City. 8.3 Severability. In the event any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, phrase or word herein is held invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, the balance of this Agreement shall stand, shall be enforceable and shall be read as if the parties intended at all times to delete said invalid section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, phrase or word. 8.4 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas without regard to any conflict of law rules. Exclusive venue for any action under this Agreement shall be the State District Court of Dallas County, Texas. The parties agree to submit to the personal and subject matter jurisdiction of said court. 8.5 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and constitute one and the same instrument. 8.6 Entire Agreement. This Agreement embodies the complete agreement of the parties hereto, superseding all oral or written previous and contemporary agreements between the parties and relating to the matters in this Agreement, and except as otherwise provided herein cannot be modified without written agreement of the parties to be attached to and made a part of this Agreement. 8.7 Recitals. The determinations recited and declared in the preambles to this Agreement are hereby incorporated herein as part of this Agreement. 8.8 Exhibits. All exhibits to this Agreement are incorporated herein by reference for all purposes wherever reference is made to the same. 8.9 Assignment. This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties to it and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives, successors, and permitted assigns. This Agreement may not be assigned without the prior written consent of the City Manager. 8.10 Conditions Precedent. This Agreement is conditioned on and subject to the following: (i) the Lessee entering into the Lease on or before December 31, 2011; (ii) Lessee providing a fully executed copy of the Lease to the City. 8.11 Employment of Undocumented Workers. During the term of this Agreement, the Lessee agrees not to knowingly employ any undocumented workers and if convicted, by a final non-appealable conviction, of a violation under 8 U.S.C. Section 1324a (f), the Lessee shall repay the taxes abated herein as of the date of such final non-appealable conviction within 120 business days after the date the Lessee is notified by the City of such final non-appealable conviction, plus interest at the rate of 6% compounded annually from the date of such final non- appealable conviction until paid. Page 9 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) 8.12 Right of Offset. The City may at its option, on not less than thirty (30) days’ prior notice to Lessee, offset any amounts due and payable under this Agreement against any debt (including taxes) lawfully due to the City from the Lessee, regardless of whether the amount due arises pursuant to the terms of this Agreement or otherwise and regardless of whether or not the debt due the City has been reduced to judgment by a court. (Signature Page to Follow) Page 10 Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Genera Corporation (TM 52533) EXECUTED in duplicate originals the ____ day of _______________, 2012. CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS By: ______________________________________ Douglas N. Stover, Mayor Attest: By: _______________________________________ Christel Pettinos, City Secretary Agreed as to Form: By:_______________________________ City Attorney EXECUTED in duplicate originals the ____ day of _______________, 2012. GENERA CORPORATION, By:_______________________________________ Name:______________________________ Title: ______________________________ Page 1 Exhibit “A” to Tax Abatement Agreement City of Coppell and Nefab Inc. USA (49328) EXHIBIT “A” Legal Description of the Land Block A, Lot 4 of the Duke-Freeport Addition (26.659 acres) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. ___________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR THE CITY OF COPPELL BY AMENDING CHAPTER 9, “GENERAL REGULATIONS”, ARTICLE 9-12, “EMERGENCY ALARM SYSTEMS,” SECTION 9-12-4, “SERVICE FEES FOR FALSE ALARMS”, BY AMENDING THE FEE FOR FALSE ALARMS; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That Chapter 9, “General Regulations”, of the Code of Ordinances be and the same is hereby amended by amending Article 9-12, “Emergency Alarm Systems”, Section 9-12- 4, “Service Fees for False Alarms” by providing establishment of false alarms fees, providing for the number of false alarms within a twelve (12) month period, repealing the current number of false alarms within a twelve (12) month period, which shall now read as follows: “CHAPTER 9 GENERAL REGULATIONS ARTICLE 9-12 EMERGENCY ALARM SYSTEMS . . . . . Sec. 9-12-4. Service Fees for False Alarms A. If any permit holder has four (4) or more false alarms in the twelve (12) month period, he shall be assessed a service fee for such false alarms, as established by resolution of the city council, as follows: 1. if the location has had four (4) but not more than six (6) other false alarms in the preceding 12-month period; 2. if the location has had seven (7) but not more than nine (9) other false alarms in the preceding 12-month period; or 3. if the location has had over nine (9) false alarms in the preceding 12- month period. B. A permit holder must pay any service fee assessed under the provisions of this section within 15 days after receipt of notice that it has been assessed by the director. C. The city shall maintain a written record of all alarm notifications, including but not limited to, the following: 1. Name of permit holder; 2. Location of alarm site; 3. Date and time of alarm notification; 4. Name and badge number of the responding police officer or fire fighter in charge of the response; 5. Weather conditions; and 6. Whether the notification was a false alarm notification.” SECTION 2. That all provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and all other provisions not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. That should any word, phrase, paragraph, section or phrase of this ordinance or of the Code of Ordinances, as amended hereby, be held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, and shall not affect the validity of the Code of Ordinances as a whole. SECTION 4. 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 Coppell, Texas, this the _______ day of ___________________, 2012. APPROVED: DOUGLAS N. STOVER, MAYOR ATTEST: CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ ROBERT E. HAGER, CITY ATTORNEY Marcie Diamond - 07111C-Carter Estates Marcie: Good afternoon. Per our conversation, I have spoken with Rob Paul of Toll Bros. Dallas and we agree that we should table/postpone our zoning case for Carter Estates from February 14 to February 28 to allow for a full Council quorum. Please let me know if you need anything else. Matt From: "Matt Alexander" <malexander@daa-civil.com> To: "Marcie Diamond" <mdiamond@ci.coppell.tx.us> Date: 2/9/2012 2:25 PM Subject: 07111C-Carter Estates Page 1 of 1 2/9/2012file://C:\Documents and Settings\mdiamond\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F33D76DCit... ITEM # 5 Page 1 of 6 CITY OF COPPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT CASE NO.: PD-246R-SF-12, Carter Addition PH III P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012 C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012 STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Planning Director LOCATION: South side of Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road SIZE OF AREA: 20.28 acres of property CURRENT ZONING: SF-12 (Single-Family 12) & A (Agricultural) REQUEST: A zoning change to PD-246R-SF-12 (Planned Development-246 Revised-Single Family-12), to attach a Detail Site Plan to permit 23 single-family lots and one common area lot. APPLICANT: Owner: Civil Engineer: Toll Dallas TX LLC Matt Alexander 2557 S.W. Grapevine Pkwy Dowdey, Anderson & Associates Suite 100 5225 Village Creek Drive Grapevine, Texas 76051 Plano, Texas 75093 817-329-8770 972-931-0694 HISTORY: The Carter Addition, a 30-lot subdivision, was established in 1972 and encircled an existing 0.5-acre cemetery. Deed restrictions placed on the property expired on January 1, 2001. In 1990, a replat of Lots 3 and 4 was denied by Council. On June 17, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied a requested replat of Lot 18, to reduce the front building line from 50 to 30 feet, at 509 East Bethel School Road. Lot 1 of the original Carter Estates subdivision is within the current request area and contains 2.95 acres of the 20.3-acre subject property. The Carter Addition, Phase II, which is a five-lot subdivision has a long replatting history. The original Final Plat was approved by the Planning Commission on November 21, 1996. That plat was not filed for record prior to its expiration date, ITEM # 5 Page 2 of 6 and therefore was deemed null and void. In 1998, a Final Plat for a reconfigured five-lot layout was approved, but again, never filed for record. In October of 1999, Council approved a five-lot Final Plat which was filed with Dallas County in December of that year. On August 8, 2000, City Council approved a replat for Lots 1 and 2 Carter Addition, Phase II; however, it also expired. This replat of Lots 1 and 2 was approved again in November 2001, and was filed within the statutory time limit. Since that time, all five homes have been constructed in Phase II of this development. On September 16, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied a request for a preliminary plat, with variances, for 23 residential lots and one area common lot on this 20.28 acres of property. On November 9, 2010, City Council followed the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a preliminary plat with no variances for twenty-seven (27) single-family residential lots and two (2) common area lots on this tract of land. On March 8, 2011, Council approved a Replat/Final Plat with no variances for 24 lots and two common area lots on this 20-acre tract of land. This plat has been filed with the county, and is essentially ready for development. TRANSPORTATION: Carter Drive and Christi Lane are two-lane, asphalt streets, built within 50 feet of right-of-way. These streets do not have curbs or sidewalks. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North - Single-family residences; Carter Addition, PD-248-SF-18 (Planned Development-248-Single Family-18) South – DART R.O.W. and Belt Line Road; A (Agriculture) East - Single-family residences; Carter Addition, Phase II, PD-248-SF-18 (Planned Development-248-Single Family-18) West - single-family residences; Northlake Woodlands, Lots 5-10 SF-12 (Single Family-12) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan of March 2011, shows the property as suitable for Residential Neighborhood, which is defined as areas of low and medium density single family, typically one to four dwelling units per acre. DISCUSSION: This property is currently zoned, and platted for the development of 24 single family lots under Single Family-12 District regulations. A Planned Development zoning district is being requested to allow for several variances to the Subdivision Ordinance, and to enhance several of the regulations in the base SF-12 zoning district. The four variances to the Subdivision Ordinance being requested are; the deletion of the alley requirement, the inclusion of a cul-de-sac which exceeds ITEM # 5 Page 3 of 6 the 600-foot maximum length, the provision of mountable curbs and no sidewalks along Carter Drive. All of the 23 single family lots proposed exceed the minimum size as required by the SF-12 district zoning, ranging in size from 13,175 square feet along the western property line abutting Northlake Woodlands, to over one acre along the southern portion of the property. These southern oversized lots incorporate the flood plain area, similar to the lots in Phase II of Carter Estates. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY While certain development rights are enjoyed by a tract of land that is already zoned and platted for single family, compatibility and sensitivity to the existing environment (development patterns, existing trees, etc.) must be considered when evaluating any development request. North and east of the subject property are Phases I and II of Carter Estates. These properties have recently been rezoned to a PD-248-SF-18, to be more reflective of the existing development patterns. To the west are Lots 5-10 Block 1, of the Northlake Woodlands subdivision, which is zoned SF-12. These lots along Rolling Hills Road, abutting the area of request, exceed 27,000 square feet (0.6 of an acre). Carter Road Frontage To be compatible with the homes/lots fronting on Carter Drive, two lots are planned east of Heritage Oak Court and one lot to the west, all of which face Carter Drive. Setbacks have been established which are reflective of the abutting existing zoning patterns, specifically, a 30-foot front yard setback on the lot abutting Carter Estates Phase II, (Lot 23) and a 50-foot front yard setback on the lot abutting Carter Estates Phase I (Lot 1). To continue the streetscape as established in this neighborhood, sidewalks, curbs and gutters are not being proposed along Carter Drive. West Property Line As stated, this property abuts Lots 5-10, Block 1, of the Northlake Woodlands subdivision. The existing lots abutting the area of request are generally just over 27,000 square feet, which is significantly larger than the 13,175-square-foot lots proposed for this property. The applicant has offered an increased rear yard setback on those lots abutting Northlake Woodlands, from the minimum of 20 feet, as prescribed in the Zoning Ordinance, to 35 feet. This essentially reflects the typical 20-foot required setback plus the additional 15 feet in width that would have been equivalent to an alley width, if not waived. This 35-foot building line would only be applicable to the main structure, whereas pools, arbors and accessory buildings would still be permitted within this area, which is throughout the city. COMMON OPEN SPACE LOT This plan includes an 11,148 square-foot common area lot in the center of the property. This lot contains fifteen overstory trees (148 caliper inches), ranging in size from eight to 17 caliper inches. It is the intent of the developer to retain this lot in its natural state, except for the cleaning of the underbrush. This lot will be fully irrigated and serve as an open space focal point for this neighborhood. ITEM # 5 Page 4 of 6 NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT On January 6th, staff received correspondence from Mr. Dean Wilkerson, representing the Rolling Hills neighborhood and Carter Estates, Phases I and II, requesting that Toll Brothers delay this request for 30 days, as well as consider the following items: 1. reduction of one lot adjacent to Rolling Hills 2. eight-foot masonry wall along the western property line 3. homes fronting on Carter to have to have side or rear entry garages - and no board on board fences on these lots 4. provision of an additional open space (x-lot) along Carter Drive 5. do more to save trees - save all trees greater than 20-inch caliper that are not within the roads or building pads 6. Minimum house size of 3,200 square feet 7. require an HOA. 8. asphalt streets, and 9. no sidewalks along Carter Drive. Attached to this Staff Report is the e-mail from Mr. Wilkerson and the response to his requests by the applicant. Obviously, they did not agree to a delay or items 1 though 5. They did agree to a minimum house size of 3,200 square feet, establishment of an HOA, asphalt streets and no sidewalks along Carter Drive. Staff can not support asphalt streets, however no sidewalks, curbs or gutters along Carter Drive is appropriate to be more compatible with the established development pattern in this neighborhood. Staff can also support mountable curbs (with sidewalks) along the new streets proposed within this development. The paving width will be increased to 30 feet (back to back), within the 50 foot right- of-way accommodate this street type. A follow-up e-mail from Dean Wilkerson is also attached which reiterates their concern with the increased number of homes backing to the homes along Rolling Hills. On January 12, 2012, Staff received responses in opposition, from 26 of the homeowners in Carter Estates, Phases I and II. All responses contained the same attachments, including a letter, signed by each property owner stating that they prefer the existing 24-lot plan (approved plat), because it provides: two entrances and better traffic flow, fewer lots adjacent to the homes on Rolling Hills, rear entry homes which will result in less cars parked on the street, an alley which will provide a hard separation between neighborhoods, and a significant more public green space in the 24-lot plan. A copy of the letter and all exhibits are also attached to this Staff Report. ITEM # 5 Page 5 of 6 Staff analyzed this request in comparison to the development rights which are vested in virtue of having a 24-lot filed, and development-ready subdivision plat. From a planning perspective, this current request: Is more compatible with development patterns along Carter Drive, whereas the approved plat has three lots that side onto Carter, which would permit wood fences along the street, standard curb, gutter and sidewalks. Open space is being provided internal to the tract. Preserves significantly more trees (approximately 1,818 caliper inches) The minimum house size has increased from 1,800 square feet, to 3,200 square feet. Retains the existing decorative metal fencing along the east and west property lines. However, the location of this fence needs to be shown on the Detail Site Plan and its maintenance defined. Homeowners Association will be established, as required with all subdivisions where there is common property. On both proposals, there are smaller lots adjacent to the west property line than the existing homes along Rolling Hills. The approved plat calls for a 15-foot alley, and a 20-foot rear yard setback, with no other requirements. The PD currently being requested includes a 35-foot setback for all main structures, and the retention of the existing decorative metal fence. While the neighborhood is requesting a construction of a masonry wall between these two developments, staff cannot support that request because masonry walls are only required along thoroughfares and between residential and non-residential uses. The applicant has offered to limit the garage doors facing the street to a maximum of two, throughout the entire development. And, it reduces the number of lots from 24 to 23. Staff recognizes the overwhelming opposition to this request by virtually all of the abutting property owners, which exceeds the 20% threshold, requiring a super- majority vote (6 out of 7) vote of Council to grant this change in zoning. RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Staff is recommending APPROVAL of PD-246R-SF-12, Carter Addition PH III subject to the PD Conditions as offered by the applicant including, the 35’ rear yard setback along the west property line, increased front yard setbacks, no curb, gutter or sidewalks along Carter Drive, maximum of two garage doors facing the street, preservation of trees, and subject to the following revisions: 1. Revise the PD Conditions on the Detail Plan to reflect the minimum house size of 3,200 square feet. 2. Revise the Detail Plan to indicate the location and define maintenance of retained decorative metal fencing. ITEM # 5 Page 6 of 6 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend approval of the request 2. Recommend disapproval of the request 3. Recommend modification of the request 4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date ATTACHMENTS: 1. E-Mail from Dean Wilkerson, dated 1/5/12 2. Response Memo from Matthew Alexander, dated 1/11/12 3. E-mail from Andy Louis, dated 1/11/12 4. Attachments to letters in opposition from 26 property owners in Carter Estates. 5. E-Mail from Dean Wilkerson, dated 1/12/12 6. Detail Site Plan 7. Tree Survey February 2, 2012 Coppell City Council Coppell City Hall 255 E. Parkway Boulevard Coppell, TX 75019 Re: Carter Estates, Phase III Planned Development (PD) Dear Honorable Members of the Coppell City Council: We are the owners of the seven homes on Rolling Hills Road that border the west side of the property that is the subject of the PD request by Toll Brothers for Carter Estates, Phase III. Most of us are long-time residents of Coppell and our families have been active in the city, local schools, and civic organizations to varying degrees. We are pleased to say that we unanimously support the PD request before you and ask that the Coppell City Council approve this zoning change. When this PD came before the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) in September 2010, some of us opposed the PD because of the increased density next to our property compared to standard SF-12 zoning, in addition to other concerns. The developer has reduced the density by one lot next to our homes and has made other improvements in the PD to address concerns. Of the requests made of the developer that came out of a joint meeting between Carter Estates homeowners and some of us from Rolling Hills on January 4th, the developer has incorporated the large majority of those requests into the revised PD. It is a reflection on the substantial improvements that have been made to the proposed PD that our neighborhood is now unanimously in support of this PD, and the P&Z has voted unanimously to recommend its adoption by the City Council. There are at least seven compelling reasons why the City Council should vote to approve this PD instead of leaving it to be developed under the SF-12 zoning: 1. Less Density. The PD has less density. There are only 22 houses in the PD rather than the 24 houses provided in the SF-12 plan. That is a significant positive difference. By virtue of having less density, the PD will also have fewer homes looking down into our yards. 2. No Alleys. The PD will be less of a nuisance to surrounding homeowners by virtue of having no alleys. The burden of alleys under the SF-12 plan would fall heavily on our neighborhood on the west side. In addition to the increased noise, there would be headlights shining into most of our homes as cars drove into and out of the alley. Coppell City Council Page 2 3. Better Public Safety. The PD offers better public safety in several respects. There are no legitimate safety issues with the proposed cul-de-sacs according to Coppell public safety officials. Cul-de-sacs are in wide use throughout our city. Having a cul-de-sac rather than a through street reduces the “racetrack effect” of people speeding through the neighborhood as they sometimes do down Rolling Hills Road. Having only 22 houses versus 24 should result in slightly less traffic from the neighborhood. There is also a concern that having alleys under SF-12 would potentially contribute to higher crime than the PD. Driving in an alley can also be hazardous to others unless the alley has good lighting (which would be a further nuisance to our homes). 4. Support for Home Values. The PD should help ensure that home values on Rolling Hills Road as well as in Carter Estates remain high. Under the PD, the developer has committed to a 3,200 square foot minimum building requirement. No such minimum square footage is required under the SF-12 plan. The developer is also agreeing to a strong homeowners association agreement to be reviewed by the city. Not having alleys behind homes is preferable for high-end housing and results in higher home prices because homeowners at this price point want large backyards and swimming pools. 5. Preservation of Trees. The PD is more consistent with the values of our community than the SF-12 plan because the PD preserves more trees that would otherwise be cut down. The SF-12 plan requires an alley, which would require many of the trees next to our homes as well as many trees that adjoin the flood plain on the south side of the property to be cut down. Many of these are mature trees that have been there for decades. It would be a shame to unnecessarily destroy trees that have been in our community for generations and would continue to add value to our community for many years to come. 6. Better Aesthetics. The PD will be more attractive aesthetically than would be the SF-12 plan. The developer has agreed to position the homes on Carter Drive facing the street with rear or side entry garages. The developer has also agreed to require iron fencing throughout the development rather than wood fences. Under the SF-12 plan, homes could be positioned with the side facing Carter Drive, there would be alleys, and there would most likely be wood fences behind many of the homes. This would be considerably less attractive than the clean and inviting appearance of the neighborhood under the PD. 7. Developer Cooperation. Toll Brothers has addressed the reasonable concerns of the homeowners surrounding this property. We asked them for certain things and they have delivered on most of them, particularly the requests that were reasonable. It would be inappropriate at this point for our city to continue to prevent the development of this property under a plan that is better than the existing zoning allows. Coppell City Council Page 3 In conclusion, the PD before you is substantially better than the existing SF-12 plan. Our city would be making a serious mistake to turn down this superior plan and force the developer’s hand to develop something that is not desirable for our community. In our opinion, it is not credible to argue that the SF-12 plan is better than this PD request. Our neighborhood is weary of the uncertainty and the unnecessary conflict over this property. We understand there is going to be development behind our homes. This PD request is acceptable to us and preferable to anything we have seen as a plan for this property to date. We have gotten the concessions from the developer we feel are appropriate and that were reasonably requested by our neighborhood as well as by Carter Estates. We respectfully ask the Coppell City Council to pass this PD. Thank you in advance for your decision to do what is best for our community. Sincerely, John and Laura Lang 526 Rolling Hills Road Andy and Karla Moog 530 Rolling Hills Road Doug and Kathy Reinhart 534 Rolling Hills Road Dean and Pam Wilkerson 538 Rolling Hills Road Dave and Sandy Capps 542 Rolling Hills Road Andy and Joni Louis 546 Rolling Hills Road Kevin and Janell Briscoe 550 Rolling Hills Road cc: Clay Phillips Gary Sieb Marcie Diamond >>> On 1/5/2012 at 5:30 PM, in message <1B59BAE71B668F4DB0A483C0CE9850B202F7A0@EXCH.acepnatl.org>, Dean Wilkerson <dwilkerson@acep.org> wrote: Dear Clay and Gary, Homeowners in our Rolling Hills neighborhood and those in the Carter Estates received the attached letter concerning a request to change the SF-12 zoning (24 lots) on the Carter/Foss property to a planned development (PD) (23 lots) with the same specifications as were previously submitted and rejected by the Coppell P&Z. We understand Coppell staff is to issue its recommendation on January 13 and the matter is to be considered by the P&Z on January 19. On behalf of the neighbors that will be affected, I respectfully ask for a one-month extension and that the staff recommendation and P&Z consideration be postponed until February. As I discussed briefly with Clay this morning, our neighborhoods have assumed that the SF-12 zoning was going to be adhered to. Many neighbors support this even with the alleys because it results in less density on the west side, creates some buffer between property lines and the building area of the new homes, and there are aspects of the PD they don't like. The request by Toll Brothers to now simply approve the original PD with no changes strikes some as a bait-and-switch. In addition, this request has come fairly quickly and homeowners have not had time to absorb, sufficiently discuss among ourselves, and suggest to Coppell staff and the Toll Brothers ways in which the PD could reasonably be improved and be supported by many if not all homeowners in the area. A few homeowners from Rolling Hills met last night with many of the homeowners from Carter Estates. There are still some differing views as to which plan is preferred and what might make the PD supportable over the existing zoning. I believe there may be enough consensus that we could propose modifications to the PD that might be deemed reasonable by the staff and some of which might be acceptable to the Toll Brothers. It would be highly preferable, in my opinion, if a win-win-win could be worked out that the city, Toll Brothers, and the homeowners could live with. An important reason for the one-month delay is to give our homeowners time to agree on what are reasonable requests for improvement of the PD. It may be that the Rolling Hills neighborhood has some different viewpoints than the Carter Estates, but based on the conversations last night, I think there is a list of items that might get support from virtually all homeowners, some of which might be acceptable to Toll Brothers and would improve the PD from our standpoint. Some of these items that would garner support of the Rolling Hills neighborhood for the PD include: 1.Reduce the density on the west side by one lot. This would be consistent with the number of lots on the west side under the SF-12 plan; the PD increases density on the Rolling Hills side. 2.Require an 8-foot stone or brick wall around most of the property, although not necessarily homes that back up to the flood plain. This would preserve some measure of privacy for our neighborhoods and for homeowners in the new subdivision. Some additional items that our neighborhood supports and are important to the Carter Estates homeowners include: 1.Have homes that are adjacent to Carter Drive face Carter Drive, require side or rear entry garages, and specify that board-on-board fences would not be allowed for the homes adjacent to Carter Drive. 2.Provide two green spaces in the new subdivision, which the SF-12 plan provides, rather than the one green space in the proposed PD. If positioned near the Carter Estates homes this would allow existing neighbors as well as future neighbors to enjoy more green space. 3.Do more to save some trees. Specify that any tree of 20 inches or more in diameter on the specific acreage outside the flood plain be saved (unless the tree is within specific road or home building lines). 4.Require a minimum house square footage of 3,200 square feet. 5.Require a strict HOA with the City of Coppell’s review and approval. Suggested cost-saving ideas for Toll Brothers could include asphalt streets in lieu of concrete and no sidewalks along Carter Drive to allow continuity with the existing neighborhood. We respectfully ask for a one-month extension to allow time for us to discuss these issues further among our neighbors, with Toll Brothers and with city staff. This is an extremely important issue that profoundly affects our home values and enjoyment of our homes. I hope you will agree to give us just a little more time with this. Thank you for your consideration. –Dean Dean Wilkerson 538 Rolling Hills Road Coppell, TX 75019 (H)972-393-1682 (O)800-798-1822, ext. 3200 Marcie Diamond - Carter Addition Phase III Ms. Diamond, Thank you for forwarding the attached response of Dowdy, Anderson & Associates, Inc. on behalf of Toll Dallas Texas LLC denying all the requested changes proposed by the adjacent neighbors in Carter Estates and Rolling Hills Road regarding the planned development proposed for Carter Addition Phase III of 23 residential lots, 1 common area on 20.269 acres. From the Rolling Hills perspective, I and my neighbors on the south part of Rolling Hills most affected by the greatest density of the proposed planned development are in agreement. While the proposed planned development reduces the total number of lots by one, it increases the density by one lot for the row of houses adjacent to the Rolling Hills Road lots. I do not understand how the city would support such an inequitable treatment for me and my neighbors. There is little incentive for us to support the proposed planned development without any concessions by the developer. I believe the developer has a lot to gain from the proposed planned development or the developer would already be building on the proposed 24 residential lot plan that does not require any variances from the current zoning restrictions. The fact the proposed planned development does not have alleys may be more valuable to the developer than to the residents on Rolling Hills. The developer benefits from the proposed planned development by, among other things, the cost savings of not having to pour a cement alley and the increased value of certain lots not having an alley cut them off from a bucolic view of the flood zone. I believe the reduction of one of the smaller lots adjacent to the Rolling Hills lots is a very reasonable request because it returns the density to us that was in the prior 24 lot proposal. Since the developer has rejected the reduction in density (and I may add all our other requests), we will be forced to plead the inequitable treatment to us of the planned development to the Planning and Zoning Commission and will risk living with the prior 24 lot proposal. I believe the inequity will resonate with the commission. I need not remind you that the last variance requests by the developer were denied by the commission even though the city staff supported the variance requests. Please put me on the list of persons who would like to speak before the Planning and Zoning Commission at the hearing next week. I appreciate your working for the city and believe we have a common goal of doing what is best for Coppell. I am not against the development, but want more equitable treatment from the developer who gains financially from the proposed planned development (perhaps even without From: "Andy Louis (Legal)" <alouis@valhi.net> To: "'mdiamond@coppelltx.gov'" <mdiamond@coppelltx.gov> Date: 1/11/2012 5:47 PM Subject: Carter Addition Phase III CC: "'gsieb@coppelltx.gov'" <gsieb@coppelltx.gov>, "'cphillips@coppelltx.gov... Attachments: Re: Toll Brothers matter Page 1 of 2 1/12/2012file://C:\Documents and Settings\mdiamond\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F0DCB49... one of its proposed smallest lots). Please note that in denying the request for a reduction in the lots, the developer cited the “financial impacts” and not “reduced profits” or a “financial loss.” I hope you can provide the support of the city staff in recommending a reduction in the planned development density as I have requested. Regards, Andy Louis 546 Rolling Hills Road Coppell, Texas 75019 Page 2 of 2 1/12/2012file://C:\Documents and Settings\mdiamond\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F0DCB49... R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx MEMO FOR RECORD DAA JOB NO. 07111C 1/11/12 TO: Marcie Diamond – Coppell Planning Coppell Planning & Zoning Commission Coppell City Council Rolling Hill/Carter Estate HOA’s CC: Toll Bros.; file FROM: Matthew Alexander, P.E. RE: Carter Addition – Phase III Coppell, Texas As requested, Dowdey, Anderson & Associates has relayed the list of requests made by the Carter Estates/Rolling Hills neighborhoods to Toll Bros. Together we have evaluated the merits of each request as well as our ability to accommodate each request. Below we have provided a response and explanation to those requests: Neighborhood Request: 1. Reduction of 1 lot adjacent to Rolling Hills – Toll Bros. purchased the land with the anticipation of constructing 24 single-family lots as approved and platted. The proposed plan only has 23 lots which already results in a 1 lot reduction. Unfortunately the loss of another lot is no longer practical due to the financial impacts to the development and thus respectfully Toll Bros. cannot agree to this request. 2. 8-foot Masonry Wall between Rolling Hills and Carter Addition III - This request is a difficult request on many levels and is not an acceptable request for the following reasons: 1) this is not consistent with the Coppell Land Development Code or the existing residents in the area. Furthermore, it is not believed that staff would support this request. In addition, masonry walls are usually constructed to separate residential and non-residential uses and thus are not appropriate in our opinion; 2) The perpetual maintenance of such a wall would truly be challenging. Masonry walls are traditionally perimeter walls and are owned and maintained by the HOA. In this situation the wall would be situated across multiple lots and the access to and the perpetual maintenance of this wall would be difficult over time. Therefore, Toll Bros. does not agree with this request and thus respectfully we cannot agree to this request. 3. Homes fronting on Carter Drive shall have side or rear entry garages - After receiving this request, we evaluated it to determine if this request was a consistent characteristic within the existing additions of Carter Estates. After driving the sub-division again, we found that this was not a consistent characteristic to all of the homes within the Carter Addition. To the contrary, we found multiple instances where existing garage doors, metal and wood, either face the streets or are clearly visible from the street within Carter Estates. Therefore, for these reasons we believe it is not rational to arbitrarily restrict our R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx future residents to a standard not consistently found or enforced within the existing additions of Carter Estates. Please refer to the pictures attached. 4. No Board-on-Board Fencing on these lots or facing the street - After receiving this request, we evaluated it to determine if this request was a consistent characteristic within the existing additions of Carter Estates. After driving the sub-division again we found that this was not a consistent characteristic to all of the homes within the Carter additions. To the contrary, we found multiple instances where existing wood fencing (board-on-board or otherwise) either faces the streets or is clearly visible from the street within Carter Estates. Therefore, for these reasons we believe it is not rational to arbitrarily restrict our future residents to a standard not consistently found or enforced within the existing additions of Carter Estates. Please refer to the pictures attached in Exhibit “A.” 5. Provision for an Additional Open Space Lot along Carter Drive - This plan proposes 3 lots that face Carter Drive. The approximate lots width at the building line are as follows: Lot 1 - 150’, Lot 22 – 150’, and Lot 23 – 143’. We believe that the additional set-back along Carter Drive created by the proposed 50-30-foot front yard set-back should be a dramatic improvement to the 15-foot side yard along Carter Drive currently approved and platted with the 24-lot plan. In our opinion, the proposed 23-lot plan and the associated front yard set-backs proposed that would be free of buildings or wood fences allowed by the current 24-Lot plan will provide the neighborhood with the open space lot “feel” that they have requested without adding an additional burden to the Phase III Addition HOA. Therefore, we respectfully decline to agree to this request. 6. Do more to save trees and save all trees greater than 20-inches in caliper that do not fall within roads or building pads - We have stated all along that we value the trees on this site and we view them as an asset to this addition. The reason we are bringing this application back to the City for their consideration is we believe the proposed 23-Lot plan is a better plan and is the right all-around plan for this site. Thus Toll Bros. is willing to forfeit development cost they have spent with us and others in an attempt to develop the right plan, recommended by staff, for this tract. This proposed plan is more consistent with other single-family development in the area and preserves more trees. This proposed 23-lot plan preserves approximately 2100 more inches than the approved 24-lot plan because of the elimination of alleys and the creation of an internal open space lot. That being said, while we cannot agree to save all trees 20-inches or greater not in the building pads or roadways due to other considerations and restrictions like utility construction and lot grading we do share a common value the existing residents in that we are significantly preserving more trees with this proposal. 7. Minimum House Size of 3,200 square feet – Toll Bros. is pleased to be able to honor this request. 8. Require an HOA – Toll Bros. is pleased to honor this request. 9. Suggesting Asphalt Streets and no Sidewalks along Carter Drive – Toll Bros. has always been open to these requests, but these requests are not consistent with the requirements of the Coppell Development Code and thus we believe Staff may not support or allow them. R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx Exhibit “A” (Examples: Garage doors facing Street within Carter Addition) R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx (Examples: Garage doors facing Street within Carter Addition) R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx (Examples: Wood fencing facing Street within Carter Addition) Attached are the Exhibits that are attached to each Response in Opposition from the 26 homeowners in Carter Estates, Phases I and II Received January 12, 2012 Marcie Diamond - Toll Brothers PD Request Dear Marcie, We wish to register our strong objection to the planned development (PD) by the Toll Brothers behind our home. This is the identical plan the Coppell Planning & Zoning Commission rejected last year. We are not opposed to development behind our home, but we oppose this plan that adds more density than current zoning. The PD increases the density along the fence line next to the homes on Rolling Hills. When this PD was rejected before, we were reconciled to a plan under the current SF‐12 zoning that would have fewer houses across our fence line, while the development was more evenly distributed elsewhere on the Toll Brothers’ property. To now be considering a narrowing of the lots and an increase in the density is a much worse plan. We would prefer to have the alley and the buffer it would create with fewer houses next to us than to pack more in on cookie‐cutter lots with the rooftops practically touching each other like their Denton Tap development. The reason Toll Brothers wants to do the PD with 23 lots instead of the SF‐12 with 24 lots is that they can make more money with this PD. If they don’t want to reduce a lot from their overall number, PLEASE make them revise their plan to reapportion their lot sizes to reduce the density on this side. The SF‐12 plan has seven lots facing the homes of the Wilkersons, Capps, Louises, and Briscoes. The PD increases that to eight homes on narrow lots. They could still build their 23 homes but change the lot sizes elsewhere. If they are not willing to do this, we ask for the protections of the current zoning. Notwithstanding my recent letter to you listing eight items various homeowners in this area think are reasonable, there is only one thing that is critically important to me and my immediate neighbors. We will not oppose the PD if Toll Brothers changes their plan to have only seven houses facing the four homes stretching from my house south on Rolling Hills instead of the eight shown on their PD. This is a reasonable request. If staff cannot recommend that, we would be very disappointed and feel as though our neighborhood was not fairly considered by staff in its recommendation. If Toll Brothers does not adjust their lots elsewhere in the PD so as to meet this reasonable request, we will work to defeat the PD request. Yours truly, Dean and Pam Wilkerson 538 Rolling Hills Road Coppell, TX 75019 From: "Dean Wilkerson" <deanwilk@gmail.com> To: <mdiamond@coppelltx.gov> Date: 1/12/2012 8:42 PM Subject: Toll Brothers PD Request CC: <cphillips@coppelltx.gov>, <gsieb@coppelltx.gov>, <pamwilk@gmail.com> Page 1 of 1 1/13/2012file://C:\Documents and Settings\mdiamond\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F0F45C4Ci... BELT LINE ROADP:\Projects LDD\07111\dwg\07111-Zoning.dwg, SITE, 2/3/2012 7:45:20 AM, cross, Dowdey, Anderson & Associates, Inc., JCR SHEETSTATE REGISTRATION NUMBER: F-399DRAWNDESIGNCHECKEDDATESCALEJOB1107111C1" = 60'6/11/2010CWHMWAA. LOGSDON SURVEY, ABST NO 783, J. CARLOCK SURVEY, ABST NO 312& McKINNEY AND WILLIAMS SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 1054CITY OF COPPELL, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS0GRAPHIC SCALE( IN FEET )1 inch = ft.180606060”“”“” ITEM # 6 Page 1 of 3 CITY OF COPPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT Carter Addition PH III, Revised Replat P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012 C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012 STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Planning Director LOCATION: South side of Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road SIZE OF AREA: 20.28 acres of property CURRENT ZONING: SF-12 (Single-Family 12) and A (Agriculture) REQUEST: A replat to re-subdivide the existing 24 single-family lots and two common area lots (Carter Addition PH III) into 23 single-family lots and one common area lot. APPLICANT: Owner: Civil Engineer: Toll Dallas TX LLC Matt Alexander 2557 S.W. Grapevine Pkwy Dowdey, Anderson & Associates Suite 100 5225 Village Creek Drive Grapevine, Texas 76051 Plano, Texas 75093 817-329-8770 972-931-0694 HISTORY: The Carter Addition, a 30-lot subdivision, was established in 1972 and encircled an existing 0.5-acre cemetery. Deed restrictions placed on the property expired on January 1, 2001. In 1990, a replat of Lots 3 and 4 was denied by Council. On June 17, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied a requested replat of Lot 18, to reduce the front building line from 50 to 30 feet, at 509 East Bethel School Road. Lot 1 of the original Carter Estates subdivision is within the current request area and contains 2.95 acres of the 20.3-acre subject property. The Carter Addition, Phase II, which is a five-lot subdivision has a long replatting history. The original Final Plat was approved by the Planning Commission on November 21, 1996. That plat was not filed for record prior to its expiration date, and therefore was deemed null and void. In 1998, a Final Plat for a reconfigured ITEM # 6 Page 2 of 3 five-lot layout was approved, but again, never filed for record. In October of 1999, Council approved a five-lot Final Plat which was filed with Dallas County in December of that year. On August 8, 2000, City Council approved a replat for Lots 1 and 2 Carter Addition, Phase II, however, it also expired. This replat of Lots 1 and 2 was approved again in November 2001, and was filed within the statutory time limit. Since that time, all five homes have been constructed in Phase II of this development. On September 16, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied a request for a preliminary plat, with variances, for 23 residential lots and one area common lot on this 20.28 acres of property. November 9, 2010 City Council followed the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a preliminary plat with no variances for twenty-seven (27) single-family residential lots and two (2) common area lots on this tract of land. On March 8, 2011 Council approved a Replat/Final Plat with no variances for 24 lots and two common area lots on this 20 acre tract of land. This plat has been filed with the county, and is essentially ready for development. TRANSPORTATION: Carter Drive and Christi Lane are two-lane, asphalt streets, built within 50 feet of right-of-way. These streets do not have curbs or sidewalks. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North - Single-family residences; Carter Addition, PD-248-SF-18 (Planned Development-248-Single Family-18) South – DART R.O.W. and Belt Line Road; A (Agriculture) East - Single-family residences; Carter Addition, Phase II, PD-248-SF-18 (Planned Development-248-Single Family-18) West - single-family residences; Northlake Woodlands, Lots 5-10 SF-12 (Single Family-12) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan of March 2011, shows the property as suitable for Residential Neighborhood, which is defined as areas of low and medium density single family, typically one to four dwelling units per acre. DISCUSSION: As stated in the History Section of this report, this property is currently platted as a 24-lot subdivision in compliance with the regulations of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. This request is to replat this subdivision into 23 lots, with one common lot to conform with the PD zoning district which is a companion to this Replat request. The following variances to the Subdivision Ordinance are being requested as part of the approval of this revised Replat: cul- de-sac length exceeding 600 feet, no alleys, mountable curbs (requiring 30 foot paving width) and no curbs, gutters or sidewalks along Carter Drive. ITEM # 6 Page 3 of 3 RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Staff is recommending APPROVAL of Carter Estates, Phase III Revised Replat, subject to: 1. Revise the notes on the Replat to only reflect those relating to the Subdivision (not Zoning) Ordinance. 2. Include the floodplain note on the plat that states, "The City of Coppell will have no responsibility for maintenance of the floodway/floodplain areas as shown hereon; however, the City does have the authority to regulate activity in the floodway/floodplain as per the City’s Floodplain Ordinance. The maintenance of these areas shall be the sole responsibility of the individual lot owner(s), adjacent to said areas. There areas are to remain free of improvements that may obstruct the flow of storm water and protected from potential erosion by the owners. No fences will be allowed in the floodplain, along with any other structures as per the City’s Floodplain Ordinance”. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend approval of the request 2. Recommend disapproval of the request 3. Recommend modification of the request ATTACHMENTS: 1. Replat Y:\07111\07111Pp.dwg, PP, 2/1/2012 10:13:26 AM, cross, Dowdey, Anderson & Associates, Inc., JCR 0GRAPHIC SCALE( IN FEET )1 inch = ft.180606060STATE REGISTRATION NUMBER: F-399REVISED: JANUARY 31, 2012 STATE REGISTRATION NUMBER: F-399REVISED: JANUARY 31, 2012”“”“”“”Y:\07111\07111Pp.dwg, PP (2), 2/1/2012 10:13:48 AM, cross, Dowdey, Anderson & Associates, Inc., JCR ITEM # 13 Page 1 of 6 CITY OF COPPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT CASE NO.: PD-214R5-C, Arbor Manors Addition Retail P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012 C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012 STAFF REP.: Matt Steer, City Planner LOCATION: 143 South Denton Tap Road SIZE OF AREA: 1.5 acres of property CURRENT ZONING: PD-214R2-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 2-Commercial) REQUEST: A zoning change to PD-214R5-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 5- Commercial) to attach a Detail Plan to allow the development of an approximate 11,000 square foot retail building to contain retail and office uses including two restaurants, one of which will have drive-thru service. APPLICANT: Developer: Representative: Architect: Hermansen Laned Development G&A Constultants, inc. NCA Partners Architecture Mitch Linnabary Randi Rivera Lance Rose 5944 Luther Lane, Ste. 725 111 Hillside Drive 5646 Milton Street, Ste. 610 Dallas, Texas 75225 Lewisville, Texas 75057 Dallas, Texas 75206 Phone: (214) 373-4202 (972) 436-9712 (214) 361-9901 ext. 118 mitch@hermansenlanddevelopment.com randi@gacon.com lance@ncapartners.com Landscape Architect: Ron Stewart Environs Group Landscape Architecture 111 Hillside Drive Lewisville, Texas 75057 (972) 317-0276 ron@gacon.com HISTORY: On May 8, 2007, PD-214R2-SF-9&C (Planned Development-214 Revision-2- Single-Family-9 & Commercial) was approved allowing for a Concept Site Plan for the development of 73 single-family homes on approximately 24 acres and ITEM # 13 Page 2 of 6 commercial uses on approximately five acres of property located south of Sandy Lake Road; west of Denton Tap Road. Tree mitigation and retribution for the overall tract was determined at that time. On October 12, 2010, Council approved a Detail Plan to allow the construction of a 4,639-square-foot medical office building on the first commercial component of the conceptual planned development for Arbor Manors. The only access granted was from Bethel School Road. A dead end fire lane and mutual access drive were extended to the subject property. TRANSPORTATION: Denton Tap Road is a P6D, improved, concrete, six-lane divided thoroughfare contained within a 110-foot right-of-way. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North – restaurant; C (Commercial) South – medical office; PD-214R4-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 4- Commercial) East – retail uses (Braewood Shopping Center); C, (Commercial) West – residential uses (Arbor Manors); PD-214R2-SF-12 (Planned Development-214-Revsion-2-Single Family-12) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Coppell Comprehensive Plan shows the property suitable for mixed use neighborhood center. DISCUSSION: This is the second commercial component of the conceptual planned development for Arbor Manors approved in May 2007. This proposal is for a 10,750 square- foot retail building on the westside of S. Denton Tap Road, between the newly constructed Vision Source and Schlotsky’s Deli. Approval of this Planned Development will also grant the right for two restaurant uses – Einstein Bros. Bagels with a drive thru and Smashburger. The hours of operation of these two restaurants are proposed everyday from 5 a.m. to 5 p.m. and 10 a.m. to 10 p.m., respectively. Site Plan: The proposed building is setback approximately 90 feet from S. Denton Tap and 50 feet from all other property lines meeting the setback requirements of the Commercial District. The parking areas are proposed to be on each side of the proposed structure with 45% angled parking on the west, off a one-way drive. A drive-thru is proposed on the southwest portion of the site with the menu board on the west side with an eight foot wide queuing area. The drive-thru window is on the south side. A fire lane/mutual access easement with perpendicular parking extends from the existing shared drive on the north property line to the proposed shared drive on the south side. To allow the southern shared drive, an off-site fire lane/mutual access easement will be required to be dedicated on the southern lot and will be required to be filed by separate instrument. ITEM # 13 Page 3 of 6 Given its residential adjacency, more detail is needed on the site lighting. The color renderings depict street lamps in front of the building, but none are shown on the site plan. A condition of approval is that the lighting be in conformance with the glare and lighting standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Parking: The parking required for a retail use is one parking space per 200 square feet of building area and for a restaurant use - one parking space per 100 square feet. The applicant is proposing 5,100 square feet of restaurant (includes a 300 square foot patio) and 5,950 square feet of retail space, exactly meeting the required parking by providing 81 parking spaces. The applicant has requested as a PD Condition on the site plan that “Retail establishments that sell to-go food only and that do not have dining or sit down facilities, be permitted as a retail use.” Staff opposes this request as this would be considered a restaurant per the Zoning Ordinance definition and would need to provide one parking space per 100 square feet. After further discussions with the applicant, the requested variance was further defined as a “retail establishment that sells groceries, prepared food and beverages. Package or prepared foods would be prepared in a commercial kitchen or commissary, meeting NSF guidelines. The store or establishment will not have in store dining, a seating area nor a kitchen.” Upon consultation with the City Attorney, the use would not be considered a restaurant as long as the packaged and prepared foods are prepared off site; therefore, staff is recommending that the condition be removed from the site plan. The irregular parking space configurations are a result of an attempt to provide enough “green space” to meet the area requirements of the Landscape Section of the Zoning Ordinance. This is a very innovative design and staff has requested more detail as to the functionality of the spaces. This is listed as a condition. If deemed acceptable, staff would recommend granting the landscape area gained toward the landscape requirements. Tree Survey/Landscape Plan: There are approximately 249 caliper-inches of protected trees proposed to be removed with this request. Of which, there are five significant Post Oaks (21”, 24”, 28”, 28” and 40”). Only 44.5” of trees are proposed to be preserved. The most significant of these is a 14” Post Oak. No tree retribution is required at this time, as the Conceptual Planned Development approved in May 2007 included 1.5 (+/-) acres of open space and the preservation of trees within the residential lots to satisfy the future removal of any existing trees from the overall development. In addition, the developer paid the City $101,000 to satisfy all tree mitigation at that time. The first submittal of the Landscape Plan was approximately 8,000 square feet deficient in nonvehicular open space, the main category of landscaping. Subsequently, the plans have been revised several times. The most recent submittal is only 83 square feet deficient. Staff can support this plan, if two variances to the ordinance are granted: 1) The landscape strip on the northwest corner of the site shall contribute toward the nonvehicular area. Staff can support this request, as the landscaping within this strip would technically be additional ITEM # 13 Page 4 of 6 perimeter landscaping not benefiting this site. 2) The additional landscaping gained at the end of the parking spaces is also recommended to contribute toward the nonvehicular open space if the proposed parking spaces are proved to be functional. With the addition of these two areas to the landscape/enhanced sidewalk area in front of and to the rear of the building, the site is only 83 square feet deficient in total nonvehicular landscape area. The landscape area in front of the building will consist of green areas, tree gates and a tan/brown enhanced sidewalk. A detail of this area has been requested. The other two categories of landscape areas (perimeter and interior) appear to be compliant if some drafting issues are resolved. There are a total of 38 overstory and 15 accent trees proposed. The perimeter area on the west is heavily landscaped and is proposed to provide a buffer along with the existing masonry wall adjacent to the existing single family neighborhood. The landscaping in this area consists of three different layers between the wall and the parking area: a row of 23 Nellie R Stevens shrubs, eight overstory trees (four Drake Elms & four Live Oaks) and 15 Yaupon Holly Trees. Elevations/Signage: The structure is proposed to be 31.5 feet in height (measured to the top of the parapet). It is proposed to be constructed of a brown field brick with a dark gray accent brick, a limestone base with a cast stone watertable. EIFS is proposed to be used on the cornice detailing. Both fabric awnings (“muted-red” and “black” color) and metal canopies are proposed above the storefronts. The colors, materials and details of the elevations are impressive and staff can support the look of the building. A 40-square-foot monument sign is proposed to be located in the middle of the site measured 15 feet from Denton Tap. It is proposed to be constructed of the same brick as the building and shall be externally illuminated, if any lighting is proposed. The applicant is requesting several variances to the sign requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. These are listed below with staff’s recommendation in bold after each one: 1) Each tenant is proposed to have one attached blade sign. The blade may project 48 inches from the building and is limited to 15 square feet of sign area. Blade signs may contain a logo at 100% of the sign area. Staff recommends granting the two restaurants blade signs as depicted on the 11x17 sheets. Staff is recommending that the other lease spaces with storefronts also be allowed similar blade signs perpendicular to the front façade. 2) The effective area of attached signs is proposed to be increased by 10%. This is not recommended, but the blade signs outlined above are recommended. 3) Logos are proposed to be up to 40% of the sign area. Staff cannot support the increase in logo at this percentage and recommends that the 20% requirement of the Zoning Ordinance be required. 4) The end caps of the retail center may have attached signage on both facades with the effective area of theses signs being one square foot allowed per lineal foot of the façade width. ITEM # 13 Page 5 of 6 Staff cannot recommend this. What has been done in the past- if a tenant would like a sign on the end cap but does not have public road frontage on that side, the tenant can divide up the allowable sign area between front and side facades (while adhering to the 20% logo requirement on both sides). The overall attached signage is depicted on the color rendering of the building. This proposes that all the channel letters will be a consistent white color. The second and third color sheets show the exact proposals for the Einstein Bros. Bagels and Smashburger restaurants. The proposed Einstein Bros. Bagels signage on the front elevation, not including the blade sign, is 49.1 square feet. A 9.5 square foot logo, a yellow underline (approximately eight square feet) and drive- thru pan (approximately four square feet) all count as logo area; therefore, the logo is proposed to be 44% of the sign. Staff recommends granting the blade sign, but asks the standard attached signage be revised to a maximum total size of 50.66 square feet with a maximum 11.32 square feet logo as required by ordinance. The applicant is proposing the exact same signage on the side elevation and staff would recommend against any signage on this elevation, as long as it was not taken from the allowed sign area from the front. The proposed Smashburger signage on the front elevation is 54 square feet with a 37% logo, not including the blade sign. Staff would recommend granting the blade sign and that the signage be revised to a maximum total size of 56.6 sq uare feet of which a maximum 11.32 square feet can be attributed to logo. The applicant is proposing a nearly identical sign on the south end cap. Staff would recommend against any signage on this elevation as long as it was not accounted for in the allowed sign area of the front façade. Two menu boards are shown for Einstein Bros. Bagels. Proposed are a bronze color preview board (20” wide and 74” high) and a bronze color full menu board with speaker panel (96” wide and 74” high). RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Staff is recommending APPROVAL of the Detail Planned Development – 215 Revision 5 – Commercial (Arbor Manors Retail) only if the following conditions are met. 1. Revise PD conditions notes to indicate: a. A sit down restaurant with 300 square foot patio area (Smashburger) and a sit down restaurant with drive thru (Einstein Bros. Bagels) are permitted. b. 560 square feet of landscaping shown on the northwest corner is being attributed toward nonvehicular landscape area requirement. c. The triangular landscape areas at the end of each parking space are being attributed toward the nonvehicular landscape area requirement. d. An 83-square-foot exception to the nonvehicular landscape area requirements, e. A maximum 15-square-foot blade sign shall be allowed for each tenant. This shall be in addition to the total sign areas allowed (one square foot per lineal foot frontage on a dedicated street). Remove all other conditions under “Development Standards” within the PD Conditions list including the condition regarding retail establishments selling “to-go food only” and all other sign variance requests as these are not supported. ITEM # 13 Page 6 of 6 2. Submit a detail of the functionality of the parking abutting Denton Tap. Include dimensions of typical car and truck with curb, overhang, door open, etc… 3. Depict loading area on site plan and note acceptable delivery times. 4. Include parking lot lighting on the site plan. Ensure compliance with the glare and lighting standards of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. Include the enhanced sidewalk hatching on the site plan and provide a detail of this landscape/sidewalk area on a separate landscape sheet. 6. Revise monument sign detail to ensure the stone cap extends over the multitenant sign area and note that the sign shall be externally illuminated. 7. Include an overstory tree at the end of each parking row and account for this being a requirement in the interior tree calculations. 8. Include trees to be preserved on the Landscape Plan. 9. Correct the discrepancies between the plant list, the landscape plan and the plant legend and ensure only one symbol is used for each plant type. 10. Remove the “Site Landscaping” section from the landscape calculations as this is stating that only the nonvehicular area is required. Revise the non-street perimeter required and provided areas. 11. Revise masonry percentage calculations on the Elevation sheets to exclude doors and windows. 12. An eight foot wide stamped concrete band is required at the proposed south mutual drive. Please depict on the site plan. 13. There will be additional comments during detailed Engineering Plan review. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend approval of the request 2. Recommend disapproval of the request 3. Recommend modification of the request 4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date ATTACHMENTS: 1. Overall Color Elevations (11x17) 2. Smash Burger Signage(11x17) 3. Einstein Bros. Bagels Signage (11x17) 4. Site Plan 5. Landscape Plan 6. Tree Survey 7. Elevations 8. Dumpster/Monument Sign Details ITEM #14 Page 1 of 3 CITY OF COPPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT Arbor Manors Addition, Lot 4R2R, Block A, Replat P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012 C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012 STAFF REP.: Matt Steer, City Planner LOCATION: 143 South Denton Tap Road SIZE OF AREA: 1.5 acres of property CURRENT ZONING: PD-214R2-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 2-Commercial) REQUEST: A replat of Lot 4R2, Block A of the Arbor Manors Addition, to relocate the existing fire lane and mutual access easement and to establish easements to allow the development of an 11,000-square-foot retail building. APPLICANT: Developer: Representative: Architect: Hermansen Laned Development G&A Constultants, inc. NCA Partners Architecture Mitch Linnabary Randi Rivera Lance Rose 5944 Luther Lane, Ste. 725 111 Hillside Drive 5646 Milton Street, Ste. 610 Dallas, Texas 75225 Lewisville, Texas 75057 Dallas, Texas 75206 Phone: (214) 373-4202 (972) 436-9712 (214) 361-9901 ext. 118 mitch@hermansenlanddevelopment.com randi@gacon.com lance@ncapartners.com Landscape Architect: Ron Stewart Environs Group Landscape Architecture 111 Hillside Drive Lewisville, Texas 75057 (972) 317-0276 ron@gacon.com HISTORY: On May 8, 2007, PD-214R2-SF-9&C (Planned Development-214 Revision-2- Single-Family-9 & Commercial) was approved allowing for a Concept Site Plan for the development of 73 single-family homes on approximately 24 acres and commercial uses on approximately five acres of property located south of Sandy ITEM #14 Page 2 of 3 Lake Road; west of Denton Tap Road. Tree mitigation and retribution for the overall tract was determined at that time. On October 12, 2010, Council approved a Detail Plan to allow the construction of a 4,639-square-foot medical office building on the first commercial component of the conceptual planned development for Arbor Manors. The only access granted was from Bethel School Road. A dead end fire lane and mutual access drive were extended to the subject property. TRANSPORTATION: Denton Tap Road is a P6D, improved, concrete, six -lane divided thoroughfare contained within a 110-foot right-of-way. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North – restaurant; C (Commercial) South – medical office; PD-214R4-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 4- Commercial) East – retail uses (Braewood Shopping Center); C, (Commercial) West – residential uses (Arbor Manors); PD-214R2-SF-12 (Planned Development-214-Revsion-2-Single Family-12) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Coppell Comprehensive Plan shows the property suitable for mixed use neighborhood center. DISCUSSION: The purpose of this plat is to dedicate necessary easements for the development of Lot 4R2R, which is the subject property of the previous Detail Planned Development item (PD-214R5-C). The previously dedicated fire lane and mutual access drive is proposed to be abandoned with this plat. The new fire lane and mutual access easement is proposed to be shifted to the west in order to provide enough room for perpendicular parking along both sides of the drive. An access drive is proposed on the southern property line providing shared access for Lot 4R1 and 4R2. This is proposed to be dedicated as a fire lane and mutual access easement (12 foot wide on each property). The adjacent property owner has given permission for this mutual access in the form of a letter. The offsite easement will need to be dedicated by separate instrument and the recording information provided on this plat prior to recordation. This is listed as a condition of approval. Two waterline easements are proposed extending west from Denton Tap, one is 20 feet wide and the other is 15 feet. There is an existing 20-foot drainage easement and a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement on the west property line running north and south. The plat meets all technical requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, and therefore warrants approval. RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Staff is recommending APPROVAL of Lot 4R2R, Block A, Arbor Manors Replat subject to the following condition being met: 1. Show the offsite mutual access and fire lane easements and provide r ecording information on this plat prior to recordation. ITEM #14 Page 3 of 3 2. A Tree Removal Permit is required prior to the start of construction. 3. There may be additional comments during engineering plan review ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend approval of the request 2. Recommend disapproval of the request 3. Recommend modification of the request ATTACHMENTS: 1. Replat Date: February 20, 2012 To: Mayor and City Council From: Mac Tristan, Chief of Police Reference: Brazos Technology Ticket Writers Background: The Coppell Police Department has a responsibility for enforcement of Class C misdemeanor offenses which are most often associated with violations of traffic laws. In the last three years, Coppell police officers issued over 33,000 citations. In order to facilitate the processing of these citations, the police department utilizes electronic ticket writers as a means to expedite the interaction between officer and violator and to ensure proper recording of the violator’s information and the alleged offense. This information is passed electronically from the ticket writers to the city’s municipal court for further adjudication and prosecution. There are two predominant companies that offer electronic ticket writers, Duncan Solutions and Brazos Technology. The department currently utilizes a writer from Duncan Solutions that has been in service since 2004. The Duncan product is dated, their repair times are lengthy, and their customer service is not acceptable to our needs. This request is to purchase fifteen (15) new ticket writers with wireless printers, accessories and the necessary operating infrastructure from Brazos Technology. Personnel from the department’s enforcement sections received a demonstration of the Brazos products; they were easy to use and had multiple user-friendly features. In addition to its capability to issue citations, the Brazos platform can facilitate the preparation of vehicle accident reports, towed vehicle paperwork, and issuance of criminal trespass warnings. Furthermore, Brazos is a Texas-based company which should alleviate delays if repairs are needed. Brazos interfaces with Municipal Court’s existing data processing system, UDS. Brazos also has the capability to interface with our new CAD system, whereas the Duncan product does not. This interface will allow for database building, statistical tracking, and research. The CAD interface will afford us the capability to generate a racial profiling report on demand. Given the interface capabilities, the transition from Duncan Solutions to Brazos Technology ticket writers should not require any substantial changes in operations for Municipal Court personnel. The transition would enhance police operations in the field and in the back office environments. Costs: The cost for the Brazos Technology ticket writer equipment and associated software is $86,903. Funds for this purchase have been appropriated in our current budget. This purchase can be made utilizing GSA Contract # GS-35F-0096X under GSA Schedule 70. GSA rules effective May 18, 2004 allow contractors to offer discounts to state and local governments. Staff Recommendation: We believe this move will provide better service to our citizens as well as increase efficiencies to the Police Department and the City. Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to sign a contract with Brazos Technology to purchase new ticket writers and associated software. Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 e-Citation/Mobile Data Capture System for Law Enforcement Proposal - 15 Ticket Writers/TLETS (6) Presented to: Proposal is valid for 60-days from the above-listed date. 979.690.2811 x103 -- 979.224.1360 cell Submitted by: R. Dale Cuthbertson Proposal Date: Brazos Hosted Server Install Solution P.O. Box 10713, College Station, TX 77842 Brazos Technology Corporation February 20, 2012 BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 1 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 $86,903 $9,550 * Please see pages 9 - 13 for details It is our privilege to present the City of Coppell with the benefits of implementing the electronic hand- held ticket writers. We welcome this opportunity to engage with the City of Coppell in a successful endeavor, which will become the icon of the industry. Brazos Technology is committed to leveraging technology to optimize the performance of law enforcement, and our goal is to assure that your wants, needs and must haves are satisfied while performing above and beyond your expectations of a vendor. This proposal outlines the hardware, software and resources needed to implement Brazos Technology’s e-citation solution, with its inherent advantages, which will empower the department to be technologically innovative as your needs evolve. It also provides budgetary costs and outlines the next steps and assumptions in moving forward. All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. Overview Thank you for your consideration. We encourage an interactive decision process, which will allow us to answer your questions and provide clarity to ensure that you are confident in making an informed decision. Pricing Summary Total project cost including software, hardware, and services* Total annual fees after year one* BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 2 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 1) a) b) 2) 3) 4) 5)Ability for the data to interface with the Municipal Court system. · · · Ability for Law Enforcement Personnel to easily and quickly enter data (much of which can be done through auto-population such as Drivers License swiping and VIN Tag scanning) into the mobile device. Minimal data entry errors – Minimize costly mistakes by enforcing business rules via technology, reduce amount of hand written data, and remove the need to manually transfer information from written citation to electronic database. All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. Ability to quickly dispose of (drop or throw) devices in case of emergency – without damaging and routinely replacing each hand-held device. This document outlines how Law Enforcement Agencies can leverage Brazos Technology’s Rapid Extension Framework (REF) and Motorola Hand-held Scanners to achieve these goals. This technology is designed to afford each Law Enforcement Agency the following benefits, including but not limited to: Allowing data to be “collected” at the point of activity and reach back to those multiple data sources as well. Ability for Law Enforcement Personnel to easily read, enter and manipulate data via a compact mobile device. Ability to extend multiple different applications to each singular device Allowing data to be “sent” from each application to each designated device As Law Enforcement Agencies are beginning to extend applications to mobile devices, several aspects of this solution are critical: Reduced paper flow – Citations are printed singularly rather than in triplicate (or more), thereby reducing paper flow between Law Enforcement and the Administrative Office of the Courts. Reallocation of Human Resources – Citation data is electronically entered at the point of activity, so court personnel must no longer re-enter data from hand-written tickets and are available for other tasks. is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. Executive Summary Today more and more Law Enforcement Agencies are looking for ways to improve the efficiency of the citation-writing process. Through the use of advanced mobile technologies, the capabilities in extending applications to mobile personnel are becoming more and more robust. BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 3 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) Brazos Technology Corporation e-Citation Solution Diagram Note: This is only a sample layout of communication between resources. This entire process is customizable depending upon your particular needs. Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. Law Enforcement personnel collects data by swiping Driver's License via the Mag Stripe Reader, Gain Vehicle Make, Model, and Year by scanning the Registration Tag, and easily choose offenses from drop down menus on the mobile device. Options are also available to gain key information (such as name) from credit cards, local student ID cards, etc. should an offender not have a license at time of traffic stop. Captured Citations are uploaded to the PD and Municipal Court Databases without the need for an intermediary server. Officers simply place the handheld devices in their cradles at the end of the shift. All citations are uploaded while software upgrades and changes are download automatically. Handheld unit "speaks" directly to the printer via Bluetooth connection. The officer collects ticket (printed while officer is walking from offender's car) at the officer's vehicle. Citation printout includes all required instructions for the offender, offender's signature, and is designed to match the specific requirements of each PD. Officer with Motorola Wireless Unit Court and Law Enforcement Agency BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 4 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 About Brazos Technology Corporation Brazos Technology provides solutions and services designed to optimize the use of mobile technology within an organization – with a strong focus on extending Law Enforcement applications and databases to devices in the hands of Law Enforcement personnel. Brazos Technology was formed in 2000 and is committed to providing rock-solid solutions that are applicable and relevant to the unique needs of the men and women in law enforcement. With more than 140 agencies actively using the Brazos Technology Ticket Writer, Brazos has been able to establish a proven track record of combining a solid solution with superior implementation, training and customer service. Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 5 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 Automated Citation Solutions - Motorola · · · · Data entry error from these manual processes has far-reaching cost, efficiency and accuracy implications at each level of government: Motorola’s proven technology delivers efficiency. A unique combination of industry-leading innovation and award-winning ergonomic design, with miniaturization, superior power management and product ruggedization is the hallmark of Motorola’s products. All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) Because of these inefficiencies and the resulting low productivity, the old manual key-based data entry processes have a negative effect on the organization's ability to serve the public. A proven solution is available to eliminate these inefficiencies: wireless handheld mobile computing systems. Police services, departments and authorities: inaccurate records of violations Court and justice services: reduced ability to prosecute, convict or collect revenue efficiently Motor vehicle departments: inability to ensure that motorists with repeat violations remain off the road is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. Transportation departments: inability to plan infrastructure improvements related to traffic signs, signals and congestion areas Throughout the world, most law enforcement citations issued by police officers or officials for traffic or other minor violations are handwritten. After issuance, the citations (also called tickets, violation notices or infringement notices) are then manually entered into multiple databases using a key- based system. These manual systems are prone to many data entry errors or misinterpretation due to illegible writing. Motorola is a global leader in secure mobile information systems that integrate application-specific handheld computers with wireless networks for data, voice and bar code data capture. Motorola products and services increase productivity and reduce costs for the world’s leading retailers, logistics and transportation companies, government agencies, manufacturers and providers of healthcare, hospitality and homeland security. About Brazos Technology Corporation's Partner - Motorola BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 6 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 · · · · Changes in business processes, Changes in local and national laws, Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. Brazos Technology provides training on two levels – (1) the administration and operation for overall management of the framework and configuration and (2) the mobile device user for the daily tasks, which will be performed using the e-Citation platform. One or more persons should be identified as the designated trainer(s). Brazos Technology will equip the designated internal trainers to perform training as needed. Changes and upgrades of back-end systems connecting to the mobile devices, And changes and upgrades of the mobile devices themselves. All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. Software Training Remote Data Capture (RDC) - Designed to run on any Windows CE or Pocket PC mobile device, RDC has been specifically designed for the unique constraints of a mobile device, to include small screen size, lack of true keyboard for entry, and the availability of barcode scanners and camera. RDC is completely flexible, allowing for the enforcement of business rules specific to your needs, to ensure speed and accuracy in performing mobile tasks and data collection. RDC supports any number of tasks, allowing a single device to serve in many capacities simultaneously. Brazos Technology refers to the combination of a mobile device and the RDC application as "an RDC". Brazos Technology’s RDC has also been specifically tailored to work in an e-Citation environment to meet the unique demands of each individual law enforcement agency – and with little effort be able to meet the constant demands brought on by: Brazos Technology also offers a more comprehensive training program that entails having a Brazos representative on-site during the rollout of the application. During the rollout phase, the Brazos representative can ‘ride-along’ with the officers to provide on the job training – which has proven to be the most beneficial way to ensure officer is up to speed in the most efficient way possible. BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 7 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 For complete technical specifications, please go to the following URL: and angled display allow for ease-of-use while on the go! Motorola MC75A with 2D Barcode Scanner Rated for a 4-5 foot drop to concrete and water resistant means your officers will be using the most rugged, reliable ticket writer available! Using it in the rain is also no problem. It has a 624MHz processor, 256 MB of RAM, Microsoft Mobile 6.0 operating system, 802.11 connectivity, a Bluetooth radio, GPS, and cellular capability. This device has a built-in 2D scanner and a 2 megapixel, autofocus camera which allows the Brazos Solution to capture pictures, associate those pictures with the citation, and scan 2D barcodes. For complete technical specifications, please go to the following URL: http://www.zebra.com/id/zebra/na/en/index/products/printers/mobile/rw420.html ZEBRA RW420 Printer Designed for the Road Warrior, the Zebra RW 420 is a mobile printer ideal for Law Enforcement http://www.motorola.com/Business/US-EN/Business+Product+and+Services/Bar+Code+Scanning/Scan- equipped+Mobile+Computers/MC75A_US-EN Hardware All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) applications. Its convenient vehicle mounting and charging options, as well as its user-intuitive interfaces Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 8 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 15 0 Price $32,750 $21,220 $340 $35,093 $89,403 ($2,500) $86,903 $9,550 Number of MDC's: Number of mobile devices: Description Software and Services Hardware - Devices TOTAL PROJECT PRICE Hardware - Printers Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. PROJECT PRICE is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. Printer Paper All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) TOTAL ANNUAL FEES AFTER FIRST YEAR Customer Pricing Allowance on Criminal Tresspass Warning BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 9 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 Unit Price Qty Extended Price · · · · · $10,000 0 $0 $2,500 1 $2,500 $200 15 $3,000 $1,500 1 $1,500 $2,500 1 $0 $2,500 1 $2,500 $2,500 0 $0 · · · · $200 0 $0 · · · · · $1,500 0 $0 · $250 6 $1,500 $32,750 State Compliant Crash Report Software per Device State Compliant Crash Report Training - 6 Hours Tow Report w/Vehicle Inventory (Included with Crash Report) Criminal Trespass Warning is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. Web Based Reports and Data Search training $7,500 **Translation Services - $200 fee / language Standard Training Package - Three (3) consecutive days $3,000 1 $3,000 Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. Standard NCIC/TCIC Requests & Returns Integration with court software ○ Includes Classroom and In-Field Training *One-time fee independent of number of devices Customized Screen and Print Layouts (from an existing layout) Setup and Configuration of Solution Online Training and Reference Materials provided Additional Training Days (Customized to meet the needs of the Agency) **travel and expenses not included** Court Process training Hosted TLETS Message Switch Setup & Installation Two (2) days of Officer Train-The-Trainer training $650 15 $9,750 Stand-alone Racial Profiling (when not captured via the other methods) Citations & Warnings Field Interviews $1,500 1 System Administrator training ○ Preferable to have one officer per device $7,500 1 Total for Software and Services: All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) $1,500 ○ Max Group Size = 12 Installation of all software at customer site Customization of additional reports Brazos Local Install Server License Parking Tickets TLETS Message Switch User Setup ($250 / unit) Consent to Search Form State Compliant Crash Report Configuration and Setup (Inc. Tow Rpt.) Description MaeKIT (RDC) Brazos Software One (1) year maintenance/support Software and Services BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 10 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 Unit Price Qty Extended Price · · · * Installation Not Included · · $33 0 $0 $518 0 $0 Additional Batteries for RW420 (optional)$78 0 $0 $345 2 $690 $21,220 Unit Price Qty Extended Price $85 4 $340 $340 All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) Supplies Total for Printers: $0Docking unit to secure printer in vehicle installations * Installation Not Included Zebra Charger Quad Li-Ion 4-Bay Battery Charger Description Hardware - Printers ** Assumes all devices are not mounted in vehicles and that the wall charger is purchased. is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. $130110VAC plug to recharge the printer from a standard wall socket One case (36 rolls) of standard thermal paper Description Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. Zebra:AK18666-1 Kit Cable USB to RJ45 E-Seek M-250 2D Barcode/Magnetic Stripe Reader w/ Smart Cable Total for Printer Paper: $731 Zebra RW420 Bluetooth Printer 25 $18,275 *To charge this printer you will need either the vehicle or wall mounted chargers below Vehicle Charger for Printer (optional) 12VDC with pigtails to wire directly into a vehicle * Installation Not Included $30 $250 $65 $1,615 17 $510 Panavise 727-06 Printer Mounting Pedestal Vehicle Doc w/Charger for RW420 (optional) $95 17 Wall Charger for Printer (optional) 0 Bluetooth Communications 2 One (1) year manufacturer's warranty BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 11 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 Unit Price Qty Extended Price * Described above * 2 Mega-pixel autofocus camera * Built-in GPS * Extremely Bright 640X400 Full VGA Screen $145 15 $2,175 · · · · · · · · · · $195 0 $0 · · $35,093 Requires Microsoft ActiveSync and computer w/Internet connection Auto Charger Cable 0 $150 $0Price includes all cables USB Charging Cable Assembly $95 0 5-Year Bronze Support Extended Warranty $475 0 $0 Comprehensive Coverage (no fault) *Can only be purchased with new device $00 Single Docking Cradle Price includes all cables $1,700 $0Auto Charger Cable w/cigarette lighter adapter *Can only be purchased with new device $265 4 $122 4 - Bay Battery Charger Extended Life Battery 1.5x Battery All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) Power and mounting bracket Additional Extended Life Battery $59 0 $0 * USB Type A Male to USB Type A Male Cable not included Price includes all cables (power supply and 6' network cable) 15Comprehensive Coverage (no fault)$3,975 Magnetic Stripe Reader Attachment Description Motorola MC75A (2D Imager) * Includes AT&T, Verizon, or Sprint Cellular Capability (must specify)$1,670 15 $25,050 Requires Microsoft ActiveSync and computer w/Internet connection is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. Total for MC75A: 3-Year Bronze Support Extended Warranty Hardware - MC75A 4-bay Docking Cradle (Highly Recommended) $425 RAM Vehicle Cradle w/USB port $129 17 $2,193 * Installation not included. BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 12 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 $250 / unit Annual $3,750 e-Citation updates, license renewal Brazos Technology e-mail Support Std maintenance covers config changes (up to 5 new fields and 1 new report per quarter) $200 / unit Annual $3,000 Interface to Court System $650 $650 Interface to RMS System $650 $650 *Any additional interfaces have an annual support cost of $650 ea. TLETS Message Switch $250 / unit $1,500 Annual license and support (Not applicable unless Message Switch is activated.) Total Annual Fees After First Year Crash Report Annual Fees after the first year Brazos Technology $9,550 e-Mail Support Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. License Renewal Ongoing Software Fees BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 13 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 1) 2) ·Accident/Crash Reports ·Seized Property and Evidence Tagging and Tracking ·Replacement gear ordering by officers ·Vehicle repair work-order submissions ·Community Outreach Programs Applications ·Rotation Wrecker Management System Rapid and Easy Extension of Other Applications The successful implementation of this project is contingent upon two primary factors: Point of Contact All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. Brazos Technology will schedule a Kick-Off Meeting with client to confirm configuration information and schedule Implementation and Training. The City of Coppell and the Coppell Municipal Court will have one (1) point of contact for implementation of software and subsequent maintenance needs. The point of contact with City of Coppell will be determined later. For the Municipal Courts and the Police Department to work diligently with Brazos Technology to identify and document its requirements and needs for this project (to be documented during pre-implementation phase) - as well as to show the dedication of its workforce to adopt such technology. Because of Brazos Technology’s unique methodology for extending applications to the mobile paradigm, the following are just a few examples of applications that could easily be extended to the mobile units literally within days of being requested by each agency (please request a quote for this capability – not included in this quote): Brazos Technology's dedication to support the City of Coppell throughout the pre- implementation and implementation phases, as well as throughout the lifecycle of the software to timely respond to support needs and Mutual Responsibilities Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 14 of 15 Brazos Technology (979) 690-2811 Ver. 3.9 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The following are assumptions on which the recommendations in this Proposal are based: Any interface costs levied by Court or RMS system providers are separate and not reflected in this proposal All information sources required for the mobile device are accessible through the City of Coppell network or the Internet. Assumptions is proprietary and confidential information of Brazos Technology Corporation. All material (in whatever medium or format) and information contained herein (collectively, “Material”) Brazos Technologies does not provide installation services for hardware to be "mounted" into vehicles. Brazos will utilize the standard UDS interface for the Municipal Court System. Real-time NCIC/State Return queries are not required at this time. (unless indicated on page 10) An active internet connection is available at the location where the synchronization device will be installed. Copyright© 2010 Brazos Technology Corporation, Inc. All rights reserved. BrazosTech Coppell 3_9 Page 15 of 15 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council VIA: Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E., Director of Engineering/Public Works FROM: Keith R. Marvin, P.E., Project Engineer DATE: February 28, 2012 RE: Consider approval of Contract Amendment Number 6 in the amount of $74,785.00 to the Freese and Nichols, Inc. design contract to the Bethel Road and Coppell Road Improvements contract; and authorizing the City Manager to sign any necessary documents. At the May 27, 2003 Council meeting, Council awarded a design contract to Freese & Nichols, Inc. for the design of improvements to Bethel Road from Denton Tap to Freeport Parkway, and Coppell Road from Bethel Road to Cooper Lane. The original contract was in the amount of $508,300.00. This project has since been broken into smaller pieces. The portion of Bethel Road between Penfolds Lane and Denton Tap was completed in January 2011. The portion between Freeport Parkway and Coppell Road/Mitchell is being constructed at this time as part of the Old Town project. Each of these changes required an amendment to the original design contract. All together there have been five previous amendments totaling $124,340.00. This proposed amendment will provide funding to finalize the design of the two remaining segments of this project. The two remaining segments are: Coppell Road from Bethel Road to Cooper Lane and Bethel Road from Coppell Road/Mitchell to Penfolds Lane. This amendment is needed to provide for additional surveying of developments that have occurred within the project area since the original survey was completed in 2003, and to cover any resulting design changes. This will also provide a design and environmental investigation for an extension of the gabion lined drainage channel that was built with a previous contract. This channel will be extended to the culvert under Coppell Road. Lastly this amendment will provide for wage adjustments to the engineer necessary due to the extended time period this contract has been in place. Approval of this contract amendment in the amount of $74,785.00 will allow us to move forward with finalizing the plans for these last two segments of Coppell Road and Bethel Road. Our intention is to move this project to construction shortly after completion of the Old Town project, which is expected during the fourth quarter of this year. Staff recommends approval of this amendment, and will be available to answer any questions at the Council meeting. S:\CAD\In_Design\ST03-01C BETHEL COPPELL\dwg\ST03-01C.dwg \ST03-01C CC Bethel Road and Coppell Road Infrastructure Improvements. City of Coppell Project ST03-01C Created in CIVIL3D 1 INCH = 1 MILE 0 1/2 11/2 1 INCH = FT. 0 400 400 200 Bethel Road and Coppell Road Infrastructure Improvements. City of Coppell Project ST03-01C S:\CAD\In_Design\ST03-01C BETHEL COPPELL\dwg\ST03-01C.dwg \ST03-01C CC Created on: 22 February 2012 by Scott Latta Created in CIVIL3D 2/2 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETED OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION Rev. 06/10 FREESE ~NICHOLS , Client: City of Coppell 255 Parkway Boulevard P.O. box 9478 Coppell, Texas 75019 Attn: Ken Griffin. P.E. CONTRACT CHANGE AUTHORIZATION FORM Amend #6 FNI Project No.: CPL03243 Client Contract Ref.: Original Contract Signed May 28. 2003 Date: January 30,2012 Project Description: Bethel Road Storm Water Services Description of Services and Deliverables Added/Deleted: See Attachment SC for Scope of Services and Deliverables details. Compensation shall be adjusted as follows: Basic Services (Lump Sum) Re-Survey $8,625 Gabion Channel Analysis $9,820 Gabion Channel Design $5,900 Re-Design due to Field Changes $18,765 Re-Submit Pre-Final Plans $9,170 Wage Adjustments ~11,955 Basic Services Subtotal $64,235 Special Services (Hourly, not-to-exceed) Environmental ~10,550 Special Services Subtotal $10,550 Total Additional Fee $74,785 Original Contract $508,300 Contract Amendment #1 $ 53,140 Contract Amendment #2 $ 38 ,400 Contract Amendment #3 $ 16,000 Contract Amendment #4 $ 14,800 Contract Amendment #5 $ 2,000 Current Amendment $74,785 Revised Total Contract $707,425 Schedule shall be adjusted as follows: No change to the current schedule. The above described services shall proceed upon return of this Contract Change Authorization. Services will be billed as they are done. All other provisions, terms, and conditions of the agreement for services which are not expressly amended shall remain in full force and effect. ~ This Contract Change Authorization will serve as contract modification . CITY OF COPPELL: BY: Print or Type Name ' Print or Type Name TITLE: \j C,-e PrL~:d.e ,, :< TITLE : DATE: 2 ~ 2,- \ 2 DATE: 1701 N MARKET STREET, SUITE 500 LB 51 I DALLAS, TEXAS 75202-2001 I TELEPHONE: 214-217-2200 I FAX : 214-217-2201 L :lAesources\Contract Blue Sheets\C\CoppeIl\CPL03243 Bethel RdlAmend #6 Storm Water Svc \01-20-12\CPL03243 Amend #6 .docx t .. . -. c , 'I .. ... FREESECOPPELL ATTACHMENTSC ~NICHOLS CITY OF COPPELL TASK DESCRIPTIONS -SCOPE OF SERVICES Basic Services (Lump Sum) A. Re-Survey -$8,625 1. Field SW'veys -Survey and prepare a revised design/topographic survey map to include three (3) newly improved intersections of Coppell Road North. SW'vey will also include upstream culvert on Coppell Road to previously constructed Gabion structures (approx. 200 ft) and downstream of culvert (approx. 50 ft). The design/topographic survey will indicate all sW'face featW'es, spot elevations, one-foot contoW's, existing right-of-way lines, and utilities. B. Gabion Channel Analysis -$9,820 1. The existing conditions hydraulic model shows the gabion walls stopping approximately 400 feet upstream of Bethel Road. This model will be updated to reflect current conditions based on the new sW'vey for the channel and Coppell Road. Proposed conditions will represent the channel improvements needed to provide the adequate level of protection to Coppell Road. The discharge estimates made by FNI in May 2008 will be used in the hydraulic models. No modifications to the hydrology are part of this scope of work. c. Gabion Channel Design -$5,900 1. Prepare Channel Design including; Channel Layout, channel widths, erosion control measures for approximately 200 LF of channel. D. Re-Design due to Field Changes -$18,765 1. Incorporate Design changes due to: a. City ROW negotiations (5 sheets) b. Other projects/ Project Sequencing 1. South Coppell Road (FNI) ( 4 sheets) 2. Old Town Coppell Development (9 sheets) 3. South Coppell Road (Huitt Zollars) (3 sheets) c. Anticipated Design changes due to field changes i. New driveway locations (5 sheets) ii. New waterline connections (5 sheets) iii. Changed drainage patterns/ features (3 sheets) iv. New Development (2 sheets) d. Total Sheets Affected = 21 sheets Exhibit "A" Page 1 of3 E. Re-Submit Pre-Final Plans -$9,170 i. Prepare and Update Cost Estimate for Submittal ii. Update specifications iii. Constructability review for Submittal iv. Package plan set for Submittal F. Wage Adjustments -$11,955 1. Original Contract Remaining a. Average of 4 .75% increase since 2003 for remaining unbilled -$16,482 i. Current Value = $26,125 ii. 2003 Value = $16,482 iii. Fee increase = $ 9,643 2. Contract Amendment #3 -Split Plans a. Average of 4.75% increase since 2007 for remaining unbilled - $ 7,200 i. Current Value = $ 9,511 ii. 2007 Value = $ 7,200 iii. Fee increase request = $ 2,312 Special Services (Hourly Not-to-Exceed) The following services are considered special services in addition to the Basic Services that are provided in the tasks above. A. Environmental-$10,550 1. Compile Information a. FNI will assemble data such as aerial photos, ROW limits, and project limits in digital format for site visit and create a data dictionary for the GPS data logger for data collection. 2. Site Visit a. FNI environmental scientists will conduct a site visit to observe and document existing conditions (environment) and assess project impacts along the proposed ROW. The presence and locations of waters of the U.S ., including wetlands; potential threatened/endangered species habitat; and vegetation cover types will be identified in the proposed ROW . FNI scientists will also delineate approximately 300 linear feet of a tributary to Grapevine Creek by collecting GPS points along the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). 3. Consult with Texas Historical Commission (THC) a. FNI will consult the Texas Historical Commission, in writing, for a review of the proposed project regarding potential impacts to cultural resources. Consultation will only consist of a coordination letter. Any follow up studies required by the THC are not included in this scope of services. Exhibit "A" Page 2 of 3 4. Meet with City a. FNI envirorunental scientists will attend up to two meetings with the City to discuss the draft report, the City's corrunents, and the USACE pennitting process. Additional Services -Freese and Nichols will notify the City if any of the following services will be necessary to comply with pennit requirements. The following services can be provided upon written authorization by the City. 1. Preparation of a detailed wetland delineation and jurisdictional determination report. 2. Preparation of a pre-construction notification for nationwide or regional general 404 pelmit coverage. 3. Preparation of a formal written request for USACE authorization under a letter of permission procedure. 4. Preparation of a standard individual Section 404 permit application. 5. Preparation of Envirorunental Information Document, Envirorunental Assessment, or an Envirorunental Impact Statement. 6. Meetings or consultation with the USACE or other resource agencies, except as specifically noted in the scope of services. 7. If required by the USACE, FNI can assist the City with holding a Public Hearing by preparing public notices, submitting notices to local newspaper(s); providing verbatim transcript services, attending the public hearing; and incorporating the hearing record into the EA. 8. Presence/absence surveys for federally listed threatened/endangered species. 9. Preparation of a mitigation plan to compensate for impacts to waters of the U.S. 10. Application to Texas Corrunission on Envirorunental Quality for individual 401 Water Quality Certification. 11. Application for General Land Office easements. 12. Application for Texas Parks & Wildlife Department Sand and Gravel Pennit. 13. Additional field investigations or analysis required to respond to public or regulatory agency corrunents. 14. Consultation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service under Section 7 of the Endangered Species act. 15. Expert representation at legal proceedings or at contested hearings. 16. Mitigation monitoring if required by pennit conditions. 17. Monitoring for compliance with pennit conditions . 18. Additional modifications to the compensatory mitigation plan . 19. Assist with the payment of an EID processing fee if levied by the USACE. 20. Phase I Envirorunental Site Assessment. Exhibit "A" Page 3 of3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council VIA: Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E., Director of Engineering/Public Works FROM: Per Birdsall, Traffic/Street Operations Manager DATE: February 28, 2012 RE: Consider approval of awarding Bid #Q-0212-01 “Raised Pavement Markings” to Highway Technologies in the amount of $106,367.92, and approval of a contingency amount of $8,632.08, for a total award of $115,000.00, as previously budgeted in the IMF funds; and authorizing the City Manager to sign and execute any necessary documents. On February 16, 2012 the City of Coppell received and opened 4 bids for “Raised Pavement Markers.” The bid includes the removal and replacement of Raised Pavement Markers (RPMs) on many of our thoroughfares. The bids ranged from $110,552.28 to $194,205.20. The Bids are in two parts – Sections A & B. The City allocated $265,000 over several years in the Infrastructure Maintenance Fund (IMF) for this work. Awarding this bid will allow us to replace RPMs in large scale on many of the thoroughfares in the City. RPMs are also sometimes referred to as “buttons” or reflectorized road markers. RPMs are preferable to painted or thermoplastic markings in their applications as lane and centerline markings. This is because of their longevity, tactile and audible detection, and increased visibility especially during wet weather events when water on the pavement reduces or eliminates the retro-reflectivity aspect of most painted or thermoplastic markings. The thoroughfares to be addressed under this bid include – Denton Tap Rd. S. Belt Line Rd. Freeport Pkwy. Parkway Blvd. Moore Rd. Samuel Blvd. E. Belt Line Rd. MacArthur Blvd. Included in this bid is Section “B,” which is a portion of East Belt Line Road outside our city limits. We are not awarding this section of the bid. We will be coordinating with the City of Dallas and/or Dallas County to allow them to piggy back off our bid pricing for the work performed on East Belt Line Road should they choose to accept the offer. The Traffic Control Department has inquired into the companies qualifications to supply and perform the work requested. It is our opinion that they are qualified and capable of completing the work in the time specified. We are recommending award of Section “A” in the amount of $106,367.92, with a contingency amount of $8,632.08, for a total amount of $115,000.00. Staff will be available at the Council meeting to answer any questions. BID SECTION "A" I.Raised Pavement Markers Type I-A ea 68 $2.97 $201.96 $5.00 $340.00 $3.60 $244.80 $5.20 $353.60 Type I-C ea 16580 $2.97 $49,242.60 $2.95 $48,911.00 $3.60 $59,688.00 $5.00 $82,900.00 Type II-A-A ea 6044 $2.97 $17,950.68 $3.25 $19,643.00 $3.60 $21,758.40 $5.20 $31,428.80 Type II-C-R ea 2588 $2.97 $7,686.36 $3.70 $9,575.60 $3.60 $9,316.80 $5.20 $13,457.60 Type W ea 11,418 $2.68 $30,600.24 $2.95 $33,683.10 $3.25 $37,108.50 $5.00 $57,090.00 Type Y ea 256 $2.68 $686.08 $4.00 $1,024.00 $3.25 $832.00 $5.20 $1,331.20 II. Method for Removal: III.Number of Calendar Days to Complete Bid Section A Bid Total Value of tangible property associated with this bid BID SECTION "B" I. Raised Pavement Markers Type I-C ea 812 $2.97 $2,411.64 $3.50 $2,842.00 $3.60 $2,923.20 $5.20 $4,222.40 Type II-C-R ea 32 $2.97 $95.04 $3.50 $112.00 $3.60 $115.20 $5.20 $166.40 Type W ea 626 $2.68 $1,677.68 $3.50 $2,191.00 $3.25 $2,034.50 $5.20 $3,255.20 II. Method for Removal: III.Number of Calendar Days to Complete BID SECTION "B" Bid Total Value of tangible property associated with this bid BID SECTION "A" & "B" Combined TOTAL BID Value of tangible property associated with this bid $37,731.72 $128,948.50 $36,311.52 Pneumatic air hammer 4 $5,072.90 $1,420.20 $0.00 Flail Removal 32 Pneumatic air hammer 49 $50,000.00 $113,176.70 Flail Removal 4 $5,145.00 $110,552.28 $110,552.28 Flail Milling 60 $186,561.20 $0.00 Flail Milling 20 $7,644.00 $0.00 $106,367.92 Hammer/Chisel - Sandblast 3 $4,184.36 $4,184.36 $194,205.20 $4,000.00 $134,021.40 Extended Price Unit Price Extended Price TRP Construction RoadMaster Striping Stripe-A-Zone, Inc $118,321.70 $57,350.00 Unit Price Extended Price Unit Price Eliminating Existing Pavement Markings and Markers Eliminating Existing Pavement Markings and Markers Hammer/Chisel - Sandblast 40 $106,367.92 Q-0212-01 Raised Pavement Markers Unit Item Description Extended Price Estimated Quantity Unit Price Highway Technologies S:\CAD\In_Design\MA10-03 BUTTON REPLACEMENT\dwg\MA10-03 PLANS REV4.dwg \MA10-03 CC Raised Pavement Marker (RPM) Replacement. City of Coppell Project MA10-03 Created in CIVIL3D 1 INCH = 1 MILE 0 1/1 1/2 1 LOCATIONS WHERE RPM's WILL BE REPLACED MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council VIA: Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E., Director of Engineering/Public Works FROM: Michael Arellano, Chief Building Official DATE: February 28, 2012 RE: An Ordinance of the City of Coppell, Texas, amending the Code of Ordinances by amending Chapter 15 Article 15-14 to the International Property Maintenance Code 2009 Edition; amending Sections 15-14-2; providing a Severability Clause; providing a Repealing Clause; providing a Savings Clause; providing a Penalty for Violation of this Ordinance not to exceed the sum of five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each offense, except however, where a different penalty has been established by State or Law for such offense which is a violation of Provision of Law that governs Fire Safety, Zoning, or Public Health and Sanitation, including dumping of refuse, the penalty shall be a fine not to exceed the sum of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense; authorizing the Mayor to sign; and providing an effective date. On January 11, 2011 Council approved Ordinance #2011-1269 which amended Chapter 15, Article 15-14 repealing Article 15-11, “The Neighborhood Integrity Code” in its entirety and adopting the “2009 International Property Maintenance Code.” Since that time, staff has received concerns from property owners whose properties are classified as rental property, even though the renter is a relative of the property owner. This proposed change will remove the requirement for an inspection of rental property when no rent is being collected. Staff has also received concerns from townhome owners, specifically those property owners that own multiple townhomes, requesting that they be able to register under the multi-family registration and inspection process instead of the single- family method. In addition to the requested changes in the rental registration program, staff is clarifying the definitions regarding inoperable and inoperative vehicles so that they are more consistent with the “ 2009 International Property Maintenance Code.” Staff also is adding definitions for “Antique Vehicle, Collector Vehicle and Special Interest Vehicle” as well as the exception clauses allowing vehicles in violation of the ordinance to be stored in an enclosed building or stored in a legal manner. Approval of this ordinance would revise the existing ordinance to allow property owners that do not occupy their property and do not collect rent on their property to provide written documentation as such exempting them from registering their property as a rental. It would also allow owners of townhomes to register their property/properties as either single family or multi-family. Lastly, approval to add and clarify the definitions and exceptions relating to the storage of vehicles will allow for better enforcement. Staff will be available to answer questions at the council meeting. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. ___________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING CHAPTER 15 ARTICLE 15-14 TO THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE 2009 EDITION; AMENDING SECTIONS 15-14-2 ; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; EXCEPT HOWEVER, WHERE A DIFFERENT PENALTY HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY STATE OR LAW FOR SUCH OFFENSE WHICH IS A VIOLATION OF PROVISION OF LAW THAT GOVERNS FIRE SAFETY, ZONING, OR PUBLIC HEALTH AND SANITATION, INCLUDING DUMPING OF REFUSE, THE PENALTY SHALL BE A FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the City of Coppell Code of Ordinances be, and the same is, hereby amended by amending Chapter 15, Article 15-14, to read as follows: “ARTICLE 15-14. PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE …. 15-14-2 Amendments …. 11. …. Sec. 113.3 Inspection required. All dwellings, boarding houses, rooming houses, lodging houses, and/or tourist houses that rent to permanent residents and dormitories shall be inspected systematically for compliance with this article and all other applicable laws. Exception: The provisions of this section shall not apply to: 1. Dwellings, buildings, structures and uses owned and operated by any governmental agency; 2. Dwellings, buildings, structures and uses licensed and inspected by the state; 3. Hotels that do not rent to permanent residents; 4. Where a nonresidential business or activity, or a state-licensed and state inspected use occupies a portion of a building and premises which would be otherwise subject to this article. The provisions of this article shall be applicable to the residential and common or public areas of such building and premises. 5. Properties that are currently being occupied by family member(s) with a written notice given to Building Inspection and no rental payments are being collected from occupant…. Add Sec. 113.4.2 Inspection of townhome(s): The owner of multiple townhomes shall provide written notice to Building Inspection indicating the type of registration classification of their townhomes as listed below: (a) Residential classification which shall be inspected upon change of occupancy with appropriate fees; or (b) Multifamily classification which shall require ten percent of the entire complex be inspected each year with appropriate fees. …. Amend Sec. 113.6 Inspection procedure to read as follows, If, upon completion of the inspection, the premises are found to be in violation of one or more provisions of applicable City codes and ordinances, the City shall provide written notice of such violation and shall set a re-inspection date before which such violation shall be corrected. If such uncorrected violations do not pose an immediate threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants, the Chief Building Official or designee may authorize the occupancy of the premises for a period not to exceed 90 days…. Repeal Sec 113.8, 113.9, 113.10, 113.11…. Amend Sec. 113.13 Exemptions to read as follows: The provisions of this article shall not apply to hospital units, nursing units or retirement- home units licensed by the state located within the City and properties that are currently being occupied by family member(s) and no rental payments are being collected all of which shall be specifically exempt from registration under this article…. Sec. 113.17 Failure to register. The owner or local property manager failing to register a property within the time prescribed, shall be liable to a fine not to exceed Two Thousand ($2,000.00) dollars…. 12. Sec. 202…. VEHICLE . ….. Repeal definition VEHICLE, INOPERATIVE…. Repeal definition VEHICLE, SPECIAL…. Repeal definition VEHICLE, UTILITY…. Add VEHICLE, ANTIQUE. A passenger car or truck that is at least 35 years old. Add VEHICLE COLLECTOR. A person who: (a) owns one or more antique or special interest vehicles; and (b) acquires, collects or disposes of an antique or special interest vehicle or part of them for personal use to restore and preserve an antique or special interest vehicle for historic interest. Add VEHICLE INOPERABLE: A vehicle without a motor, including but not limited to trailers, campers, camper shells, and wheeled towing frames, that is not in operating condition because it is wrecked, dismantled, partially dismantled, dilapidated or has one or more flat tires. Add VEHICLE, SPECIAL INTEREST. A vehicle of any age that has not been changed from the original manufacturer’s specifications and, because of its historic interest is being preserved by hobbyist. …. 16. .… Amend Sec. 302.4.8 to read as follows: Sec. 302.4.8 Assessments of expenses. In the event the owners of premises upon which work was performed by the City and charges incurred, fails or refuses to pay such charges and expenses within 60 days after the work was done, the City Tax Assessor and collector shall file with the County Clerk of Dallas County or Denton County a lien statement which describes the expenses the City has incurred pursuant to the provision of this article, the name of the owner, if known, and the legal description of the property. This lien is security for the expenditures made and interest occurring at the rate of ten percent on the amount due from the date of payment by the municipality. This lien is inferior only to tax liens and liens for street improvements…. 19. …. Amend Sec. 302.8 to read as follows: Sec. 302.8 Motor Vehicles. Except as provided for in other regulations, no inoperable or unlicensed motor vehicle shall be parked, kept or stored on any premises, and no vehicle shall at any time be in a state of major disassembly, disrepair, or in the process of being stripped or dismantled. Paint of vehicles is prohibited unless conducted inside an approved spray booth. Exceptions: 1. A vehicle of any type is permitted to undergo major overhaul, including body work, provided that such work is performed inside a structure or similarly enclosed area designed and approved for such purposes. 2. A vehicle that is completely enclosed within a building in a lawful manner and is not visible from the street or other public or private property. 3. That is stored or parked in a lawful manner on private property in connection with the business of a licensed vehicle dealer or a junk yard; or 4. That is antique or special interest vehicle stored by a vehicle collector on the collector’s property, if the vehicle or part and the outside storage area, if any, are: (a) maintained in an orderly manner; (b) not a health hazard; and (c) screened from ordinary public view by appropriate means including a fence, rapidly growing trees or shrubbery…. Section 2. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, phrase or work in this ordinance, or application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity. Section 3. That the repeal of any ordinance or any portion thereof by the preceding sections shall not affect or impair any act done or right vested or accrued or any proceeding, suit or prosecution had or commenced in any cause before such repeal shall take effect; but every such act done, or right vested or accrued, or proceedings, suit or prosecution had or commenced shall remain in full force and effect to all intents or purposes as if such ordinance or part thereof so repealed shall remain in force. Section 4. That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance or the Code of Ordinances as amended hereby, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction in the Municipal Court of the City of Coppell, Texas shall be subject to a fine not to exceed the sum of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for each offence, except where a different penalty has been established by State law for such offense, the penalty shall be that fixed by State law, and for any offense which is a violation of any provision of law that governs fire safety, zoning or public health and sanitation, including dumping of refuse, the penalty shall be a fine not to exceed the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense; and each and every day such offense is continued shall constitute a new and separate offense. Section 5. That this ordinance shall become effective 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 Coppell, Texas, this the _______day of _______________, 2012. APPROVED: ______________________________ DOUGLAS N. STOVER, MAYOR ATTEST: ___________________________________ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ ROBERT HAGER, CITY ATTORNEY Date: To: From: Re: Backgro The Park feasibility Andrew B along the on the sh the lakes Parks and project a list. Former h expansio phase of north fro itself. Th are exam The attac 1. C PARK Febru Mayo Brad R Consi Nall a survey trail p CRDC ound: ks and Recre y analysis on Brown Park e lake edges horeline, resu . The conce d Recreation s the numbe high priority n project, ar this erosion m the spillw hese two wa mples of the m ched agreem Conceptual, KS AND CIT uary 28, 2012 r and Counc Reid, Direct ider approva and Perkins, ying service protection at C and the Ci ation Depart n erosion co Central, and from rising, ulted in an ev ern for this p n/Coppell Re r one priorit projects, the re nearing co control proj way to the bri ter features a most extensi ment includes preliminary RECRE Y COUNC 2 cil tor al of award o in the amou s related to t Andrew Bro ty Manager tment retaine ontrol and dra d Andrew Br and then rec ventual threa otential defe ecreation De ty on the 201 e recreation ompletion m ject. The fir idge at the C are in closes ve erosion d s Basic Servi and final de EATION CIL AGEN of a Professio unt of $174,8 the planning own Park Ea to sign the n ed Teague N ainage impro rown Park E ceding rain w at to the exis erred infrastr evelopment C 10, 2011 and center expan aking it poss rst phase con Central Activ st proximity damage need ices, which a esign of eros N DEPA NDA ITEM onal Service 800.00, to pr g and design ast, and autho necessary do Nall and Perk ovement opt East in 2008. water, and th sting concret ructure main Corporation/ d 2012 CRDC nsion projec sible to alloc nsists of the f vity Lake an to the major ding addressi are: sion control i ARTME M es Agreemen rovide engin of erosion m orizing the P ocuments. kins, Inc. to tions at vario . The steady he wind driv te trail syste ntenance issu /Tree Board C Developm ct and the ten cate funding finger-lake w d the Centra r events held ing. improvemen ENT nt with Teagu eering and mitigation an President of perform a ous locations y loss of eart ven wave act m that surro ue prompted to place this ment Prioritie nnis center g for the first which extend al Activity L d in the park nts. ue nd the s in th tion ounds d the s es t ds Lake and 2. Preparation of final construction plans and specifications. 3. Bid/construction administration. 4. Field design surveys and geotechnical investigation. 5. Environmental permitting. And Special Services, which are: 1. Topographic survey of lake bottom. 2. Design lake dredging improvements. 3. Environmental – individual permit. Execution of this Agreement will produce designs and construction documents ready for the bidding process. The CRDC has reviewed their current year budget and decided to allocate $1,000,000 for the construction of this phase of the work. This project will result in a variety of different solutions to address the erosion that has increased over time. There will likely be more than one ultimate method used in addressing the protection of the perimeter of the pond, depending on the root cause of the erosion and the location of the area being protected. The CRDC approved this Agreement at their meeting of February 13, 2012. Further, the CRDC is in favor of proceeding in the very near future with additional phases of the work. Specifically, the pond at the east end of Moore Road Park is of major concern and they discussed that section of the work should be addressed as quickly as funding is available. It is expected that at least a portion of the tax receipts from the current year will be used on phase II of the work in 2013. City Council Action requested: Approval of a Professional Services Agreement with Teague Nall and Perkins, in the amount of $174,800, to provide engineering and surveying services related to the planning and design of erosion mitigation and trail protection at Andrew Brown Park East, and authorizing the President of the CRDC and the City Manager to sign the necessary documents. Staff Recommendation: Approval of this item. AUTHORIZATION FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROJECT NAME: Andy Brown Park (East) Erosion Control Improvements TNP PROJECT NUMBER: CPL11185 CLIENT: The City of Coppell 255 Parkway Blvd. Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 The City of Coppell (the CITY) hereby requests and authorizes Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc., (the CONSULTANT) to perform the following services: Article I SCOPE: Provide engineering and surveying services related to the planning and design of erosion control improvements at Andy Brown Park (East) for the west lake and the lower portion of the finger lake, as shown on Exhibit ‘E’. A detailed scope of services is included as Attachment 'A' and is made a part hereto. Article II COMPENSATION to be on a basis of the following (see also, Attachment „C‟): 1. BASIC SERVICES: The CITY agrees to pay the CONSULTANT a fixed fee of ___One Hundred Fifty Thousand Two Hundred_Dollars ($_150,200.00) for BASIC SERVICES as outlined in Attachment 'A'. BASIC SERVICES shall be billed monthly based on the percentage of work complete. 2. SPECIAL SERVICES: The CITY agrees to pay the CONSULTANT a fixed fee of __Twenty Four Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($_24,600.00_) for SPECIAL SERVICES as outlined in Attachment 'A'. SPECIAL SERVICES shall be billed monthly based on the percentage of work complete. 3. ADDITIONAL SERVICES: When authorized in writing by the CITY, ADDITIONAL SERVICES shall be considered additional work and the CITY agrees to pay (reimburse) CONSULTANT at CONSULTANT‟s standard hourly rates or CONSULTANT‟s standard rates for items provided in-house, or direct expenses times a multiplier of 1.10 for non-labor, subcontract or mileage items (see Attachment „D‟). ADDITIONAL SERVICES, when authorized, will be billed monthly based upon the labor effort required and expenses incurred within each billing period. 4. PAYMENT TERMS: CITY shall be billed monthly for services rendered and pay promptly upon receipt of invoice. Delays of transmitting payments to CONSULTANT more than 30 days from invoice date may result in cessation of services until payment is received. Article III SCHEDULE: The proposed services shall begin within ten (10) working days of written notice to PROVISIONS 1. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED Signing this agreement shall be construed as authorization by CITY (or CLIENT) for TNP, Inc. (CONSULTANT or ENGINEER) to proceed with the work, unless otherwise provided for in this agreement. 2. LABOR COSTS TNP, Inc.'s Labor Costs shall be the amount of salaries paid TNP, Inc.'s employees for work performed on CITYS Project plus a stipulated percentage of such salaries to cover all payroll-related taxes, payments, premiums, and benefits. 3. DIRECT EXPENSES TNP, Inc.'s Direct Expenses shall be those costs incurred on or directly for the CITY's Project, including but not limited to necessary transportation costs including mileage at TNP, Inc.'s current rate when its, or its employee’s, automobiles are used, meals and lodging, laboratory tests and analyses, computer services, word processing services, telephone, printing and binding charges. Reimbursement for these expenses shall be on the basis of actual charges when furnished by commercial sources and on the basis of usual commercial charges when furnished by TNP, Inc. 4. OUTSIDE SERVICES When technical or professional services are furnished by an outside source, when approved by CITY, an additional amount shall be added to the cost of these services for TNP, Inc.'s administrative costs, as provided herein. 5. OPINION OF PROBABLE COST In providing opinions of probable cost, the CITY understands that TNP, Inc. has no control over costs or the price of labor, equipment, or materials, or over the Contractor’s method of pricing, and that the opinions of probable cost provided to CITY are to be made on the basis of the design professional’s qualifications and experience. TNP, Inc. makes no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of such opinions as compared to bid or actual costs. 6. PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS TNP, Inc. shall be responsible, to the level of competency presently maintained by other practicing professional engineers in the same type of work in the State of Texas, for the professional and technical soundness, accuracy, and adequacy of all design, drawings, specifications, and other work and materials furnished under this Authorization. TNP, Inc. makes no other warranty, expressed or implied. 7. TERMINATION Either CITY or TNP, Inc. may terminate this authorization by giving 10 days written notice to the other party. In such event CITY shall forthwith pay TNP, Inc. in full for all work previously authorized and performed prior to effective date of termination. If no notice of termination is given, relationships and obligations created by this Authorization shall be terminated upon completion of all applicable requirements of this Authorization. 8. MEDIATION In an effort to resolve any conflicts that arise during the design or construction of the project or following the completion of the project, the CITY and the CONSULTANT agree that all disputes between them arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be submitted to nonbonding mediation unless the parties mutually agree otherwise. The CITY and the CONSULTANT further agree to include a similar mediation provision in all agreements with independent contractors and consultants retained for the project and to require all independent contractors and consultants retained also to include a similar mediation provision in all agreements with subcontractors, subconsultants, suppliers or fabricators so retained, thereby providing for mediation as the primary method for dispute resolution between the parties to those agreements. 9. LEGAL EXPENSES In the event legal action is brought by CITY or TNP, Inc. against the other to enforce any of the obligations hereunder or arising out of any dispute concerning the terms and conditions hereby created, the losing party shall pa y the prevailing party such reasonable amounts for fees, costs and expenses as may be set by the court. 10. PAYMENT TO TNP, INC. Monthly invoices will be issued by TNP, Inc. for all work performed under the terms of this agreement. Invoices are due and payable on receipt. If payment is not received within 30 days of invoice date, all work on CITY’s project shall cease and all work products and documents shall be withheld until payment is received by TNP. Time shall be added to the project schedule for any work stoppages resulting from CITY’s failure to render payment within 30 days of invoice date. Interest at the rate of 1½% per month will be charged on all past-due amounts, unless not permitted by law, in which case, interest will be charged at the highest amount permitted by law. 11. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY TNP, Inc.'s liability to the CITY for any cause or combination of causes is in the aggregate, limited to an amount no greater than the fee earned under this agreement. 12. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Services not specified as Basic Services in Scope and Attachment ‘A’ will be provided by TNP, Inc. as Additional Services when required. The CITY agrees upon execution of this contract that no additional authorization is required. Additional services will be paid for by CITY as indicated in Article II, Compensation. 13. SALES TAX In accordance with the State Sales Tax Codes, certain surveying services are taxable. Applicable sales tax is not included in the fee set forth and will be added on and collected when required by state law. Sales tax at the applicable rate will be indicated on invoice statements. 14. SURVEYING SERVICES In accordance with the Professional Land Surveying Practices Act of 1989, the CITY is informed that any complaints about surveying services may be forwarded to the Texas Board of Professional Land Surveying, 12100 Park 35 Circle, Building A, Suite 156, MC-230, Austin, Texas 78753, (512) 239-5263. 15. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SERVICES The Texas Board of Architectural Examiners has jurisdiction over complaints regarding the professional practices of persons registered as landscape architects in Texas. The CITY is informed that any complaints about landscape architecture services be forwarded to the Texas Board of Architectural Examiners, Hobby Building: 333 Guadalupe, Suite 2-350, Austin, Texas 78701, Telephone (512) 305- 9000, Fax (512) 305-8900. 16 INVALIDITY CLAUSE In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be held illegal, the enforceability of the remaining provisions contained herein shall not be impaired thereby. 17. PROJECT SITE SAFETY TNP, Inc. has no duty or responsibility for project site safety. 18. CONSTRUCTION MEANS AND METHODS AND JOBSITE SAFETY Means and methods of construction and jobsite safety are the sole responsibility of the contractor. Page 4 ATTACHMENT 'A' DETAILED SCOPE OF SERVICES Andy Brown Park (East) Erosion Control Improvements City of Coppell, Texas The scope of services for this Project consists of the preparation of construction plans and related documents necessary for the construction of erosion control improvements for the west lake at Andy Brown Park (East) in Coppell, Texas. The Project is understood and defined to include the design by the CONSULTANT and subsequent construction/reconstruction (by others) of erosion control improvements for the lake and a short section of the finger lake to the south. See Project Layout, Attachment „E‟. The pre-design, conceptual opinion of probable construction cost for the Project is $1,300,000. I. BASIC SERVICES Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc., (the CONSULTANT) shall render the following professional services (BASIC SERVICES) necessary for the development of this project. BASIC SERVICES are in general those services required to complete the preliminary and final design of the Project. The following tasks are to be performed by the CONSULTANT as part of the scope of BASIC SERVICES. TASK 1 – CONCEPTUAL (30%), PRELIMINARY (60%), AND FINAL DESIGN (90%) OF EROSION CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS This work will include conceptual, preliminary and final design of a lake edge treatment and erosion control measures for all or part of the perimeter of the lake (see Exhibit E), channel bank stabilization for the finger lake, repair or replacement of existing storm drain outfall structures, fishing pier improvements, and pedestrian bridge repairs. The primary intent of this design is to address the erosion, scour and lake edge deterioration that is occurring on the west lake and lower finger lake. The work necessary to complete this task is as follows: a. Establish the limits, and general vertical and horizontal control, for the proposed improvements. b. Coordinate with City staff to select the most appropriate design alternative from the feasibility study. Only one (1) alternative will be included in the preliminary and final design. (Note: A detailed drainage study/hydraulic analysis is not included as part of this scope. The proposed improvements will be designed to closely match the existing hydraulic capacity). c. Design a lake edge treatment for the perimeter of the lake. This may include a combination of methods and materials to be applied at various locations along the lake perimeter, as identified in the feasibility study (2008), but only one overall design. d. Design grading and bank stabilization improvements for both channel banks between the lake and the existing concrete spillway approximately 200 feet south of the lake. The design will include stabilization and repair measures for the partially undermined concrete spillway. If the spillway is determined to be structurally deficient or beyond Page 5 repair, a new spillway can be designed as ADDITIONAL SERVICES, upon written approval by the CITY. e. Design erosion control improvements for approximately seven (7) storm drain outfall locations that discharge into or out of the lake. Improvements may include connection to a proposed wall, building a new headwall, or turf reinforcement stabilization. This work is not anticipated to alter the FEMA flood plain and does not include hydraulic analysis, computer modeling, or FEMA permitting associated with altered flood profiles. f. Design bridge abutment improvements for the existing pedestrian bridge at the southwest corner of the lake. It is assumed that the existing bridge can be salvaged and will be removed and reinstalled. However, if the existing bridge structure cannot be removed and replaced or it is determined to be structurally deficient, a new bridge can be designed as ADDITIONAL SERVICES, upon written approval by the CITY. g. Design improvements to stabilize the connection of the fishing pier to the lake edge. This work is limited to the connection and walkway nearest the lake edge, and does not include reconstruction of, or improvements to the remainder of the pier. h. Upon 30% and 60% completion of the construction documents (conceptual and preliminary design), up to five (5) sets of construction plans will be provided to the CITY for review and comment. After the review is complete, the CONSULTANT will mee t with CITY to address the comments. i. Upon 90% completion of the construction documents (final design), up to five (5) sets of construction plans will be provided to the CITY for review and comment. After the review is complete, the CONSULTANT will meet with CITY to address the comments. j. Upon 30%, 60% & 90% completion of the construction documents, the CONSULTANT will prepare an updated opinion of probable construction cost. TASK 2 – PREPARATION OF FINAL CONSTRUCTION PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS, INCLUDING OTHER RELATED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS A set of construction plans and related construction documents will be prepared for the work described in Task 1. The work necessary to complete this task is as follows: a. Prepare an Erosion Control Plan and appropriate details in accordance with the requirements of the City of Coppell and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). It is understood that the SWPPP documents and NOI will be prepared and submitted by the Contractor. b. Select and utilize standard City of Coppell details where possible. Special construction details will also be developed as needed for the project design. c. Assist the CITY with identifying utilities within the Project area and coordination with franchise utility companies to facilitate relocation of franchise utilities as may be required for the construction of this Project. It is understood that the intent of this effort by the CONSULTANT will be to assist in evaluating potential conflicts based upon the best information available from the CITY and/or utility companies. Page 6 d. Prior to 100% completion the CONSULTANT will prepare construction bid documents, including but not necessarily limited to, detailed pay item descriptions, special specifications, the bid proposal form, and other information required by the CITY for bidding the project. It is understood that the CITY will provide the CONSULTANT with the CITY‟s standard construction/bid documents (i.e., standard specifications, construction contract form, bond forms, general & special conditions, etc.) for the CONSULTANT to incorporate into the construction/bid documents. TASK 3 – BID/CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION This work will consist of providing assistance to the CITY during the CITY‟s administration of the bidding process and subsequent construction. The work by the CONSULTANT will be limited as follows: a. Coordinate with City‟s Floodplain Administrator to obtain approval of a Floodplain Development Permit prior to construction. b. The CONSULTANT will assist the CITY in the advertisement of the Project for bid. The CITY shall bear the cost of advertisement. The CONSULTANT shall provide the necessary printing of construction plans, specifications and contract documents (up to 30 sets) for use in obtaining bids, awarding contracts, and constructing the Project. The CITY shall be responsible for dispersing all plans and specifications from its office to prospective bidders. c. The CONSULTANT will attend one pre-bid meeting with the CITY and prospective bidders to assist the CITY in answering questions and clarifying bid documents. d. The CONSULTANT will assist the CITY in the preparation of one Addendum following the pre-bid meeting to address any issues requiring change, correction and/or clarification. e. The CONSULTANT will assist the CITY in the opening and tabulation of the construction bids for the Project and provide recommendations to the CITY regarding the proper action on all proposals received. f. After selection of Contractor(s) and award of contract(s) by the CITY, the CONSULTANT will assist in the preparation of formal contract documents, including contract, performance, payment, and maintenance bonds and all other related CITY forms required to initiate construction on the Project. g. The CONSULTANT will attend one pre-construction conference with the CITY, Contractor(s), and all affected utility companies. h. The CONSULTANT will assist in representing the CITY in the non-resident administration of the project. (NOTE: This function of CONSULTANT shall not be construed as supervision of the Project and does not include on-site activities other than occasional site visits to observe overall Project conditions, normally only once a month, or when specifically requested by CITY to visit on site for a particular matter. It particularly does not involve exhaustive or continuous on-site inspection to check the quality or quantity of the work or material; nor does it place any responsibility on the CONSULTANT for the techniques and sequences of construction or the safety precaution incident thereto, and CONSULTANT will not be responsible or liable in any Page 7 degree for the Contractor's failure to perform the construction work in accordance with the Contract Documents.) i. The CONSULTANT will consult and advise the CITY regarding the need for any contract change orders and will prepare change orders as required for CITY approval. j. The CONSULTANT will be available for interpretation of plans and specifications as may be required by the Contractor(s) in the field. k. The CONSULTANT will, with assistance from the CITY‟s Inspector on the project(s), prepare and process monthly and final pay requests from the Contractor(s) to the CITY. l. The CONSULTANT will provide, in conjunction with the CITY, a final inspection and one follow-up of the project upon completion of initial construction and provide a “punch list” of deficient items to the Contractor(s). m. The CITY inspector will provide the CONSULTANT with a red-lined set of drawings depicting changes during construction and shall also require the Contractor to maintain a set of drawings that reflect any changes in construction from what is shown on the original plans. CONSULTANT will revise construction drawings as necessary to adequately reflect any revisions in the construction from what was represented on the plans and/or specifications. n. After the red-lined plans referenced above have been provided, CONSULTANT will provide the CITY with an electronic file of the “Record Drawings” in .pdf format, and an updated electronic file in AutoCAD (.dwg) format of the new construction for use by the CITY. TASK 4 – FIELD DESIGN SURVEYS AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION This work will include the field survey and office work necessary for preparing base maps of existing conditions on the ground for use in the design of the Project. The work necessary to complete this task is as follows: a. Establish vertical and horizontal control for the project onsite using GPS equipment. b. Perform topographic design surveys of the project site and prepare base maps for use in the design and preparation of construction plans. This survey will consist of identifying and recording the vertical and horizontal location of the structural and physical features within the limits of the project. The survey will include a description of the existing structures (i.e. size, flow lines, etc.) and location of trees with a diameter of 6" or larger. c. After the project is bid and the Contractor(s) is (are) selected, the survey control points will be re-established. The purpose of this subtask is to provide the survey control necessary for the construction staking. It is understood the construction staking will be completed by the Contractor. d. Geotechnical survey, including up to 8 bore holes at various locations around the lake and channel bank. Page 8 TASK 5 – ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING This work will include the site research, field investigations, and environmental permitting actions necessary to submit a Preconstruction Notification (PCN) to the USACE, in support of one or more Nationwide Permits (NWP‟s) for the design of the Project. It is assumed that the planned bank stabilization measures of the Project can be performed under a NWP. If the lake bottom is to be dredged an Individual Permit may be required, and is included as SPECIAL SERVICES. The anticipated work necessary to complete this task is as follows: a. Initial coordination with the USACE to have a project manager assigned, and to coordinate the appropriate course of action for the project. This coordination will establish the appropriate use of one or more NWP‟s for the Project. b. Delineate waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that could be subject to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers‟ jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Section 404); c. Identify federally listed threatened and endangered species subject to the Endangered Species Act; d. Identify migratory birds; e. Prepare and submit a PCN to the USACE in support of the NWP. This work includes all field work, research, and documentation necessary to comply with the requirements of the NWP/s. f. Coordinate mitigation measures with the USACE for design compliance and acceptance of the NWP/s. II. SPECIAL SERVICES Teague Nall and Perkins, Inc. (the CONSULTANT) shall render the following professional services (SPECIAL SERVICES) for the development of this project, upon written approval by the CLIENT. SPECIAL SERVICES are those services which will be required in order to complete an expanded scope of work to include lake dredging improvements. These SPECIAL SERVICES will be in addition to the CONSULTANT‟s BASIC SERVICES for this Project. The following tasks are included as SPECIAL SERVICES: TASK 6 – TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF LAKE BOTTOM This work will include the field survey and office work necessary for preparing topographic contours of the lake bottom, for use in the design of dredging improvements for the lake bottom. TASK 7 – DESIGN LAKE DREDGING IMPROVEMENTS This work consists of designing dredging improvements for the lake bottom. Task‟s 1 and 2 will serve as the basis for this Task. This Task shall consist only of the work required to add lake dredging improvements to the design of Task 1 and the construction documents of Task 2. TASK 8 – ENVIRONMENTAL - INDIVIDUAL PERMIT (SECTION 404) This work will include the additional site research, field investigations, and environmental Page 9 permitting actions necessary to obtain an Individual Permit from the USACE. The anticipated work necessary to complete this task is as follows: a. TASK 5, items a. through d. will serve as the base for this task. TASK 5 items e. and f. will not be performed if an Individual Permit is needed. The fee listed in Attachment ‘C’ for this TASK represents only the additional fee (above the total for TASK 5) required for obtaining an Individual Permit in lieu of a NWP. b. Submit an application for an Individual Permit to the USACE using the standard forms and attachments, including, functional assessment, wetland data forms, photographs, illustrations, functional assessment, mitigation evaluation, adjacent land owners list, and a Section 401 water quality certificate, among other things. c. Coordinate with the USACE and other agencies, as needed (TCEQ, TPWD, USFWS, USEPA, and THC) to facilitate the permit process. d. Prepare recommendations for mitigation measures. It is assumed that any mitigation required will be achieved through the purchase of credits from a mitigation bank. III. ADDITIONAL SERVICES ADDITIONAL SERVICES shall be any service provided by the CONSULTANT which is not specifically included in BASIC SERVICES or SPECIAL SERVICES as defined above. ADDITIONAL SERVICES shall include, but not be limited to: a. Construction Staking; b. Property research and real property surveying for easements, right-of-ways or plats; c. Preparation of real property transfer documents, exhibits or plats; d. Participation in or performing real property (easements or ROW) acquisitions; e. Trips and meetings beyond a 100 mile radius of Fort Worth; f. Subcontract charges, photocopies, plan reproduction, computer charges, etc. not described in BASIC or SPECIAL SERVICES; g. Subsurface Utility Engineering (S.U.E.); h. Coordination of Franchise Utility Relocations; i. Flood study or CLOMR/LOMR Applications; j. Construction Inspections; k. Tree Survey and/or Tree Mitigation Plan; l. Detailed hydraulic analysis IV. ASSUMPTIONS, EXCEPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS TO SCOPE OF SERVICES The following is a list of assumptions, exceptions, and exclusions for this proposed scope of services: a. The contractor will prepare the SWPPP and NOI if required. A recommended plan for temporary erosion controls is included in this scope. b. No tree mitigation plan will be required; c. The Contractor will provide construction staking for the project; d. This scope of services assumes the CITY will provide access to or copies of all relevant information in the CITY‟s possession related to the Project (i.e., plans or locations of the water system, sanitary sewer system, storm drainage system, topographic and aerial maps, etc.). Page 10 e. This scope assumes NO floodplain analysis, flood study, or FEMA mapping will be required for the Project. The Project is not anticipated to alter the hydrologic function of the lake or the hydraulic capacity of any drainage structures. f. This scope assumes the existing pedestrian bridge and fishing pier will be salvaged and reinstalled as part of this Project. g. This scope assumes the concrete spillway south of the lake is structurally sound and will remain in place. h. This scope assumes that a cultural resources survey will not be required as part of the environmental permit, and therefore is not included. i. This scope assumes an „absence/presence survey‟ of any state or federally listed protected species will not be required as part of the environmental permitting, and therefore is not included. j. This scope assumes no „benthic or macro-invertebrate surveys‟ will be required as part of the environmental permitting, and therefore are not included. Page 11 ATTACHMENT 'B' PROJECT SCHEDULE Andy Brown Park (Central) Erosion Control and Drainage Improvements City of Coppell, Texas The CONSULTANT will endeavor to accomplish the work in accordance with the schedule outlined below, with the understanding that the primary objective of all involved in this project is to produce and provide a quality and complete design. The proposed schedule represents an aggressive time frame for completing the design of the Project and will require a considerable amount of coordination, collaboration and cooperation between the CONSULTANT and CITY, as well as from others outside the control of the CONSULTANT. It is understood by the CITY that the CONSULTANT‟s ability to perform the scope of services in accordance with the proposed project schedule is dependent upon timely receipt of information and reviews from the CITY and others, and that adjustments in the schedule may be required should the information and reviews become delayed. Proposed Project Schedule (Design) 1. Perform field surveys, geotechnical investigations and data collection within 25 working days from Authorization to Proceed by CITY. 2. Complete conceptual design (30%) plans within 40 working days from Authorization to Proceed by CITY. 3. Prepare and submit a Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) to the USACE within 20 working days from approval of conceptual design by CITY. 4. Complete preliminary design (60%) plans within 30 working days from approval of conceptual design by CITY. 5. Complete final design (90%) plans within 20 working days from approval of preliminary design by CITY. 6. Complete final design (100%), construction plans and related construction documents within 15 working days from approval of preliminary design plans. Page 12 ATTACHMENT ‘C’ COMPENSATION Duck Pond Park Improvements City of Coppell, Texas As described in Article II, COMPENSATION to the CONSULTANT is based on the following: I. BASIC SERVICES: TASK 1-2 Erosion Control Design, Construction $ 94,000 Plans & Related Documents TASK 3 Bid/Construction Administration $ 21,500 TASK 4 Field Design Survey (incl. geotechnical) $ 22,200 TASK 5 Environmental Permitting $ 12,500 TOTAL (BASIC SERVICES) $ 150,200 II. SPECIAL SERVICES: Task 6 Topographic Survey of Lake Bottom $ 6,000 Task 7 Design Lake Bottom Dredging $ 8,600 Task 8 Environmental – Individual Permit $ 10,000 TOTAL (SPECIAL SERVICES) $ 24,600 III. ADDITIONAL SERVICES: When authorized in writing by the CITY, ADDITIONAL SERVICES shall be considered additional work and the CITY agrees to pay (reimburse) CONSULTANT at ENGINEER‟s standard hourly rates or ENGINEER‟s standard rates for items provided in-house, or direct expenses times a multiplier of 1.10 for non-labor, subcontract or mileage items (see Attachment „D‟). ATTACHMENT ‘D’ CONSULTANT’S STANDARD RATE SCHEDULE Effective January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012* Engineering / Technical From - To Principal $170 - $230 Per Hour Project Manager $120 - $200 Per Hour Senior Engineer $110 - $220 Per Hour Engineer $ 85 - $140 Per Hour Landscape Architect / Planner $110 - $175 Per Hour Landscape Designer $ 70 - $110 Per Hour Designer $ 85 - $120 Per Hour Senior Designer $100 - $160 Per Hour CAD Technician $ 60 - $ 95 Per Hour Senior CAD Technician $ 75 - $110 Per Hour IT Consultant $120 - $150 Per Hour IT Technician $ 85 - $120 Per Hour Clerical $ 50 - $ 80 Per Hour Resident Project Representative $ 70 - $120 Per Hour Surveying Survey Manager $130 - $180 Per Hour Registered Professional Land Surveyor $120 - $150 Per Hour S.I.T. / Senior Survey Technician $85 - $110 Per Hour Survey Technician $70 - $100 Per Hour 1-Person Field Crew w/Equipment** $120 Per Hour 2-Person Field Crew w/Equipment** $145 Per Hour 3-Person Field Crew w/Equipment** $165 Per Hour 4-Person Field Crew w/Equipment** $190 Per Hour Flagger $40 Per Hour Abstractor (Property Deed Research) $85 Per Hour Subsurface Utility Engineering Hourly Rate SUE Engineer $160 Sr. Utility Location Specialist $ 95 Utility Location Technician $ 75 1-Person Designator Crew w/Equipment $115 2-Person Designator Crew w/Equipment $135 2-Person Vacuum Excavator Crew w/Equipment $250 (Travel and Stand-by) SUE QL-A Test Hole (0 < 4 ft)*** $900 per hole SUE QL-A Test Hole (>4 < 6 ft)*** $1,100 per hole SUE QL-A Test Hole (>6 < 8 ft)*** $1,310 per hole SUE QL-A Test Hole (>8 < 10ft)*** $1,530 per hole SUE QL-A Test Hole (>10 < 12ft)*** $1,770 per hole SUE QL-A Test Hole (>12 < 14ft)*** $2,000 per hole Direct Cost Reimbursables Photocopies, Scans & PDF Files: $0.10/page letter and legal size bond paper, B&W $0.20/page 11” x 17” size bond paper, B&W $1.00/page letter, legal and 11” x 17” size bond paper, color $2.00/page 22” x 34” and larger bond paper or vellum, B&W $4.00/page 22” x 34” and larger bond paper or vellum, color Plots: $1.00/page 11” x 17” size bond paper, B&W $2.00/page 11” x 17” size bond paper, color $4.00/page 22” x 34” and larger bond paper or vellum, B&W $6.00/page 22” x 34” and larger bond paper or vellum, color $6.00/page 22” x 34” and larger mylar or acetate, B&W Mileage $0.55/mile All Subcontracted and outsourced services shall be billed at rates comparable to TNP’s billing rates shown above. * Rates shown are for calendar year 2012 and are subject to change in subsequent years. ** Equipment includes Truck, ATV, Robotic Total Station, GPS Units and Digital Level. *** Pricing includes 2-Person crew, designating for excavation, vehicle costs, and field supplies. Page 13 Andy Brown East Erosion Control Improvements. Coppell, Texas Created in CIVIL3D 1 INCH = 1 MILE 0 S:\CAD\In_Design\MISC EXHIBITS\dwg\EXHIBITS 2012.dwg \ABE EROSION Created on: 21 February 2012 by Scott Latta 1/2 1/2 1 PARKWAY BLVD. PARKVIEW PL. PROJECT LIMITS D E N T O N C R E E K ATTACHMENT E¯1 inch = 300 feet Date: To: From: Re: Backgro The Park Commun the next d network current a on Comm trail syste gaps in th planned i Rivercha the trail s A meetin homeown represent Parks and Inspectio complain to cooper PARK Febru Mayo Brad R Consi Maier Prelim Way/E to sign ound: ks and Recre nity-Wide Tr decade and b of trails with nd future tra munity Welln em connectin he current C in the cities ase portion o system maste ng to discuss ner complain tatives from d Recreation ons. All atten nts and/or co rate with the KS AND CIT uary 28, 2012 r and Counc Reid, Direct ider approva r Consulting minary Route Easement, an n the necessa ation Depart rails Implem beyond. The hin the City, ail developm ness and Enr ng the city. oppell trail s of Irving and f town is a t er plan. s this propert nts, was con Nathan D. M n Departmen ndees had an omplaint reso e generation RECRE Y COUNC 2 cil tor al of award o Engineers, I e Study for t nd authorizin ary documen tment retaine mentation Pla e plan formu and surroun ment opportun richment and The TXU R system and w d Carrollton op priority w ty, its many nducted on M Maier, TXU nt, Engineeri n interest du olution. Ulti of a plan to EATION CIL AGEN of a Professio Inc., in the a the Hike/Bik ng the Presid nts. ed TBG Part an which pro ulates strateg nding comm nities. One d addresses t Right of Way will be a key n. Developm with the CRD challenges a March 4, 201 Electric, Riv ng Departm ue to property imately, it w turn this com N DEPA NDA ITEM onal Service amount of $9 ke Trail alon dent of the C tners, Inc., t ovides a trail gies through munities, and of the 2030 the need and y/Easement t y component ment of this s DC in the co and its histor 1. Attendin verchase HO ment, Code En y ownership was determin mmunity eye ARTME M es Agreemen 90,025.00 to ng the TXU/O CRDC and th o develop th l implementa the creation prepares us Vision’s fiv d importance trail fills one t in linking a section of tra ontinued imp ry of generat ng the meetin OA and, the nforcement p, easements, ned that all p esore into a u ENT nt with Natha o provide a Oncor Right he City Man he 2009 ation strateg n of a connec to manage ve pillars foc e of a multi- e of the majo adjacent trail ail in the plementation ting perennia ng were City of Copp and Building , utilities, arties were r usable and an D. t of nager y for cted cuses use or ls n of al pell g ready beautiful amenity to the city. The CRDC has decided to proceed with researching potential trail development opportunities on this tract of land running from Sandy Lake Road to East/West Beltline Road. All parties agreed that this seems to be the most responsible way for this land to be improved. Nathan D. Maier Consulting Engineers, Inc. was selected for this project due to their familiarity with the property and their established working relationship with the City of Coppell, Oncor, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and, their expertise with wetlands and jurisdictional waters of the United States which lie in the study area. The scope of this phase of the project is to study the ownership and responsibilities of maintenance, along with the feasibility of providing a connective trail system between Beltline Road and Sandy Lake Road in the eastern portion of the city. This item was approved by the Coppell Recreation Development Corporation at their meeting of February 13, 2012. City Council Action requested: Approval of the Professional Services Agreement with Nathan D. Maier Consulting Engineers, Inc., in the amount of $90,025 a Preliminary Route Study for the Hike/Bike Trail along the TXU/Oncor Right of Way/Easement, and authorizing the President of the CRDC and the City Manager to sign the necessary documents. Staff Recommendation: Approval of this item IDTask NameDurationStartFinish1Route Study132 daysMon 3/5/12Tue 9/4/122Notice To Proceed0 daysMon 3/5/12Mon 3/5/123Survey58 daysMon 3/5/12Wed 5/23/124Control3 daysMon 3/5/12Wed 3/7/125Field Topo40 daysThu 3/8/12Wed 5/2/126Property/ROW Survey30 daysThu 3/8/12Wed 4/18/127Survey Base Map15 daysThu 5/3/12Wed 5/23/128Jursidictional Determination40 daysThu 5/10/12Wed 7/4/129Wetland Delineation10 daysThu 5/10/12Wed 5/23/1210Jurisdictional Report30 daysThu 5/24/12Wed 7/4/1211Route Study74 daysThu 5/24/12Tue 9/4/1212Horizontal Alignment Study15 daysThu 5/24/12Wed 6/13/1213Conceptual Vertical Alignment Evaluation10 daysThu 6/14/12Wed 6/27/1214Drainage Evaluation10 daysThu 6/21/12Wed 7/4/1215Cost Evaluation10 daysThu 6/28/12Wed 7/11/1216Draft Report Development20 daysThu 7/12/12Wed 8/8/1217Preliminary Report Submittal To City0 daysWed 8/8/12Wed 8/8/1218City Review of Draft Report9 daysThu 8/9/12Tue 8/21/1219Comment Revisions10 daysWed 8/22/12Tue 9/4/1220Final Report Submittal0 daysTue 9/4/12Tue 9/4/123/58/89/42/122/192/263/43/113/183/254/14/84/154/224/295/65/135/205/276/36/106/176/247/17/87/157/227/298/58/128/198/269/29/9MarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberTaskSplitProgressMilestoneSummaryProject SummaryExternal TasksExternal MilestoneDeadlineCity of CoppellRoute Study - Hike/Bike Trail Along TXU ROW/EasementPage 1Project: TXUROW_HikeBikeTrail_ScheDate: Mon 2/20/12 TXU R.O.W/Easement Preliminary Hike/Bike Trail Study Coppell, Texas Created in CIVIL3D 1 INCH = 1 MILE 0 S:\CAD\In_Design\MISC EXHIBITS\dwg\EXHIBITS 2012.dwg \TXU HIKE BIKE Created on: 21 February 2012 by Scott Latta 1/2 1/2 1 Community-Wide Trails Implementation PlanE. Belt Line RoadMacArthurMacArthurParkParkM a c A r t h u rMacArthur RiverchaseRiverchaseCountry ClubCountry ClubEEEEEEEE.BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBeeeeelelettttLine RBBBtEEEEEEEEEE.B BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBeleleleleleleltttt LineRRoCotton Belt RailCotton Belt RailE. Sandy Lake RoadE. Sandy Lake RoadB lvd.Blvd.OHP Utility Corridor Trail (Cont.)Proposed Proposed TrailheadTrailheadCurrently a boardwalk is used to elevate a trail connecting Currently a boardwalk is used to elevate a trail connecting the neighborhood residents to the school and City park. the neighborhood residents to the school and City park. Community-Wide Trails Implementation PlanBeing in a low-lying area, much of the area is in standing Being in a low-lying area, much of the area is in standing water after a rain, contributing to the breeding of the mos-water after a rain, contributing to the breeding of the mos-quitoes.quitoes.The corridor is dominated by overgrown grasses, weeds, The corridor is dominated by overgrown grasses, weeds, and brush.and brush.Multiple runs of large overhead power lines exist in the Multiple runs of large overhead power lines exist in the corridor that is approximately 250 to 300 feet wide.corridor that is approximately 250 to 300 feet wide.LegendPriority Trail (trail types and widths vary)Regional VelowebCommunity TrailArea to be Studied for Implementation-F7- Page 1 RESOLUTION NO. ___________________ ORDER OF GENERAL AND SPECIAL ELECTION May 12, 2012 BE IT REMEMBERED THAT on this the 28th day of February, 2012, at a duly posted meeting of the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, a quorum being present, the meeting was called to order and the Council issued the following order: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a general election be held on the 12th day of May, 2012, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., for the purpose of electing one Councilmember for Place 2, one Councilmember for Place 4, one Councilmember for Place 6, and one Councilmember for Mayor. The election shall be held as a Joint Election administered by the Dallas County Elections Administrator in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Election Code and a Joint Election Agreement with each of the respective counties. BE FURTHER ORDERED THAT A SPECIAL ELECTION BE held on the 12th day of May, 2012, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., for the purpose to fill an unexpected term for Councilmember Place 7. The election shall be held as a Joint Election administered by the Dallas County Elections Administrator in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Election Code and a Joint Election Agreement with each of the respective counties. The candidate for such office receiving a majority of all votes cast for all candidates for such office shall be elected to serve such term or until his or her successor is duly elected and qualified. Page 2 In the event any candidate for said office fails to receive a majority of all votes cast for all the candidates for such office, a run-off election shall be held. If a run-off election becomes necessary, the run-off election will be held on Saturday, June 23, 2012. The Dallas County Elections Administrator will conduct the Election. A Presiding Election Judge and an Alternate Presiding Election Judge shall be appointed in accordance with the Joint Election Agreements. Early voting by personal appearance shall be conducted at the Coppell Town Center, 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas 75019. Early voting will be conducted on weekdays beginning Monday, April 30, 2012 through Friday, May 4, 2012, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.; Saturday, May 5, 2012, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.; Sunday, May 6, 2012, 1:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.; and Monday, May 7, 2012 and Tuesday, May 8, 2012, 7:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. Qualified residents of Coppell may vote early in the Joint Election by personal appearance at either the Coppell Town Center, 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas 75019, or at any of the other branch locations, as published by Dallas County and by Denton County, respectively, in accordance with the Joint Election Agreements. Application for a ballot by mail shall be mailed: Toni Pippins-Poole Early Voting Clerk 8th Floor Dallas County Elections Department Health & Human Services Building 2377 N. Stemmons Freeway, Suite 820 Dallas, Texas 75207 Application for ballot by mail must be received no later than the close of business on May 4, 2012. The City Secretary shall present such returns to the City Council for the canvassing of said elections. Page 3 The canvass of said elections return shall be conducted by the City Council not earlier than the 15th day nor later than the 23rd day after the elections. DULY ORDERED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas the 28th day of February, 2012. APPROVED: DOUGLAS N. STOVER, MAYOR CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ATTEST: _______ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROBERT E. HAGER, CITY ATTORNEY Página 1 RESOLUCIÓN NÚM. _________________ MANDATO DE CONVOCAR A ELECCIONES GENERALES Y ESPECIALES 12 de mayo del 2012 HÁGASE A MANERA DE RECORDATORIO QUE en este día 28 del mes de febrero del año 2012, en una reunión debidamente notificada del Ayuntamiento del Municipio de Coppell, Texas, y estando presente el quórum, la reunión se llamó al orden y el Ayuntamiento promulgó el mandato a continuación: POR ESTE CONDUCTO SE ORDENA que se convoque a una elección general que se llevará a cabo el día 12 de mayo del 2012 a partir de las 7:00 a.m. y hasta las 7:00 p.m., con el propósito de elegir a un Concejal para el Escaño 2, a un Concejal para el Escaño 4, a un Concejal para el Escaño 6 y a un Concejal para fungir como Alcalde. Las elecciones se llevarán a cabo como una elección conjunta administrada por el Administrador de Elecciones del Condado de Dallas, según lo establecen las cláusulas del Código Electoral de Texas y un Convenio Electoral Conjunto firmado por ambos condados respectivamente. ADEMÁS HÁGASE A MANERA DE MANDATO QUE LA ELECCIÓN ESPECIAL se lleve a cabo el día 12 de mayo de 2012 de las 7:00 a.m. a las 7:00 p.m., con el propósito de ocupar el escaño de los Concejales 7 de una gestión suspendida inesperadamente. Las elecciones se llevarán a cabo como una elección conjunta administrada por el Administrador de Elecciones del Condado de Dallas, según lo establecen las cláusulas del Código Electoral de Texas y un Convenio Electoral Conjunto firmado por ambos condados respectivamente. Página 2 El candidato para ocupar dicho escaño, a quien se le haya otorgado la mayoría de los votos decisivos para ocupar dicho escaño, será electo para prestar sus servicios durante esa gestión o hasta que su sucesor(a) sea debidamente electo(a) y llene las cualidades establecidas. En caso de que cualquier candidato a dicho cargo público no logre acumular la mayoría de los votos decisivos entre todos los candidatos a ocupar dicho cargo público, se llevará a cabo una segunda ronda de elecciones posterior a la primaria. Si llegase a ser necesaria una segunda ronda de elecciones posterior a la primaria, dicha elección se llevará a cabo el sábado 23 de junio del año 2012. El Administrador de Elecciones del Condado de Dallas será el dirigente de dicha elección. Se nombrará tanto a un juez electoral, como a un juez electoral alterno quienes presidirán los comicios electorales apegándose a lo que establecen los Convenios de Elecciones Conjuntas. El ejercicio del voto anticipado, compareciendo en persona, podrá ejercerse en el Town Center de Coppell, ubicado en el 255 Parkway Boulevard, en Coppell, Texas 75019. El voto anticipado podrá ejercerse en días hábiles a partir del lunes 30 de abril del 2012, hasta el viernes 4 de mayo del 2012, de las 8:00 a.m. a las 5:00 p.m., el sábado 5 de mayo del 2012 de las 8:00 a.m. a las 5:00 p.m., el domingo 6 de mayo del 2012 de la 1:00 p.m. a las 6:00 p.m., el lunes 7 de mayo del 2012 y el martes 8 de mayo del 2012 de las 7:00 a.m. a las 7:00 p.m. Los habitantes que residan en Coppell y cumplan con los requisitos, podrán ejercer el voto en la Elección Conjunta, en persona, ya sea en el Town Center de Coppell ubicado en el 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas 75019, o en cualquier otra casilla electoral, según lo publique tanto el Condado de Dallas como el Condado de Denton, respectivamente y apegándose a los Convenios de la Elección Conjunta. Las solicitudes de boletas electorales por correo deberán enviarse a: Página 3 Toni Pippins-Poole Early Voting Clerk 8th Floor Dallas County Elections Department Health & Human Services Building 2377 N. Stemmons Freeway, Suite 820 Dallas, Texas 75207 Las solicitudes de las boletas electorales por correo deberán recibirse antes del cierre oficial del día 4 de mayo del 2012. La Secretaria del Ayuntamiento deberá presentarle al Ayuntamiento Municipal las boletas devueltas para el escrutinio y salvaguarda de dichas elecciones. El escrutinio de las boletas electorales devueltas de dichas elecciones deberá llevarse a cabo por conducto del Ayuntamiento Municipal no antes del 15avo. día ni después del 23avo. día posterior a las elecciones. DEBIDAMENTE ORDENADO por el Ayuntamiento Municipal de Coppell, Texas el día 28 de febrero del año 2012. APROBADO: DOUGLAS N. STOVER - ALCALDE AYUNTAMIENTO MUNICIPAL DE COPPELL, TEXAS ATESTIGUÓ: _______ CHRISTEL PETTINOS - SECRETARIA DEL AYUNTAMIENTO AYUNTAMIENTO MUNICIPAL DE COPPELL, TEXAS APROBADO POR SU CONTENIDO Y FORMA: ROBERT E. HAGER – PROCURADOR DE JUSTICIA DEL MUNICIPIO