Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2002-08-26 Agendas CITY OF NORTH RJCHLAND HILLS PRE-COUNCIL AGENDA AUGUST 26, 2002 - 5:30 PM For thèMeeting conducted at the North Richland Hills City Hall - Pre-Council Chambers 7301 Northeast Loop 820. NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 1. Discuss Items from Regular August 26, 2002 City Council MeetinQ (5 Minutes) Review Focus Group Meetings with Builders, Engineers, 2. IR 2002-114 Developers (10 Minutes) 3. IR 2002-119 Discuss NETS Urban Transit District (15 Minutes) 4. Adjourn P05IED <ll.~, b ~ Date¡>. 4', ?>l> ~ Time 08/26/02 City Council Agenda Page 1 of 3 ~. City Secretary f). M;.~ 1Ø1~~ Bv .., " " CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AUGUST 26, 2002 - 7:00 PM For the Meeting conducted at the North Richland Hills City Hall Council Chambers 7301 Northeast Loop 820, at 7:00 p.m. The below listed items are placed on the Agenda for discussion and/or action. 1. Items on the consent agenda will be voted on in one motion unless a Council Member asks for separate discussion. 2. The Council reserves the right to retire into executive session concerning any of the items listed on this Agenda, whenever it is considered necessary and legally justified under the Open Meetings Act. 3. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need assistance should contact the City Secretary's office at 817-427-6060 two working days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 1. Call to Order 2. Invocation - T errv Kinzie 3. Pledge - 4. Special Presentation Yard of the Month - Monique Hester Budget Presentation Award - Anita Thetford Award of Leadership to the City from the Texas Municipal League Institute 5. Removal of Item(s) from the Consent Agenda 08/26/02 City Council Agenda Page 2 of 3 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 6. Consent Agenda a. Minutes of the Pre-Council Meeting August 12, 2002 b. Minutes of the City Council Meeting August 12, 2002 GN 2002-098 c. Authorize Release of Graham Lien - Resolution No. 2002-070 GN 2002-099 d. Calling November 5, 2002 Special City Council Election - Resolution No. 2002- 066 PU 2002-032 e. Authorize Interlocal Purchasing Agreement with the Parker County Emergency Services District #1 - Resolution No. 2002-067 PU 2002-033 f. Award of Contract to NBGS, International for the Purchase and Installation of a Rider Dispatch system for the Green Extreme - Resolution No. 2002-068 PU 2002-034 g. Award Bid for Police Department Wall Covering Project to The Rockaway Company in the Amount of $55,298 PAY 2002-008 h. Approve Final Payment to JCF Bridge & Concrete, Inc. in the amount of $27,829.54 for Iron Horse Golf Course Erosion Control Improvements Consideration of a Request by Russell Killen of 7. PS 2002-29 Halff Associates Inc. for the Approval of a Final Plat of Lots 1, 2R and 3R of the Five Star Ford Addition (Located in the 6600 Block of NE Loop 820) 18.78 acres 8. PZ 2002-13 Public Hearing to Consider a Request by Sam Pack of Pack Properties for a Zoning Change from C-2 Commercial and 1-2 Medium Industrial to HC Heavy Commercial (Located at 6618 NE Loop 820) for 5 Star Ford Auto Dealership - Ordinance No. 2646 08/26/02 City Council Agenda Page 3 of 3 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN Consideration of a request for Site Plan 9. PZ 2002-18 Approval by Five Star Ford (Located at 6618 NE Loop 820) Consideration of a request for Site Plan 10. PZ 2002-19 Approval by River Crown Investments LLC for a Proposed Expansion of Huggins Honda Auto Dealership 11. PZ 2002-20 Public hearing to Consider an Ordinance Amending and Revising the Planned Development Regulations of the City - Ordinance No. 2647 12. PZ 2002-21 Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance to Allow Certain Educational and Institutional Uses in Residential Districts - Ordinance No. 2648 13. PZ 2002-22 Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance Increasing the Minimum Residential Masonry Requirements and Changing Calculation Methodology for Masonry - Ordinance No. 2649 Public Hearing to Consider Hardship Variance 14. SRC 2002-02 Requests from Sign Ordinance No. 2640 by the Birdville Independent School District for a Proposed Electronic Message Sign (Located Along Precinct Line Road Frontage) (Continued from the July 22 City Council Meeting) Public Hearing on Proposed Tax Rate for 15. GN 2002-100 2002-2003 Fiscal Year Public Hearing on Proposed 2002-2003 16. GN 2002-101 Budget Consider CAPP Electric Supply Contract - 17. GN 2002-102 Resolution No. 2002-069 Approval of Master Development Plans for 18. GN 2002-103 Seven Neighborhood Park Sites as Part of the NeiQhborhood Park Initiative Project 19. a) Citizens Presentation b) I nformation and Reports POSTED (/ T...."" I A , & " I '" \J I "V""" 20. Adjournment Date¡>. ~I oj 0 ¿JI'I\ Time fut...f--. City Secretary 6Ä4 t.c:.ò ,~- ~ ~ By 08/26/02 City Council Agenda Page 4 of 3 INFORMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL No. IR2002-114 .. *- Date: ~ Subject: August 26, 2002 Review Focus Group Meetings with Builders, Engineers, Developers In late June, City Staff conducted three separate meetings with builders, developers and engineers. These three separate meetings consisted of those builders, developers and engineers that deal with the City on a regular basis and are routinely working in North Richland Hills. The primary reason for conducting these meetings was to explore ways that the City of North Richland Hills could improve its development process to our customers. This was also one of the items City Council ranked with a high priority at last year's Goals Retreat, which was Development Process: Evaluation and Refinement. City Staff agreed the best way to evaluate and examine ways to refine our system would be to talk to the actual customers, or those that are utilizing the system, which are the builders, developers and engineers. Prior to the meeting we sent out a questionnaire asking specific questions so that they could be better prepared to respond at their particular meeting. The questionnaire is attached for your review. Overall, the feedback was very positive. In fact, the engineers with whom we deal most frequently were very complimentary of our process and thoroughness in which items are reviewed and the wiUingness of Staff to go the "extra mile". There was some concern regarding the lack of staffing in the Public Works Department, which we explained there has been an assistant director position vacant for the past six months. Also there was some concern regarding minor plats requiring Planning & Zoning and City Council approval. In many cities, plats only go to Planning & Zoning and do not go to City Council. Also, in some cities, minor plats can be approved administratively, such as moving a lot line, adjusting easements, etc. We are working with our City Attorney exploring ordinances or charter revisions that may be necessary to achieve this as our goal. The meeting with the builders produced very few comments, in that most of the building codes and ordinances that we have are very typical in most cities. It was noted that in this city, we have a quick turnaround time on required inspections. As far as the developers were concerned, most of the comments centered around the timeline necessary to obtain approvals; also, for the opportunity for plat approvals to be approved "subject to Staff' comments. This may accelerate the time frame without having to wait on minor details to be resolved prior to it being submitted to City Council for consideration. As stated earlier, overall the comments were very positive and there were several suggestions made that City Staff is in the process of reviewing. As you know, our new Assistant Public Works Director win be ~rting Monday, August 19tfi and it will be his responsibility to handle all the engineering and plan review processes. We will be waiting until he arrives to fully examine what we can do ( administratively to improve the process with the developers and engineers. After all, it will be his responsibility to insure proper systems are in place, plan reviews are done in a timely fashion, and plat approval processes are handled correctly. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICH LAND HILLS, TEXAS 2 Weare very confident that we can make some minor adjustments to improve our process. We quickly learned through these focus group meetings that our system is not '"", "broke", in fact, it was one of the better ones in the area. Many of the engineers stated great frustration with several nearby communities and commented that the North Richland Hills process was as good, if not better, than the vast majority of cities in the Metroplex. This input came from those engineers who work in more than just Northeast Tarrant County, but throughout the entire Metroplex. City Staff does agree that we can make some minor modifications to insure that we have a "wìn-win" situation for all involved. In addition to the attached questionnaire, I have also attached a listing of who attend from each of the different groups. I will be discussing in more detail some of these issues Monday night at the City Council meeting. Respectfully submitted, ~ Steve Norwood Assistant City Manager --- "'..-< North Richland Hills Community Development Questionnaire The following questions are being asked to assist in our upcoming meeting. Please take a moment to review the questions. Also, please be as specific as possible so that we can respond accurately to your question. It would be helpful if you could return these to the city a week prior to our scheduled meeting so that we will have ample time to research questions, if necessary. If you cannot send the completed questions back early, please bring them with you to the meeting. 1. What are some specific things the city staff does that assists you in a positive way in developing/building in North Richland Hills? 2. What are some specific ordinances and/or policies that inhibit or cause you undue delay in your gaining the proper approvals? 3. Are there any procedures that add frustration and/or delay when dealing with a development? If so, what would you recommend that could be changed or added to expedite the process? 4. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions to offer ways the city can improve its review process for development? 5. Based on your business experiences in other cities, what are some policies, procedures, or ordinances those cities have that would be beneficial to North Richland Hills? Also, name one or two cities in the Metroplex that you have had dealings with that you would recommend as a "model" for good development regulations or processes? The city appreciates you taking the time to review these questions and providing thoughtful input that will assist both the private development community and the city in making North Rich/and Hills the premier business and residential address for the Fort Worth-Dallas area. Builders, Developers, and Engineers in Attendance EnQineers We invited eight engineers to attend, six were in attendance as follows: Ernest Hedgcoth Jim Tharp, GSBS/Batenhorst Jeff Miles, Jones & Boyd, Inc. Doug Long Tim Welch, Welch Engineering, Inc. Mike Clark, Winkelmann & Associates Builders We invited ten builders, three were in attendance as follows: Rick Newlin, K B Homes Sammie Smimmo, Sassy Builders Brent Hare, Vintage Crest Custom Homes Developers We invited six developers, only the local developers were in attendance, as follows; Mark Howe Mark Wood Doug Long John Barfield Bill Fennimore, WJF Development, LLC INFORMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL No. IR 2002- 119 \'---* Date: .. . Subject: August 26,2002 Discuss Establishing NETS Urban Transit District As you know, for many years North Richland Hills has been the pass through agent for state grant funds provided to the Northeast Transportation Service (NETS). In the last few years there have been problems with the Federal funding for this program. Many of these problems were resolved when Congresswoman Kay Granger introduced legislation to ear mark Federal funding for the NETS program. As a result of this legislation, it was determined that one of the cities involved in NETS would need to become the pass through agent for the Federal funds. Earlier this year, the City of Grapevine agreed to become the pass through for these funds. Following this, TXDOT and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) recommended that all of the cities that participate in NETS form an Urban Transit District (UTD) so that we would all share the responsibility for this program, its funding, and its operation. The cities of Bedford, Colleyville, Euless, Haltom City, and Hurst are also participants in NETS along with Grapevine and NRH. The City Managers and members of the Management Staff of each of these cities have been meeting periodically over the last several months to address NETS funding and operational issues, and to discuss the formation of an Urban Transit District as recommended by TXDOT .~ and the FT A. The general consensus is that the forma~ion of a UTD would be beneficial for several reasons. First, the formation of this district would formally distribute responsibility for the NETS program among all of the participating Cities. In the past, the bulk of the responsibility fell on North Richland Hills, since we are the recipient of the state grant funds. Second, the formation of the UTD will include the establishmentofa board that will oversee the management and operation of the NETS service, which will give the participating cities direct and formal oversight of this transportation service. Finally, the UTD will be able to set and enforce operational standards for the program. Staff plans to bring an item to the Council that would establish the UTD in the near future. However, we thought it would be beneficial to provide a report on this issue prior to placing an item for action on the agenda. In the pre council work session, Paulette Hartman will provide an overview of what the UTD is, what it means for NRH to join this UTD, and how the formation of the UTD will benefit the NETS program and the participating cities. We look forward to reviewing this information with you Monday. Respectfully Submitted, ~ngham City Manager '-.... ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS UTD Interlocal Aareement Summary · Purpose - to provide for a public transportation system to be operated within the NE Tarrant County area · Creation of an Urban Transit District (UTD) · Geographic area to be served is the area within the corporate city limits of all the member cities. Area can be changed in the future upon approval of all the cities involved. · UTD shall supervise the performance of this agreement and the operation of the public transit system. · Governance · Governed by a board - City Managers of each participating City will serve as the Board for the first year of operation - In future years, each City Council will appoint one Board member which can be City staff or a member of the City Council · Co-lead agencies - Grapevine to be the "co-lead" agency and act as liaison with regard to federal funding and related issues - NRH to be the "co-lead" agency and act as liaison with regard to state funding and related issues · Rights and duties · The Board shall select an independent contractor to operate the transit service · Contractor shall assume all operational responsibilities · Contractor shall submit an annual budget for approval by the local governments. Shall be submitted during budget time in the same form required of city departments. · UTD can seek grants to support the system · Local governments may provide contributions - cash and in-kind - to enhance the system · May contract with local governments for support services i.e. fueling stations · UTD shall have the power to contract, acquire and own real and personal property, and accept and expend grant funds · UTD shall have the immunities and liabilities of a district under the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code · Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless local governments in the UTD §pecial Presentations Presentation of Award Presenter: Anita Thetford, former President of Government Finance Officers Association of Texas Recipient: Budget and Research Department The Budget and Research Department has received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the past 12 years. Presentation of Award Presenter: Mary Lib Saleh, Mayor of Euless, TML Region 8 Chair, and serves on the TML Board Recipient: City Council We received the Award of Leadership from the Texas Municipal League for continually investing in the training and education of our elected leaders through the Texas Municipal League Institute over the past five years. YARD-OF-THE-MONTH August AREA 1 Ben & Gloria Miller, 6601 Tabor Sherry Morgan 589-7764 AREA 2 Jerry & Juanita Rinao, 4325 Ken Michael Jerry Hilliard 577.3640 AREA 3 Norman & Betty Turnaae, 6536 Woodcreek Tammy Joyce 281 .4882 AREA 4 Richard & Theresa Radwan, 5909 Circle Dr. Cher S. Paris 581 .1522 994.6778 AREA 5 Mark Harwell, 5804 Newman Rhonda Dolan 498.5963 AREA 6 Davis Baker, 7416 Chapman Charlie & Jerry Smith 577.9102 AREA 7 Nolan & Ruth Williams, 6513 Massey Ct. Tracy Andrews 514.6819 AREA 8 Joe Q. Georae, 7325 Undwall Ct. Scott Wood 253.0697 485-9250 (H) AREA 9 Kevin & Cynthia Keck, 8605 Saddleridae Theresa Hampton 428.1672 (h) 972.915.9558 (w) Texas SmartScape Melody Williams, 5501 Club House MINUTES OF THE PRE-COUNCIL MEETING OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, HELD IN THE PRE-COUNCIL ROOM AT CITY HALL, 7301 NORTHEAST LOOP 820 - AUGUST 12, 2002 -5:45 P.M. Present: Oscar Trevino Frank Metts, Jr. Lyle E. Welch Scott Turnage JoAnn Johnson David Whitson Joe D. Tolbert Mayor Mayor Pro T em Councilman Councilman Councilwoman Councilman Councilman Larry J. Cunningham Steve Norwood Greg Vick Patricia Hutson Alicia Richardson George Staples John Pitstick Larry Koonce Mike Curtis Jenny Mabry Andy Jones Karen Bostic Pam Burney City Manager Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager City Secretary Assistant City Secretary City Attorney Director of Development Finance Director Public Works Director Communications Director Fire Chief Budget Director Director of Environmental Services ITEM DISCUSSION ASSIGNMENT CALL TO ORDER Mayor Trevino called the meeting to order at 5:46 p.m. DISCUSS ITEMS Agenda Item 6d - GN 2002-093 - Mayor FROM REGULAR Trevino asked staff if the school district was AUGUST 12, 2002 aware of the upcoming changes. Mike Curtis CITY COUNCIL advised council he would assure that the school MEETING district is notified. M.Curtis Councilman Tolbert present at 5:47 p.m. IR 2002-118 Mr. Robb Wasielewski, President of Northeast NORTHEAST ARTS Arts Council, introduced himself to council. Mr. COUNCIL Wasielewski reported to council various events INTRODUCTION and functions sponsored and partnered by AND REPORT Northeast Arts Council. Mr. Wasielewski introduced board member Priscilla Michalk. Councilwoman Johnson asked if the money received from North Richland Hills would be spent outside of the City. Pre Council Minutes August 12, 2002 Page 2 Mr. Wasielewski informed council that their charter mandates that they work only with the 15 communities and six school districts in Northeast Tarrant County. Mr. Wasielewski informed council when funding is requested from a governing body the funds are kept within the City. NAN IR 2002·123 Ms. Patricia Hutson outlined options for the NOVEMBER 5 upcoming November 5 Special Election to fill the SPECIAL vacancy for Place 7 on City Council. Ms. ELECTION Hutson informed council that the City can enter into agreement with Tarrant County to hold a joint election or the City can hold a separate election. The following pros and cons were identified for holding a separate and joint election: Joint Election - Pros · Citizens can vote both elections at one location · City will pay the County 75% of the cost of our most recent election · County will be using City Hall as a polling location during early voting and the citizens will be able to use the DRE system · Citizens will be able to early vote at other County early voting locations · Ability to utilize County's judges and clerks Joint Election - Cons · City's portion of election will be at the end of the ballot · 14 election day voting locations · Lengthy ballot may frustrate voters Separate Election - Pros · Three regular election day polling locations rather than 14 locations · Shorter ballot · Ability to receive timely election results Separate Election - Cons · Citizens will have to vote at two different locations for City and County ballots · Additional voting location confusion (citizens being at wrong location) · The need to recruit and train election judges and clerks to work City election Pre Council Minutes August 12, 2002 Page 3 . Dan Echols and City Hall will be utilized by the County to conduct their election. Citizens will have to wait in two lines if they wish to vote both ballots. . May encounter space problem for early voting and election day at Dan Echols and City Hall. Additional phone lines will need to be installed. The November 5 Special Election will be called at the August 29 City Council meeting. Staff is seeking council direction whether to conduct a separate or joint election. Council consensus was to hold a separate election for the November 5 Special Election. Councilwoman Johnson asked staff to educate the public about the upcoming election through the newsletter. Council also suggested that information be placed on the City website. Ms. Hutson asked council if they would like the DRE system for early voting. Council agreed to have the DRE system for early votinQ. P.Hutson IR 2002-122 Mr. John Pitstick informed council that staff has DISCUSS DATES received all surveys that were sent to the City FOR ECONOMIC Council, Planning and Zoning Commission and DEVELOPMENT Economic Development Advisory Committee. STRATEGIC PLAN The first workshop will identify the top three strategies. The first meeting will be held on Wednesday, August 21 from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the Fire Administration - Training Room. Mr. Pitstick informed council that Councilman Tolbert would not be able to attend the meeting. Mayor Trevino asked Councilman Tolbert if he would be agreeable to council holding the meeting on August 21st. Councilman Tolbert informed council that it would not be a problem to move forward with the date. Councilman Whitson present at 6:06 p.m. At the second workshop staff will present formal Pre Council Minutes August 12, 2002 Page 4 goals and objectives for each strategy that was identified at the first meeting. Mr. Pitstick informed council that there was not a consensus of opinion for the second meeting. Staff talked to the consultants and they are available the first two weeks in October (October 1 st, 2nd or 3rd or October 71I1, 81I1 or 91I1). Council agreed to Thursday, October 3rd at 6:00 p.m. Mr. Pitstick informed council that the consultants would give council a final presentation at a council meetina in October or November. J.PitsticklS.Norwood IR 2002-117 Mr. Greg Vick informed council that the Request REVIEW SCOPE OF for Proposal (RFP) was ready and would be SERVICES FOR distributed Tuesday, August 13th. Mr. Vick SOLID WASTE reviewed the RFP with council highlighting the PROPOSALS following: · Four-year contract with no extensions (February 1, 2003 - January 31,2007) · Base proposal includes "maximum not to exceed price" for each service · Allows vendor to make modifications and/or proposed changes that will add value or better services · Level of service will be "equal to" or "better than" existing services that are provided · Identification of contact person (Greg Vick) any contact with other individuals will be grounds for disqualification of RFP · Loose brush identified as a maximum of 20 cubic yards for a $10.00 fee · Includes contract termination clause · $15,000 annual contribution for the Beautification Committee · Most favored nations clause any city that has similar service in Northeast Tarrant County and has same vendor · Residential construction site mandatory services Mr. Vick advised council that staff has scheduled a pre-bid conference Wednesday, August 14. The proposals will be opened on Tuesday, August 27. Mr. Vick informed council that a contract will be brought back for council consideration September/October timeframe. G.Vick Pre Council Minutes August 12, 2002 Page 5 IR 2002-116 Mr. Vick informed council staff if seeking council CONSIDERATION input or ideas to submit to Texas Municipal OF STATE League (TML). Staff will bring item for council LEGISLATION FOR action at the August 22 City Council meeting. SUBMITTAL TO TEXAS MUNICIPAL Mayor Trevino asked Mr. Vick to summarize the LEAGUE three major issues before legislation. Mr. Vick made council aware that there might be an issue between zoning and property rights. There are a number of issues that relate to the zoning authority of the city, land use and right- of-ways. Another may be public safety issues, which attempt to be confused with labor issues. Mr. Vick informed council that staff would be working on the City's legislation program in conjunction with what is seen from TML Legislative Committees. Staff will continue to present the City's program to state and federal leQislatures as has been done in the past. NAN IR 2002-120 Chief Andy Jones informed council of a meeting COG REGIONAL called by The Council of Governments (COG) to COORDINATING discuss threats of bio-terrorism. At the COMMITTEE FOR conclusion of the conference, political leaders of EMERGENCY the communities asked COG to develop a MANAGEMENTI regional coordinating committee to address PREPAREDNESS emergency management. COG created a Regional Emergency Management Planning Council with a method to fund the council through the member cities of the Council of Governments. The City of North Richland Hills was asked to participate at a cost of $5,000/annually, which is determined by the city's population. Staff advised council that COG asked for one-half of the assigned fees ($2,500) for the current fiscal year for "start-up" costs. The City will be billed for the full amount of $5,000 on October 1, 2002 for fiscal year 2003. Staff is recommending that the City participate in this fiscal year start-up cost. Mr. Cunningham informed council that the county would be picking up the other half of the cost for the current fiscal year. Council consensus was to proceed with the start-up cost for the current fiscal year. G.Vick Pre Council Minutes August 12,2002 Page 6 ADJOURNMENT Mayor Trevino announced at 6:28 p.m. that the Council would adjourn to Executive Session for (a). Consultation with Attorney on a Matter in which the Duty of the Attorney to the Government Body Under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with Chapter 551 of the Local Government Code (authorized by Section 551.071); and (b). Consultation with Attorney on Threatened Litigation as authorized by Local Government Code Section 551.071 - Creek Channel. Mayor Trevino announced at 6:55 p.m. that the Council would recess the Executive Session to the regular Council meeting and would reconvene in Pre-Council immediately following the regular Council meeting. Mayor Trevino announced at 8:07 p.m. that the Council would reconvene the Executive Session. Mayor Trevino announced at 8:55 p.m. that the Council would adjourn to the Council Chambers to open the meeting and adjourn Executive Session. Oscar Trevino - Mayor ATTEST: Alicia Richardson - Assistant City Secretary MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, HELD IN THE CITY HALL, 7301 NORTHEAST LOOP 820 -AUGUST 12, 2002 -7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Trevino called the meeting to order August 12, 2002 at 7:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Oscar Trevino Frank Metts, Jr. Lyle E. Welch Scott Turnage JoAnn Johnson David Whitson Joe D. Tolbert Mayor Mayor Pro T em Councilman Councilman Councilwoman Councilman Councilman Staff: Larry J. Cunningham Steve Norwood Greg Vick Karen Bostic Alicia Richardson George Staples City Manager Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager Managing Director Administrative/Fiscal Services Assistant City Secretary Attorney Absent: Patricia Hutson City Secretary 2. INVOCATION Councilman Tolbert gave the invocation. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilman Tolbert led the pledge of allegiance. 4. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS RECOGNITION OF RETIRING BARBERS- DON PARKER & BILL OTWELL, PRO BARBER SHOP City Council Minutes August 12, 2002 Page 2 Councilman Turnage recognized and presented Mr. Parker and Mr. Otwell with certificates. 5. REMOVAL OF ITEM(S) FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA None. 6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED A. MINUTES OF THE PRE-COUNCIL MEETING JULY 22, 2002 B. MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING JULY 22, 2002 C. GN 2002-092 APPOINTMENT TO THE CITIZEN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT STUDY COMMITTEE (NO ACTION TAKEN AT JULY 22 CITY COUNCIL MEETING) D. GN 2002-093 REVISE FOSTER VILLAGE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ZONE- ORDINANCE NO. 2643 E. GN 2002-094 SETTING DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR 2002-2003 CITY BUDGET, PARKS & RECREATION FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND CRIME CONTROL DISTRICT BUDGETS COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN TURNAGE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. Motion to approve carried 6-0. Mayor Trevino asked Mike Curtis, Public Works Director, to address the revised school zone for the public. Mr. Curtis announced that the city is making adjustments to the school zone spacing. The requirements for school zones require that the school zones be located a certain distance from the school property. Per state law, the school zone speed limit along Rufe Snow Drive can only be designated a certain speed limit. It has been designated as 20mph along Rufe Snow and according to state law the speed limit is 25mph. City staff will be revising the distance and speed limit to comply with state law. City Council Minutes August 12,2002 Page 3 7. PZ 2002-14 CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN APPROVAL REQUEST FOR IMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH (LOCATED AT 7321 LOLA DRIVE) APPROVED Pastor Merrill Wagenknecht was available to answer questions from council. Mr. John Pitstick, Director of Development, advised council that the applicant is proposing a 2158+ square foot office expansion to the existing church sanctuary. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval at their July 25th meeting. COUNCILMAN TOLBERT MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM METTS TO APPROVE PZ 2002-14. Motion to approved carried 6-0. 8. PZ 2002-16 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED REVISION TO THE R-3 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT LOT AND AREA REQUIREMENTS; CONSIDERATION OF REVISION TO THE MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN A SIDE OR REAR PROPERTY LINE AND GARAGE ENTRY IN ALL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS - ORDINANCE NO. 2644 APPROVED Mayor Trevino opened the public hearing. Mr. Pitstick informed council that the Planning and Zoning Commission considered revisions to the R-3 minimum house size at council direction. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved Ordinance No. 2644 with the following recommendations: · Increase the minimum lot size from 7,500 square feet to 7,700 square feet; · Increase the minimum lot frontage for interior lots from 65' to 70' (corner lots remain at 75'); · Increase minimum lot depth 100' to 110'; · Increase the minimum dwelling unit size from 1,600 to 1,700 square feet. · Minimum front, side, and rear setbacks, maximum structure height, and rear yard open space requirements to remain unchanged. In addition, the following revisions are proposed for garage entries: City Council Minutes August 12,2002 Page 4 . In the R3 District, front entry garage will set back 30' from the front building line. Side entry garages will be no more than 10' in front of the occupied building. . Garage Entry Distance (all residential districts) Increase the minimum distance between a side or rear property line and a garage entry from 20.5' to 22'. Mr. Pitstick informed council that the proposed revision in the R-3 District would only affect those properties platted after 8/12/02. Properties already platted on 8/12/02 would follow the current regulations. The Planning and Zoning Commission also made recommendations to the Planned Development, but that will be brought back for council consideration at the following meeting. Mr. Pitstick advised council that Chairperson Don Bowen and John Lewis from the Planning and Zoning Commission were present. Mayor Trevino asked Mr. Bowen to inform council of Planning and Zoning's position. Mr. Bowen advised council that for the past few years the Planning and Zoning Commission did not favor R-3, except as a buffer zone. The Commission is seeing requests for the smaller residential lots. The Planning and Zoning Commission would like to raise the bar for R-3 in North Richland Hills. The Commission would still like to see R-3 as a buffer zone between retail and the larger residential. The Commission recognizes that it is difficult to get some houses on the smaller lots, which is the reason why the Commission increased the depth by 10 feet. The Commission had considerable debate with regards to the house size. The Commission considered 1800 square feet, but it would make it difficult to differentiate between R-2 and R-3. Councilman Turnage asked staff how much undeveloped R-3 property is in the city. Mr. Pitstick advised council that there is very little property. The majority of the property has been platted. Staff has noticed that most of the requests are from Industrial and Commercial going back to R-3. In the past year, most of the tracts staff has seen rezoned to R-3 are existing Office and Commercial properties. Councilman Turnage asked if there were larger tracts. Mr. Pitstick believed there was a large tract off of Rufe Snow. The city still has some agricultural property that has not been zoned for residential property. There is very little existing vacant R-3 wide-open property. Councilwoman Johnson did not want to penalize property owners who currently have property zoned R-3 by requiring them to conform to the new R-3 regulations. City Council Minutes August 12, 2002 Page 5 Mayor Trevino called for comments in favor of request to come forward. There being no one wishing to speak Mayor Trevino called for comments opposed to come forward. There being no one wishing to speak Mayor Trevino closed the public hearing. COUNCILMAN TOLBERT MOVED TO APPROVE PZ 2002-16, ORDINANCE No. 2644 WITH THE MINOR CHANGE THAT THE MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE BE 1800 SQUARE FEET. MAYOR PRO TEM METTS SECONDED THE MOTION. COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON ASKED COUNCILMAN TOLBERT TO AMEND HIS MOTION TO INCLUDE WORDING THAT WOULD PROTECT THE FEW PROPERTIES CURRENTLY ZONED R-3 AND NOT PLATTED. Councilman Tolbert asked Councilwoman Johnson if she would like properties that are currently zoned R-3 to fall under the old requirements for R-3. Mr. Pitstick proposed that council use the verbiage "platted or zoned" prior to August 12, 2002. COUNCILMAN TOLBERT ACCEPTED THE AMENDMENT. MAYOR PRO TEM METTS SECONDED THE AMENDMENT. Councilman Turnage was concerned that council should be concerned with the undeveloped property and the possibility of making it hard for property owners whom would like a 1600 square foot home. If Council is trying to raise the bar in terms of having higher quality of neighborhoods or quality housing maybe the council should address it by articulation standards (masonry, etc). Council would be assuring that a new neighborhood would be a quality neighborhood 5, 10, or 20 years from now and maintain its integrity. Councilman Turnage feels that council can do this by addressing the details of the home and not the square footage. Motion to approve carried 5-1 with Mayor Pro Tern Metts, Councilmen Welch, Whitson, Tolbert and Councilwoman Johnson voting for approval and Councilman Turnage voting against. 9. GN 2002-095 CONTRACT AUTHORIZING PASS THROUGH STATE GRANT AGREEMENT FOR NETS APPROVED Ms. Paulette Hartman, Assistant to the City Manager, summarized item for council. City Council Minutes August 12,2002 Page 6 Councilwoman Johnson asked staff if the contract is with the existing vendor who currently have contract. Councilwoman Johnson was under the impression that the vendor was not able to fulfill the services. Ms. Hartman advised council that YMCA would continue to provide transportation for the Northeast Transportation Service (NETS). Ms. Hartman advised council that staff in the future would solicit Request for Proposals to obtain another transportation provider. Mr. Cunningham advised council that North Richland Hills along with other cities are in the process of examining the need for procurement or bidding process. Mr. Cunningham advised council this process would be several months. Staff plans to bring a discussion point regarding participating in the Urban Transit District at the next council meeting. COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN WHITSON TO APPROVE GN 2002-095. Motion to approve carried 6-0. 10. GN 2002-096 AMENDING FOOD AND FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS REGULATIONS - ORDINANCE NO. 2645 APPROVED Ms. Pam Burney, Environmental Services Director, informed council that the Temporary Food Vendor Ordinance has been in placed for the past year. Staff informed council that they would operate under the new ordinance and report back to council in a year. Ms. Burney advised council that the ordinance has been working well, but staff has some recommendations for changes. The City Attorney advised staff that the Food Service Ordinance needed to be reformatted and staff believed this would be an excellent time to change the Temporary Food Vendor to incorporate it into one ordinance. Ordinance No. 2645 includes the following changes: · update language to reflect changes in regulatory terminology · reformat the ordinance using municipal code standards · allow for appeal of permit revocation I denial to the City Manager or his designee · changes name to Weekend Food Vendor and allow for 3 day permit · eliminate separate ordinances and incorporates language into new Food Service Ordinance · sets annual permit fee of $500.00 · limits permit to one site for the year · requires commissary be inspected by state, county or local authorities and that cart must be removed each night by 10:00 p.m. and stored at the approved commissary City Council Minutes August 12,2002 Page 7 Ms. Burney also stated that the annual permit is site specific. Staff is issuing the permit to vendor and not the business as was done in the past. Ms. Burney is recommending that City Council approve Ordinance No. 2645 that replaces Ordinance No.'s 2406,2407 and 2561. COUNCILMAN TOLBERT MOVED TO APPROVE GN 2002..Q96. ORDINANCE No. 2645. COUNCILMAN TURNAGE SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 6-0. 11. GN 2002-097 RECORD VOTE ON PROPOSED TAX RATE AND SETTING OF PUBLIC HEARING APPROVED Ms. Karen Bostic, Managing Director Administrative/Fiscal Services informed council that it is necessary to begin the notice and hearing procedures to establish a tax rate and approve the budget for the next fiscal year. The council's consensus to set the tax rate at .57¢, which is the tenth consecutive year for the .57¢ tax rate. Ms. Bostic explained that tax calculations are misleading to the public. Although the tax rate has not increased some citizen's property values have increased, therefore, increasing their taxes. The average homestead increased from $108,341 to $119,981 and using this as required by state law, the average homestead would increase by 10.74% or $56.50 annually in taxes. In addition to publishing the tax rate, state law requires that a record vote be taken by council concerning the proposed tax rate, and that the results be published in the Fort Worth Star Telegram. The council is also required to schedule a public hearing on the proposed rate. Staff recommends that the notice be published on Thursday, August 15 and the public hearing be scheduled for Monday, August 26 at 7:00 p.m. Councilman Tolbert asked council to modify the budget process. Councilman Tolbert would like the budget process to be more productive. Councilman Tolbert believes the council needs to set requirements before the budget process is complete and final. He would like to see council putting the final touches on the budget and not digesting information provided to them. He would like more input up front, he believes the council needs to seriously look at the budget process and maybe add a couple of steps. Mayor Trevino informed Councilman Tolbert that council changed the process at the last budget session. As council creates the goals, let the goals feed into the budget. If Council discusses this at the goals work session it would help council in directing the process with staff. City Council Minutes August 12,2002 Page 8 COUNCILMAN TURNAGE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN WHITSON TO APPROVE GN 2002-097. Motion to approve carried 6-0. 12. A. CITIZENS PRESENTATION Mr. Gary Jones, 5601 Jamaica, spoke on behalf of the Food Service Ordinance. B.INFORMATION AND REPORTS Councilwoman Johnson announced the following. Residents can recycle phone books with their regular recycling service or they can bring them to the Library parking lot. There is a Trinity Waste Services dumpster in the parking lot to recycle phone books. It will be there through September 15th. The library is located at 6720 NE Loop 820. The Fire Department is taking applications for the Citizens Fire Academy. The fall academy will begin on September 10th. Deadline to sign up for this 11 week class is August 23. Call 817-427-6900 for further information. The Police Department is accepting applications for the Citizen's Police Academy. This is a 12 week course that provides an in depth look at the NRH Police Department. To learn more, call Officer Keith Bauman at 817-427-7000. Mayor Pro Tern Metts announced the following. AUQust 17 Critter Connection North Hills Mall 10:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. 817 -427 -6570 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Trevino announced at 8:02 p.m. that the council would recess the City Council meeting to the Executive Session in the Pre-Council Chambers. City Council Minutes August 12, 2002 Page 9 Mayor Trevino reconvened the council meeting in the Council Chambers at 8:57 p.m. and asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Councilman Turnage moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:57 p.m. Oscar Trevino - Mayor ATTEST: Alicia Richardson - Assistant City Secretary -~ CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: LeQal Counc ·Meeting Date: 08/26/02 Subject: Authorize Release of Graham Lien: Resolution #2002-070 Agenda Number: GN 2002-098 This item is a follow-up to the same matter covered in our executive session last week. Mr. Graham has agreed to pay the City $41,000 to release the lien he executed to secure a payment which would become due if the City built a concrete drainage channel adjacent to and on a portion of his property, at such time as his property is sold or developed. The channel was constructed as an earthen channel. The terms of the release include a commitment to not assess this property for drainage impact fees. The City currently has no such fees. Mr. Graham's payment will be due upon execution of the settlement documents which are being drafted. RECOMMENDATION: Pass and approve Resolution No. 2002-070. ',- Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operatin get Ot r Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds AvallaDle "-- Finance Director Page 1 of .L. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-070 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, that: 1. The City Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to execute Settlement documents and Release of Lien on the Billy Graham property as the act and deed of the City. PASSED AND APPROVED this 26th day of August, 2002. APPROVED: ATTEST: Oscar Trevino, Mayor Patricia Hutson, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: George A. Staples, City Attorney CITY OF NORTH R/CHLAND HILLS I ' Department: City Secretary - Council Meeting Date: _ 8{26102 Subject Calling November 5, 2002 Special City Council Election - Agenda Number: GN 2002-099 Resolution No. 2002-066 The attached resolution calls for a special City Council election to be held on Tuesday, November 5,2002 to fill the Council Place 7 vacancy. The resolution calls for the election to be conducted in accordance with the Texas Election Laws. In accordance with State law, candidate filing will begin on September 9, 2002 and end on October 7, 2002. Early voting will be held at City Hall and will begin October 21, 2002 and end November 1, 2002. Election day polling locations will be at City Hall, Dan Echols Senior Center and Bursey Road Senior Center. The resolution authorizes the City Secretary to procure voting machines for the election and to contract with the Tarrant County Elections Administrator for early voting and other miscellaneous voting services. A resolution will be brought to Council at a later date for the appointment of the election officials for each of the Election Day polling locations. In the event a run-off election is necessary following the canvass of the November 5 election, the attached resolution also provides for a run-off date of Saturday, December 7, 2002. This date is in accordance with State law. Recommendation: -- To approve Resolution No. 2002-066. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Finance Director ~'i~ ,&t2bLtMib~ Department Head Signature RESOLUTION NO. 2002-066 6 WHEREAS, a vacancy exists in Place 7 of the City Council of the City of North Richland Hills, and the Council desires to call a special election to fill such vacancy at the time required by and in the manner provided for by the Texas Election Code; NOW, THEREFORE, 4 8 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: 10 Section 1: THAT an election is hereby called to elect a person to fill the office of City Council Place 7, to serve until May of2003, or until a successor is duly elected and qualified. Such election shall take place on the 5th day of November, 2002, from 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. 12 14 16 Section 2: Qualified persons may file as candidates by filing with the City Secretary between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, beginning September 9, 2002, and ending on October7, 2002. Each application for a place on the ballot shall be accompanied by a filing fee of One Hundred Fifty ($150.00) Dollars payable to the City, or a petition seeking the candidate's name to be placed on the ballot in lieu of the filing fee. Such petition must be signed by at least one hundred fifty (150) qualified voters ofthe City. Fonns for the petition shall be furnished to potential candidates by the City Secretary. 18 20 22 ~ 28 Section 3: The location of polling places for this special election are designated pursuant to the Texas Election Code, and the Council finds that the following locations can most adequately and conveniently serve the voters in this election, and that these locations will facilitate the orderly conduct of the election: 26 30 PRECINCT VOTING LOCATION 32 Precinct One (includes County voting precincts 3214,3324,3333,3041,3364, &3366) City Hall, 7301 Northeast Loop 820 34 36 Precinct Two (includes County voting precincts 3215,3140,3326,3289,3424&4141 ) Dan Echols Senior Adult Center 6801 Glenview Drive 38 Precinct Three (includes County voting precincts 3063,3049,3177,3209,3367,3387, 3507,3527,3543, & 3584) Bursey Road Senior Adult Center 7301 Bursey Road 40 1 Section 4: 4 6 8 10 12 14 Section 5: 16 18 Section 6. 20 22 24- Section 7. 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 Early voting will be held on weekdays beginning on October 21,2002 at 8:00 a.m. and will continue through November 1, 2002 at 5 :00 p.m. Such early voting shall take place in the office of the City Secretary in the North Richland Hills City Hall (the Pre-Council Room and City Council Chambers shall be considered an extension of the City Secretary's office for early voting purposes) at 7301 Northeast Loop 820, North Richland Hills, Texas. Applications for early voting by mail shall be delivered to the City Secretary at the same address not earlier than September 6, 2002, and not later than the close of business on October 29, 2002, ifby mail or October 18, if delivered in person. The City Secretary, or her designee, shall be responsible for conducting early voting, both in person and by mail, and has the authority to contract with Tarrant County for early voting services and other miscellaneous voting services. All resident qualified electors of the City shall be pennitted to vote at said election and, on the day of the election, such electors shall vote at the polling place designated for the Election Precinct in which they reside. The election shall be conducted pursuant to the election laws of the State of Texas. The City Secretary is directed to procure voting machines, if available, for the election of November 5, 2002, and voting machines are hereby adopted as the method of voting at such election. Should a runoff election be required following the canvass of the November 5, 2002, Election, the Council hereby orders that a runoff election by held on December 7, 2002. The polling place on election day for the runoff election shall be at the same polling places as those for the original election, and the hours of voting shall be between 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. Should a runoff election be necessary, early voting by personal appearance for the runoff election shall be held at the office of the City Secretary in the North Richland Hills City Hall (the Pre-Council Room and City Council Chambers shall be considered an extension of the City Secretary's office for early voting purposes) 7301 Northeast Loop 820, North Richland Hills, Texas, between the hours of8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on each day that is not a Saturday or Sunday or an official State Holiday beginning on November 20, 2002 and continuing through December 3, 2002 until 5:00 p.m. 40 AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. 42 PASSED AND APPROVED on the 26 day of August, 2002. 44 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS 2 By: Oscar Trevino, Mayor ATTEST: 4 6 8 10 12 Patricia Hutson, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: George A. Staples, Attorney 3 1. ReVL~ td- RESOLUTION NO. 2002-066 4 WHEREAS, a vacancy exists in Place 7 of the City Council of the City of North Richland Hills, and the Council desires to call a special election to fill such vacancy at the time required by and in the manner provided for by the Texas Election Code; and, 6 8 WHEREAS, the city council desires to hold this election jointly with Tarrant County, except for a possible runoff; NOW, THEREFORE, 10 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: 12 Section 1: 14 16 18 20 Section 2: 22 24 26 28 Section 3: 30 32 Section 4: 34 36 38 40 42 A1. Section 5: 46 THAT an election is hereby called to elect a person to fill the office of City Council Place 7, to serve until May of2003, or until a successor is duly elected and qualified. Such election shall take place on the 5th day of November, 2002, from 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. and shall be held jointly with Tarrant County utilizing the election judges provided for by Tarrant County. The city secretary shall have authority to execute any contract required for this election. Qualified persons may file as candidates by filing with the City Secretary between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, beginning September 9, 2002, and ending on October 7, 2002. Each application for a place on the ballot shall be accompanied by a filing fee of One Hundred Fifty ($150,00) Dollars payable to the City, or a petition seeking the candidate's name to be placed on the ballot in lieu of the filing fee. Such petition must be signed by at least one hundred fifty (150) qualified voters of the City. Forms for the petition shall be furnished to potential candidates by the City Secretary. The location of polling places for this special election are designated pursuant to the Texas Election Code as those precincts designated by Tarrant County for those precincts located in North Richland Hills. Early voting will be held at such times and at such locations as shall be established by Tarrant County for early voting purposes. Applications for early voting by mail shall be delivered to the City Secretary at the same address not earlier than September 6, 2002, and not later than the close of business on October 29, 2002, ifby mail or October 18, if delivered in person. Robert Parten, Tarrant County Elections Administrator, shall be responsible for conducting early voting, both in person and by mail. The North Richland Hills City Secretary shall be considered as deputy early voting clerk and has the authority to contract with Tarrant County for early voting services and other miscellaneous voting services for any runoff election. All resident qualified electors of the City shall be permitted to vote at said election and, on the day of the election, such electors shall vote at the polling place designated for the Election Precinct in which they reside. 1 Section 6. The election shall be conducted pursuant to the election laws of the State of Texas. If a runoff election is required, the City Secretary is directed to procure voting machines, if available, for the election of December 7, 2002, and voting machines are hereby adopted as the method of voting at such election. 1. 4 6 Section 7. Should a runoff election be required following the canvass of the November 5, 2002, Election, the Council hereby orders that a runoff election by held on December 7,2002. The polling place on election day for the runoff election shall be at the polling places set forth below, and the hours of voting shall be between 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. 8 10 12 PRECINCT VOTING LOCATION 14 Precinct One (includes County voting precincts 3214,3324,3333,3041,3364, &3366) City Hall, 7301 Northeast Loop 820 16 18 Precinct Two (includes County voting precincts 3215,3140,3326,3289,3424&4141 ) Dan Echols Senior Adult Center 6801 Glenview Drive 20 Precinct Three (includes County voting precincts 3063,3049,3177,3209,3367,3387, 3507,3527,3543, & 3584) Bursey Road Senior Adult Center 7301 Bursey Road 22 24 26 Should a runoff election be necessary, early voting by personal appearance for the runoff election shall be held at the office of the City Secretary in the North Richland Hills City Hall (the Pre-Council Room and City Council Chambers shall be considered an extension of the City Secretary's office for early voting purposes) 7301 Northeast Loop 820, North Richland Hills, Texas, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on each day that is not a Saturday or Sunday or an official State Holiday beginning on November 20,2002 and continuing through December 3, 2002 until 5:00 p.m. 28 30 32 34 AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. 36 PASSED AND APPROVED on the 26 day of August, 2002. 38 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS 40 By: 42 Oscar Trevino, Mayor ATTEST: ;14 46 2 Patricia Hutson, City Secretary £. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: 4 6 George A. Staples, Attorney 3 ~ , CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS "- Department: Finance Council Meeting Date: 8/26/2002 Subject: Authorize Interlocal Purchasina Aareement with the Agenda Number: PU 2002-032 Parker County Emergency Services District #1- Resolution No. 2002-067 The Parker County Emergency Service District #1 is requesting to enter into an interlocal purchasing agreement with the City for the purchase of goods and services from vendors selected through the competitive bidding process. One type of bid being considered is for the fire truck that Council awarded November 26, 2001 (PU 2002-042). Council has authorized several of these interlocal agreements and they have been mutually beneficial to North Richland Hills and the other agencies because participation reduces the overall expense of soliciting bids and purchasing larger quantities also reduces cost. Each agency will place their orders and pay the vendors directly. North Richland Hills or the Parker County Emergency Services District may change or cancel the agreement with a 3D-day written agreement. Recommendation: Authorize the interlocal agreement with the Parker County Emergency Services District #1 and pass Resolution No. 2002-067 authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement. \ '- Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account ·NumÞer Sufficient Funds Aval a e Budget OIrecjør Paae 1 of RESOLUTION NO. 2002-067 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, that: 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the interlocal agreement with the Parker County Emergency Services District #1 authorizing each entity to purchase goods and services from vendors selected through the competitive bidding process. PASSED AND APPROVED this 26th day of August 2002. APPROVED: Oscar Trevino Mayor ATTEST: Patricia Hutson, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Attorney for the City APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~' CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Parks and Recreation Council Meeting Date: 8/26/2002 Subject: Award of Contract to NBGS, IntI. for the Purchase and Installation of a Rider Dispatch System for the Green Extreme - Resolution No. 2002-068 Agenda Number: PU 2002-033 The Green Extreme, the world's longest and tallest uphill water coaster, continues to be a popular attraction at NRH20 Family Waterpark. It remains the signature attraction of NRH20, and continues to draw visitors to the park as it has since its debut in 1998. Because of the high demand for this attraction, it has been one of park staffs goals to en'sure that the dispatch rate for this attraction is as efficient as possible, while maintaining guest safety. The goal is to keep the lines for the Green Extreme as short as possible. However, with the current operating procedures in place, line waits of 45 minutes to one hour are common during peak attendance periods. For this and other reasons, staff is recommending the addition of a semi-automated rider dispatch system. This system uses computer technology coupled with electric eye sensors to monitor the locations of riders and alerts ride operators when it is safe to dispatch the next rider(s). It also incorporates a pneumatically operated gate at the top of the attraction that forms a physical barrier against a rider being dispatched prematurely. The benefit of this system will be a decrease in the rider dispatch interval and the ability of the computer system to turn the ride off if an incident (such as riders not clearing the crest of a hill) occurs on the slide. Because the computer system knows where the riders are on the attraction, it can turn off only the areas affected by the incident and riders further down the slide path will continue to enjoy their ride. NBGS, International is being recommended as the contractor for the addition. The original attraction was also supplied by NBGS, International and they are the sole source supplier for this system. The installation of this system will begin after the 2002 Season ends therefore no impacts on waterpark operations are expected. City Council approved $150,000 for this improvement within the Aquatic Park CIP Budget in 2001. Recommendation: To award the contract to NBGS, International in the amount of $117,250 for the purchase and installation of a slide dispatch system for the Green Extreme and approve Resolution No. 2002-068 authorizing the City Manager to execute the contract. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Account Number 415-0000-712.79-00 Sufficient Funds Available 2 9-600CP 9- - =-~L~.__ - 6L De artment Head Si nature Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION No. 2002-068 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHlAND HillS, TEXAS, that: The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the contract with NBGS, International for the purchase and installation of a rider dispatch system, as act and deed of the City. PASSED AND APPROVED this 26th day of August 2002. APPROVED: Oscar Trevino, Mayor ATTEST: Patricia Hutson, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: George Staples, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~~&R t 1m rowne, Irec or 0 ar s ecrea Ion CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Support Services / 'Finance CounCIl Meeting Date: 08/26/2002 "- Subject: Award Bid for Police Department Wall Covering Project to Agenda Number: PU 2002-034 The Rockaway Company in the Amount of $55,298 In the 2001/02 Budget. Council appropriated funds for the replacement of the wall covering in the Police Department. The existing wall covering is 14 years old and. this project will complete the CIP interior renovations for the office areas of the Police Department. Formal bids were solicited and the results are outlined below. Rockaway Company Kirby and Terrell Painting Burt & Associates Kurosky & Company Kingdom Wallcovering Bill's Papering & Painting Commercial Painting Best Quality Service $55,298 $66,767 $67,335 $75.899 $11,766 (Contractor submitted wrong bid amount) $48,751 (Incomplete bid. no bid bond or insurance) $47,204 (Incomplete bid. contractor withdrew bid) $50,938 (Incomplete bid, no insurance) \,- Bidders were requested to submit bids for the removal and replacement of the wall covering throughout the Police Department. The Rockaway Cornpany.met all the specifications and general conditions of the bid and can complete the project within 90 days. They also submitted their bid as a worse case scenario that could result in some budget savings. Recommendation: To award the bid for the Police Department Wall Covering Project to The Rockaway Company in the amount of $55,298. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other ~ ~.~.. C~ De artment Head Si nature Page 1 of ...L .. \' þ' CITY OF NORTH" RICHLAND HILLS ',_ Department: Public Works Council Meeting Date: 8/26/2002 Subject: Approve Final Payment to JCF Bridge & Concrete. Inc. Agenda Number: PAY 2002-008 in the Amount of $27,829.54 for Iron Horse Golf Course Erosion Control Improvements This project consisted of drainage and erosion improvements along the major tributaries located in Iron Horse Golf Course. The project was awarded by Council on September 10, 2001, PW 2001-017 for $518,732.05. Within a few weeks after the award of the project 2 issues came up that impacted the contract amount. The first issue had to deal with the type of material planned to be used for the proposed flume. The plans indicated that the new flume would be constructed with concrete. The adjacent property owners were concerned about how the concrete would look next to their existing driveways since the existing driveways had an exposed aggregate surface. The additional cost charged by the contractor to provide the matching (exposed aggregate) surface is shown in the table below. The second issue dealt with the bridge data that Continental Bridge provided to the engineer. The bridge data provided did not take into consideration the force of the water "pushing" against the bridge during "high water" conditions. This error was not discovered until the bridges were being manufactured by Continental Bridge. Continental Bridge was not under contract at the time the data was provided, therefore they claimed no responsibility for the error. The City's consulting engineer redesigned the bridge abutments (at no cost to the City), but the new design required the abutments to be larger and required additional labor and materials from the contractor. The contractor agreed to provide the additional work for the same unit prices that he bid. In addition there were some additional irrigation adjustments that were required due to the Golf Course plans not reflecting all irrigation lines. The additional cost charged by the contractor is shown below. Bid Price Additional cost for exposed aggregate Additional cost from bridge abutments Additional cost for unplanned irrigation adjustments Actual Project Cost $518,732.05 1,500.00 2,451.77 1.464.50 $524,148.32 Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Account Number 02-05-01-002, 05-01-02-6000 t Funds ~va"aDle 410-0000-712,79-00 -f!IJ ~4~' epa ent Head ignature ance Director " CITY OF NORTH RICHLANDHILI:.S .~ "- The final payment of $27,829.54 will bring the total amount paid to $524,148.32, which puts the project over the contract amount by $5,416.27. 1 The past Deputy City Manager was aware of the additional work required and requested the change order be processed at the end of the project in order to prevent additional delays by the contractor. Sufficient funds are available in the approved project budget and Golf Course reserves. Recommendation: To approve final payment in the amount of $27.829.54 to JCF Bridge & Concrete, Inc. for Iron Horse Golf Course Erosion Control Improvements. CITY COUNCIL ACTION "EM Page_of _ DeOtte, Inc. August 1,2002 '~/ Mr. Mike Curtis, P.E. Director of Public Works City of North Richland Hills 7301 NE Loop 820 North Richland Hills, Texas 76180 AUG 1 2002 NRH Public Works Re: Pay Estimate No.8 (Final) Iron Horse Golf Course Erosion Control Improvements Dear Mr. Curtis: I have received and reviewed the Application and Certification for Payment No. 8 from Mr. Ken Matheson in your office. The application date is July 24, 2002. A final walk-through was completed with Mr. Matheson, the Contractor and myself present to review the work completed and it was found to be satisfactory to receive the project. This estimate is for minor landscaping work and the 5% retainage that is due at the end of and acceptance of the project. I last reviewed the Application and Certification for Payment NO.7. The work on the project, including change orders, has been completed and the work appears to be in accordance with the plans and specifications. I have reviewed the contract amounts listed in the request as submitted and find no errors in the calculations submitted. The amount requested is $27,829.54. . I recommend payment for the completed work and materials and the 5% retainage in the amount of $27,829.54. If you have any questions, please contact me at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, DeOtte, Inc. ~~,1)~ Richard W. DeOtte, P.E. '~, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS "- Department: PJanning & Inspections Department Council Meeting Date: 8/26/02 Subject: Consideration of a reQuest from Russell Killen of Halff Agenda Number: PS 2002-29 Associates fo~ the approval of the Final Plat of Lots 1 R, 2R, and 3R of the Five Star Ford Addition located in the 6600 block of NE Loop 820 (18.78 acres) Case Summary: Mr. Russell Killen of Haliff Associates Inc. is requesting approval of the Final Plat of Lots 1, 2R and 3R of the Five Star Ford Addition. The purpose of this replat is to revise the existing lot pattern from 5 lots to 3 lots and to reflect the future NE Loop 820 ROW line (based on proposed TXDOT Loop 820 expansion plans). The applicant hils a rezoning request (ref. PZ 2002-13) and a request for site plan approval (ref. PZ 2002-18) also on this agenda. The Development Review Committee has reviewed the plat and has determined that it complies with both the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. Attached is a memo concerning this plat from the Public Works Department. Current Zoning: The current zoning of the site is C-2 Commercial and 1-2 Medium Industrial. The applicant has a request on this agenda (ref. PZ 2002-13) to rezone the entire site to HC Heavy Commercial. ~ Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan indicates commercial uses for this area. The existing/proposed use is consistent with the Plan Right Of Way: No additional street ROW is required for this developmen~. Utilities: No issues concerning the extension of utilities to the site have been identified. Flood or Drainage: No portion of this lot is located within the 100-year floodplain. No drainage issues have been identified by staff. Traffic/Access: The site is accessed by an ingress/egress point to the eastbound Loop 820 service road that parallels the north boundary of the site. A second ingress/egress point is provided from the east property line to Rufe Snow. Tree Pr~servation: The applicant has submitted a landscape plan as part of a site plan approval request also on this agenda (ref. PZ 2002-18). Finance Review -q) Account Nwnber Sufficient FWlds A VaUaDJe Finance Director .. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS PLANN.ING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on, August 8, 2002, recommended approval of PS 2002-29 subject to the following stipulations by a vote of 7-0. 1) The legal description to include a save and except clause for the existing TESCO land. 2) A general note placed on the plat that once TXDOT obtains the Right of Way dedication, there will be a 25' setback from the Service Road. 3) A clean up of the general notes including lot numbers. UPDATE: The applicant has made revisions to the plat that satisfies the above stipulations. RECOMMENDATION: To approve PS 2002-29 a-Final Plat of Lots 1R, 2R, and 3R of the Five Star Ford Addition. ',- CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM ..,..~.-~,,".~.,~..,,-~.. ..._~...._.._._-,_.._..~,...~_..,,-~~--------- C-2 C-2 PD 1-2 FIVE STAR FORD C-2 R-1 I I· '.< ........ ,.; ¡PO! I R-2 E rJ Ε“ NRH PZ 2002-29 Five Star Ford Rezone (From 1-2 & C-2 to H.C.) 0 200 400 Feet Prepared by: Planning Dept. 7/24/02 -. . ..~. _..,-- _.-"""-'~~~'~-'-"-'- -~-'~~'""-"'~"""'-'_._'''.''-~- NI~H Public Works / Administration CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS July 30, 2002 MEMO TO: Dave Green, Planner FROM: RE: Andrea Jobe, EIT, Engineer Associate P&Z Agenda Items Reviewed By Public Works Public Works has reviewed the plats submitted for the August 8, 2002 P&Z Agenda and offer the following comments: 1. FIVE STAR FOOD ADDITION; BLOCK 1. LOTS 1-5 REPLAT All of Public Works comments have been satisfied. 2. KJELDGAARD ADDITION; BLOCK 1. LOTS 1 & 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT All of Public Works comments have been satisfied. ARJ/pwm2002-082 PO, Box 820609 * North Richland Hills, Texas 76182-0609 7301 Northeast Loop 820 * (817) 427-6400 * Fax (817) 427-6404 The first three cases for consideration on the agenda concern Five Star Ford. These items were discussed concurrently. 4. PS 2002-29 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST BY RUSSELL KILLEN OF HALFF ASSOCIATES INC. FOR THE APPROVAL OF A FINAL PLAT OF LOTS 1,2R AND 3R OF THE FIVE STAR FORD ADDITION IN THE 6600 BLOCK OF NE LOOP 820 (18.78 ACRES). APPROVED 5. PZ 2002-13 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY SAM PACK OF PACK PROPERTIES FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM C-2 COMMERCIAL AND 1-2 MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL TO HC HEAVY COMMERCIAL AT 6618 NE LOOP 820 FOR FIVE STAR FORD AUTO DEALERSHIP (18.78 ACRES). APPROVED 6. PZ 2002-18 CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN APPROVAL REQUEST FOR FIVE STAR FORD LOCATED AT 6618 NE LOOP 820. APPROVED Dave Green, Zoning Administrator, summarized the three items on the agenda that involve Five Star Ford. The fIrst item is a replat of the site. Currently, the site (the entire Five Star development) exists as 5 lots. The property is being replatted so that the 5 lots will be reduced to 3 lots. Another reason for the replat is that the Texas Highway Department has purchased additional right-of-way along the fÌ'ontage of Five Star Ford for the future expansion of Loop 820. The replat reflects the new right-of-way line. Secondly, at the present time, the dealership is zoned in two different categories. Part is zoned 1-2 (industrial) and part is zoned C-2 (commercial). There is no need for the 1-2 zoning and it is not supported in our comprehensive plan. The applicant's rezoning request takes the entire site and rezones it to a new category that was adopted last year called Heavy Commercial (HC). The HC zoning designation is the ideal district for this type of use. The comprehensive plan supports that type of use. This will be the first property in North Richland Hills to carry this zoning designation. The third item on the agenda regarding Five Star Ford is for site plan approval. The dealership wants to expand in a couple of new directions. There will be a new entrance into the dealership. The existing entrance is in fÌ'ont of the main display building. The new proposed entrance is a little to the east of the existing entrance. There is also a proposal to expand on a vacant area. This is inside the boundaries of the existing dealership. There is no expansion proposed outside of that boundary. This will become the pre-owned automobile sales area. The area directly east of the service facility will be used to park vehicles that are in for servicing. Because these two expansions are within 200 feet of residential zoning, site plan approval is required. Staff has reviewed the plat and it is consistent with the City's subdivision rules and regulations. There are no outstanding issues. The applicant's request to go to the HC zone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and removes the industrial zoning that exists in the area. There is a landscaping issue with the site plan. The boundary along the south on the adjacent service parking lot is adjacent to an existing entryway into the Meadowlakes Subdivision. At the present time, there is a certain amount of landscaping on this property as it enters the neighborhood. There is a berm that is approximately 5 to 8 feet in height which visually separates the area where the service parking lot will be fÌ'om the residential area to the south. There are some existing trees along this right-of-way. The applicant is proposing to put ornamental iron fencing along this southern boundary in-between the berm and the parking lot and they are proposing to add 8 trees along this area. Staff supports that but feels that the Meadowlakes Homeowners Association should be involved in this request because this landscaping would be occurring on property that is offsite fÌ'om the dealership and would be in the Meadowlakes Subdivision. The applicant may be able to address this issue at their meetings with that homeowners association. Staff would support additional landscaping along this particular boundary. The other landscaping issue is along the new right-of-way line for 820 along the north boundary of the site. The plans are consistent with City regulations in terms of landscaping fÌ'om the very east property line up to the existing entryway. From the existing entryway to the western portion of the property (approximately 800 feet), no landscaping is proposed. Staff feels it is necessary, as Loop 820 is widened, to continue to invoke those rules and regulations that would require landscaping. Perhaps in this case the applicant might be able to visit with TXDOT to fmd out ifthere is an opportunity to show some sort of landscaping on the Five Star property, or possibly, what might be available within the TXDOT right-of-way to show some continuation of landscaping along that entire fÌ'ontage. Mr. Welch asked if the 75-ft TXDOT right-of-way line is included with the replat? Will the applicant put a save and accept on the legal description? Has the Rufe Snow Drive right-of-way been acquired by the City? The applicant responded that the Rufe Snow right-of-way was dedicated on a previous plat. The TXDOT right-of-way has not yet been acquired. Mr. Welch requested that in the future when the right-of-way is acquired a 25-foot setback line be part of the new plat. The applicant needs to understand that once that acquisition of property occurs, there is no setback line. This plat shows the 25-foot setback along the portion that is being replatted tonight. Mr. Green stated that those are all items that will be addressed before this goes to City Council. Mr. Lewis asked if the proposed improvements were going to be made in conjunction with the roadway work so that there could be a condition placed on the approval of the project if the applicant obtained landscaping fÌ'om TXDOT. Mr. Green stated that staff understands that Sam Pack (owner of Five Star Ford) has lost a certain amount offÌ'ontage that has displaced his display area and we are recommending an agreement between the property owner and TXDOT to include something along there in terms of landscaping. Mr. Lewis asked if the timing of the improvements will permit that? Mr. Green responded yes. Ms. Cole asked if there is traffic impact since the entrance is being moved closer to Rufe Snow. Andrea lobe, Public Works Engineer Associate, responded that the driveway meets the minimum distance requirements fÌ'om Rufe Snow. Chairman Bowen opened the public hearing portion of this case (PZ 2002-13). Oscar Mohkamkar, ASM Architects, stated that they are not doing any improvements on the existing property other than extending the parking. He does not understand why they have to be responsible for landscaping for the portion impacted by the State expansion. He explained that there will be some green space between the state right-of-way and the Five Star property and they are proposing to have irrigation installed in order to maintain those spaces. Chairman Bowen asked if they had discussions with the Meadowlakes Homeowners Association regarding the maintenance and irrigation of the trees along the Meadowlakes side of the property. Mr. Mohkamkar responded that Five Star has proposed about 8 new trees on the south side of the property. There is no irrigation to the north of the berms so the HOA wanted to place the trees just to the south of the berms because there is existing irrigation at that location. Five Star has no objection to that. Charles Hawthorne, 4917 Delta Court, came forward in favor of this project. He stated that his house lies just south of where Five Star Ford's shops end so he is interested in this matter and 100% in favor of it. He stated that if Five Star says they are going to plant trees, they'll do it. He said he has bought seven cars fÌ'om Five Star and fÌ'om experience he knows they are honest and have integrity and if they say they are going to do something, they will. .<..~--..._-._-_._"...,-'-'-~""-----,---- Sam Pack, the owner of Five Star Ford came forward to make the comment that the dealership is willing to provide landscaping in the easement area if the State will allow it. Tim Welch asked Mr. Pack ifhe had any idea of when they would know that information fÌ'om the State. Mr. Pack responded that he didn't know. He stated that they weren't having a lot ofluck trying to get anything meaningful in the way of information fÌ'om the State. Five Star objects to dedicating an additional 15 ft of landscaping. As it currently is, they are losing 274 parking places. If an additional 15- ft is taken, then it further cripples Five Star's operation, therefore, they don't mind the expense of landscaping on State property. As there were none others wishing to speak, Chairman Bowen closed the public hearing and called for a motion on the fmal plat portion of this case (PS 2002-29). Tim Welch, seconded by Ms. Cole, motioned to approve PS 2002-29 subject to the following: That the legal description include a save and except clause since the TESCO land is already a separate ownership; a general note stating that once TXDOT acquires the right-of-way dedication there is an understanding that there is a 25-ft setback along the frontage of the service road; and, prior to going to City Council, clean up of general notes, such as lot numbers, on the plat. The motion was approved unanimously (7 -0). Ted Nehring, seconded by James Laubacher, motioned to approve PZ 2002-13. The motioned was approved unanimously (7-0). Mr. Lewis began to make a motion for approval ofPZ 2002-18 but Mr. Schopper interrupted to make a comment. Mr. Schopper suggested that the Commission either approve the request as written or add an amendment for a 15-foot setback in order to give Mr. Pack a clear idea of how to negotiate with the State. Mr. Schopper suggested that if P&Z insists on the setback, then the State is going to have to pay more for the right-of- way since the damage to the remainder would be greater. Ifthe setback goes right to the property line, then the State is not going to have to pay as much for the right-of-way since the remainder would not be as damaged. Mr. Schopper suggested that if Mr. Pack has to wait for an answer fÌ'om the State regarding the right-of-way, he could be waiting for a couple of years. Mr. Schopper suggested that the City shouldn't stop Mr. Pack's ability to progress while waiting on an answer fÌ'om the State but provide Mr. Pack with knowledge to negotiate with the State by passing this the way it is written or passing it with the amendment that requires a 15-ft setback. Mr. Lewis withdrew his motion. Mr. Welch asked Mr. Schopper to clarify what he means by "as written." Mr. Schopper replied that as it is written now, there is no setback. The applicant could build to the curb, which could look very bad when this project is completed. Mr. Schopper stated that it is going to make a difference in value whether it is taken up to the curb or whether it complies with the City ordinance for a 15-ft buffer. An additional 90 parking spaces will be lost if the 15-ft setback is required, but Mr. Pack should be compensated by the State for that loss by showing the State an ordinance that shows that he is required to have the 15-ft setback. Mr. Mohkamkar, ASM Architects, Inc., stepped to the podium to comment. He stated that they would be willing to place a landscaping island every 10 to 20 parking spaces to accommodate a tree in order to not lose the entire row of parking along the :tront. Mr. Schopper responded that during the plat approval there would have been the latitude to do that sort of thing, but during approval of the site plan, P&Z is restricted to dealing with what is submitted. Mr. Mohkamkar asked if approval could be given with the exception of adding the landscape islands every so often. Chairman Bowen pointed out that P&Z does have the latitude to make changes to the site plan. He asked for confirmation :trom John Pitstick, Director of Development, as to whether or not an exception can be given during site plan approval. Mr. Pitstick responded that approval could be given to add the landscape island with a tree every 20 spaces or whatever the commission wanted. Mr. Laubacher asked if the applicant could be allowed to appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment in the future? For instance, ifP&Z recommends approval with the 15-ft landscape buffer and then the State takes the land, which leaves Mr. Pack unable to comply with the 15-ft buffer requirement, could he then appeal to ZBA as a hardship case? Mr. Schopper responded that he has had a lot of negotiations with the State and in his dealings with the State, he has found that they won't give something unless they have to. Mr. Schopper suggested that if the State were infonned that the City was going to enforce the 15-ft setback unless Mr. Pack was allowed to landscape on the State's part ofthe land, the State would then be more motivated to allow Mr. Pack to landscape on that land so that the State would not have to pay damages for the remaining parking spaces. Mr. Laubacher stated that it seems like it would be the best route to require the 15-ft because it would meet the City ordinance and give the owner an opportunity to work out something with the State. Mr. Pitstick stated that the primary issue with the landscaping is the requirement of trees every 50 feet. To meet the ordinance requirements, he suggested P&Z approve it with the exception of having an open area every 50 feet with a 3-inch caliper tree, and give the owner the option of providing this in a landscape island every 50-ft, or in the State right- of-way. Chairman Bowen called for any other questions or comments. Mr. Welch asked the engineer if they had a driveway permit yet from TXDOT and whether or not they were in compliance with the new access management policy. Russell Killen, Halff Associates, stated that they have not acquired the permit but they feel they are in compliance with the new policy and plan on submitting for that permit in the near future. Mr. Schopper motioned to approve PZ 2002-18 as written. Chairman Bowen called for a second. There was none. Mr. Welch began to make a motion but asked John Pitstick for direction on the frequency of the landscape requirements. Mr. Pitstick reminded the members that the ordinance requires a tree every 50 feet. He stated that a landscape island creates a little bit of a hardship because Five Star would lose a full parking space to the island. Mr. Welch withdrew his motion. Mr. Laubacher, seconded by Mr. Schopper, motioned to approve PZ 2002- 18 with the stipulation that a 15-ft landscape buffer zone extend all the way to the extreme western end of the property. The buffer could be on Mr. Pack's property or on State property if the State agrees to it. [Motion Later Withdrawn] Mr. Pack stepped to the podium and asked for an explanation of how this motion would impact him. Mr. Schopper repeated his explanation of negotiating with the State. Mr. Pack stated that with all due respect, that is not what they want. He stated that they will lose an additional 90 parking spaces and they do not want that to happen. Mr. Schopper argued that it's possible they won't lose those spaces if properly negotiated with the State. Mr. Pack stated that he didn't want to take that risk. He has already lost 274 spaces and he doesn't want to lose another 90 spaces. Mr. Schopper repeated his explanation of the State's taking and that Mr. Pack would be paid damages. Mr. Pack stated that it is not about money at this stage. He needs the parking spaces. Ifhe loses those parking spaces, he is unwilling to go forward. Mr. Schopper asked Mr. Pitstick whether or not Mr. Pack could get relief through a variance? Mr. Pitstick stated that, in the future, he could request a variance, or change the zoning, but he believes Mr. Pack would like to settle this now rather than burden him with additional zoning or variance requests in the future. Mr. Schopper stated that the desired end result is for Mr. Pack to keep the 90 parking spaces and for the City to get landscaping and the only way to do that is to motivate the State to help Mr. Pack. Mr. Pack stated that he has been to a commissioner's hearing and gone to mediation and accomplished very little at this point with the State. He stated that he wants to work with the City but he can't be the victim of another 90 parking spaces. Mr. Nehring asked Mr. Pack what he is willing to do ifhe can't get permission to landscape from the Highway Department? Mr. Pack replied that he is willing to give the City an island tree every 100 feet. The frontage is about 1600 feet. Mr. Pack is landscaping 800 of that 1600. He would be willing to place a tree island every 100 feet on the remaining 800 feet of frontage, which means he would lose 8 parking spaces. He stated that he understands what Mr. Schopper is saying regarding being paid damages by the State, but he can't take that money and spend it to get parking spaces anywhere else. There is no place to go. The only way to get those spaces back would be to create a parking garage and that's not a viable option. At the end of the day, every parking space is a premium to the dealership. Mr. Laubacher asked if there is a way that the site plan can be approved with the 15-ft buffer and, in addition, adding some type of automatic variance that kicks in if the State refuses to cooperate. Mr. Pitstick stated that the best way to protect the City and Mr. Pack is to get the trees on Mr. Pack's site. Mr. Pack could put in an irrigation system that fans out onto the State property, and the State right-of-way could be counted as part of the landscape buffer. Mr. Nehring asked if 100 feet is allowed? Mr. Pitstick responded that 50-ft is the current ordinance but P & Z could recommend 100-ft if the State provides some parkway area. He agrees with Mr. Schopper that there is no way to predict what the State will do, but he considers it unlikely that the State will run the frontage road right up to the property line. There should be some parkway area. By putting trees on Mr. Pack's property, the City guarantees that the trees will be there, and then counting the State's parkway area, it should look nice. From a precedent standpoint, 5 or 10 years from now when the road is completely done, we want the landscaping to look consistent as you drive down 820 and the consistency could be the combination of trees on Mr. Pack's property and State right-of-way landscaping that is irrigated by the irrigation system that Mr. Pack installs and maintains. Chairman Bowen stated that he believes 50-ft would be too close. It would hide the cars, which defeats the purpose ofa car lot, so 100-ft seems to be more appropriate for this site. Mr. Welch suggested a compromise. The new parking spaces along Rufe Snow have landscape islands. He suggested getting rid of those landscape islands and putting those trees along the south on the berm providing more of a buffer on that side of the dealership. This would allow Five Star Ford to gain parking spaces along Rufe Snow. They could then add landscape islands along the fÌ'ontage road which would result in the loss of some parking spaces along the fÌ'ontage road, which would be offset by the gain of parking spaces along Rufe Snow. Mr. Pitstick and the other Commission members agreed that this is a good idea. Mr. Welch, seconded by Ms. Cole, motioned to approve PZ 2002-18 with a recommendation of 8 landscaping islands with trees spaced every 100-ft along the 800 ft section west of the main entrance. The four landscape islands along Rufe Snow will be eliminated to create 8 parking spaces. The trees and landscaping from those four islands will be placed on the south side of the property on the adjacent berm for additional landscape coverage. Chairman Bowen added a comment that the landscaping and trees on the south side of the property adjacent to Meadowlakes Drive must be in conjunction with Homeowner Association approval. Mr. Welch amended his motion to include Chairman Bowen's comment. Mr. Nehring suggested adding a comment regarding TXDOT property as part of the buffer. Mr. Welch amended his motion to include an irrigation system for maximum coverage of 15-ft width along the buffer, which would incorporate TXDOT right-of-way. The motion was approved unanimously (7 -0). Prior to voting on the motion, Ms. Cole reminded the Commission that there was a previous motion on the floor fÌ'om James Laubacher. Mr. Laubacher withdrew that motion. Mr. Schopper withdrew his second of Mr. Laubacher's motion. <t.~:, k..··.· "~ ~ CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Planning & Inspections Department Council Meeting Date: 8/26/02 ',-- Subject: Public hearing to consider a reQuest by Sam Pack of Pack Agenda Number: PZ 2002-13 Properties for a zoning change from C-2 Commercial and 1-2 Medium industrial to HC Heavy Commercial at 6618 NE Loop 820 for Five Star Ford Auto Dealership. (18.78 acres) Ordinance No. 2646 Case Summary Mr. Sam Pack, owner of Five Star Ford is requesting a rezoning of his dealership and adjacent retail from C-2 Commercial and 1-2 Medium Industrial to HC Heavy Commercial. Although the dealership is proposing a new used car display area and a paved area for vehicles being serviced (see PZ 2002-18), no expansion of the dealership is proposed beyond the current boundaries. The purpose of the rezoning is to consolidate the current zoning of the site into one district and eliminate the existing 1-2 Medium Industrial zoning along the western boundary of this site. This zoning consolidation is being requested along with the replat (ref. PS 2002-29) and site plan approval (ref. PZ 2002-18) for the new parking areas mentioned above. As of last year, the C-2 Commercial District was renamed HC Heavy Commercial as a means to better describe the uses permitted in the district. This request represents the first request for this district. Comprehensive Plan - The Comprehensive Plan indicates commercial uses for the majority of this site. A small portion of the site immediately adjacent Rufe Snow is shown as retail. The existing uses are consistent with the Plan. \ ,--. Plat Status - The applicant has a replat request on this agenda (ref. PS 2002-29) to consolidate the site consolidating from 5 lots into 3. Site Zoning/Land Use - All of the proposed Lot 3 and the western 600' of proposed Lot 2 are currently zoned 1-2 Medium Industrial. The balance of proposed lot 2 and all of proposed Lot 1 are zoned C-2 Commercial. The majority of the site is related to the Five Star Ford dealership including the showroom, service and paint and body facilities. A very small area (proposed Lot 1) is devoted to an auto rental agency and a paint and wallpaper store. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GOlRev.) Operating Budget ~~~ Department Head Signature Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Finance Director '~i~ I PZ 2002-13 Five Star Ford CC sum, ,... '\.< "" ~ CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Surrounding Zoning ILand Use "--. North: East: South: West: C-2 I Loop 820, Vacant R-2, LR I Single family residences, vacant gas station R-2 I Single family residences R-2, PD I Single family residences, Richland Hills Church of Christ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on, August 8, 2002, recommended approval of PZ 2002-13 by a vote of 7-0. RECOMMENDATION: To approve PS 2002·13 and Ordinance No. 2646 changing the zoning of Five Star Ford Auto Dealership at 6618 NE Loop 820 from C-2 Commercial and 1-2 Medium industrial to HC Heavy Commercial. \--- c ... ~ . '- I/~ .'~ ( 1 , NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NORTH RICHlAND HillS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION '--... CASE #: PZ 2002-13 Five Star Ford Dealership 6618 N E loop 820 lots 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 Five Star Ford Addition You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner of record within 200 feet of the above property. PurDose of Public Hearina: This public hearing is being held to consider a request from Sam Pack of Pack Properties for a zoning change from C-2 Commercial and 1-2 Medium Industrial to HC Heavy Commercial. ',,- Public Hearina Schedule: Public Hearing Dates: Location: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, AUGUST 8, 2002 CITY COUNCil MONDAY, AUGUST 26, 2002 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCil CHAMBERS 7301 N. E. lOOP 820 NORTH RICHLAND HillS, TEXAS Time: If you have any questions or wish to submit a petition or letter concerning the above request, please contact: Planning Department City of North Richland Hills . 7301 Northeast Loop 820 North Richland Hills, Texas 78180 Phone (817)427-6300 Fax (817) 427-6303 C-2 C-2 PD FIVE STAR FORD 1-2 C-2 PD Ε“ NRH PZ 2002-13 Five Star Ford Rezone (From 1-2 & C-2 to H.C.) 0 I 200 400 Feet I Prepared by: Planning Dept. 8/02/02 TETCO STORES LP, PO BOX 171720 SAN ANTONIO TX SNOW HEIGHTS ADDITION BLK 25 LOT 2 5036 RUFE SNOW DR EXXON CORP, #7356 PO BOX 4388 HOUSTON TX NORTH 820 COMMERCIAL ADDITION BLK 3 LOT 1 5037 RUFE SNOW DR RICHLAND HILLS CH OF CHRIST, 6300 NE LOOP 820 FORT WORTH TX BARTON, R P SURVEY A 175 TR 2 6400 NE LOOP 820 PEREZ, JULIAN T ETUX FIRA 6705 CORONA DR FORT WORTH TX SNOW HEIGHTS ADDITION BLK 22 LOT 10 6705 CORONA DR RINEY, TERRY L ETUX GAIL C 9530 SAINT JOHNS CT PILOT POINT TX SNOW HEIGHTS ADDITION BLK 22 LOT 11 6701 CORONA DR DRUMMOND, TIM ETUX CAROL 5008 SURREY CT FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 1 LOT 3 5008 SURREY CT HONEYSUCKER, ROBERT & SHIRLEY 5017 SURREY CT FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 1 LOT 4 5017 SURREY CT CHAMBLEE, VIRGINIA M 6700 CORONA DR FORT WORTH TX SNOW HEIGHTS ADDITION BLK 24 LOT 2 6700 CORONA DR MEADOWLAKES COMM IMP ASSN, 6350 GLENVIEW DR STE 104 FORT WORTH TX FOSSIL CREEK TRAILS ADDITION BLK 12 LOT A 6601 MEADOW LAKES DR HUFFMAN, CLARENCE ETUX F AYE 6537 MEADOW LAKES DR FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT lOR 6537 MEADOW LAKES DR HUNT, SCOTT P ETUX BRENDA K 6533 MEADOW LAKES DR FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT 9R 6533 MEADOW LAKES DR SEALE, RANDY R ETUX CINDY K 6529 MEADOW LAKES DR FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT 8R 6529 MEADOW LAKES DR HAMEEDPARTNERSLTD 6525 MEADOW LAKES DR FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT 7R 6525 MEADOW LAKES DR CARAM, ABDALLA SR ETUX GLORIA 6521 MEADOW LAKES DR FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT 6R 6521 MEADOW LAKES DR DICKEY, GOLDEN 1& ARTHA M 6517 MEADOW LAKES DR FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT 5 6517 MEADOW LAKES DR KOHLHEPP, KEITH D 6513 MEADOW LAKES DR FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT 4 6513 MEADOW LAKES DR CONTE, FRANK ETUX RA YDA 6509 MEADOW LAKES DR NORTH RICHLAND HILLS TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT 3 6509 MEADOW LAKES DR WILLIAMS, WARNER L 6505 MEADOW LAKES DR NORTH RICHLAND HILLS TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT 2 6505 MEADOW LAKES DR BUCK, RICHARD & MELANIE 6501 MEADOW LAKES DR FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 9 LOT 1 6501 MEADOW LAKES DR WALTZ, MARVIN K ETUX DONNA J 6705 LARUE CIR FORT WORTH TX SNOW HEIGHTS ADDITION BLK 24 LOT 4 6705 LARUE CIR TICE, TERRY S 6701 LARUE CIR FORT WORTH TX SNOW HEIGHTS ADDITION BLK 24 LOT 3 6701 LARUE CIR URBANOVSKY, DAVID E ETUX MITZI 5004 SURREY CT FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 1 LOT 2 5004 SURREY CT TAYLOR, DONALD ETUX PEGGY 5000 SURREY CT NORTH RICHLAND HILLS TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 1 LOT 1 5000 SURREY CT FRANK, ROBERT J 3732 FENTON AVE FORTWORTHTX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 6 LOT IRI 4913 RUFE SNOW DR WRIGHT, ROBERT D ETUX BARBARA 4916 DELTA CT FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 6 LOT 3R 4916 DELTA CT HOFFMAN, CHARLES ETUX WANDA 4917 DELTA CT FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 6 LOT 7R 4917 DELTACT MEADOWLAKES COM IMP ASSN, ET AL 6350 GLENVIEW DR STE 104 FORTWORTHTX FOSSIL CREEK TRAILS ADDITION BLK 1 LOT Al 4917 RUFE SNOW DR DUNLAP, LARRY W ETUX JUDY A 4916 TAMRA CT FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 6 LOT 8R 4916 TAMRACT AUGE, STEPHEN ETUX GLORIA D 4917 TAMRA CT FORT WORTH TX MEADOW LAKES ADDITION BLK 6 LOT 12R 4917 T AMRA CT TURNEY, A L ETUX PATRICIA 4916 LARIAT TRL FORT WORTH TX FOSSIL CREEK TRAILS ADDITION BLK 1 LOT 1 4916 LARIAT TR PZ 2002-13 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY SAM PACK OF PACK PROPERTIES FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM C-2 COMMERCIAL AND 1-2 MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL TO HC HEAVY COMMERCIAL AT 6618 NE LOOP 820 FOR FIVE STAR FORD AUTO DEALERSHIP (18.78 ACRES). APPROVED Dave Green, Zoning Administrator, summarized the three items on the agenda that involve Five Star Ford. The first item is a replat of the site. Currently, the site (the entire Five Star development) exists as 5 lots. The property is being replatted so that the 5 lots will be reduced to 3 lots. Another reason for the replat is that the Texas Highway Department has purchased additional right-of-way along the fÌ'ontage of Five Star Ford for the future expansion of Loop 820. The replat reflects the new right-of-way line. Secondly, at the present time, the dealership is zoned in two different categories. Part is zoned 1-2 (industrial) and part is zoned C-2 (commercial). There is no need for the 1-2 zoning and it is not supported in our comprehensive plan. The applicant's rezoning request takes the entire site and rezones it to a new category that was adopted last year called Heavy Commercial (HC). The HC zoning designation is the ideal district for this type of use. The comprehensive plan supports that type of use. This will be the fIrst property in North Richland Hills to carry this zoning designation. The third item on the agenda regarding Five Star Ford is for site plan approval. The dealership wants to expand in a couple of new directions. There will be a new entrance into the dealership. The existing entrance is in fÌ'ont of the main display building. The new proposed entrance is a little to the east of the existing entrance. There is also a proposal to expand on a vacant area. This is inside the boundaries of the existing dealership. There is no expansion proposed outside of that boundary. This will become the pre-owned automobile sales area. The area directly east of the service facility will be used to park vehicles that are in for servicing. Because these two expansions are within 200 feet of residential zoning, site plan approval is required. Staff has reviewed the plat and it is consistent with the City's subdivision rules and regulations. There are no outstanding issues. The applicant's request to go to the HC zone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and removes the industrial zoning that exists in the area. There is a landscaping issue with the site plan. The boundary along the south on the adjacent service parking lot is adjacent to an existing entryway into the Meadowlakes Subdivision. At the present time, there is a certain amount of landscaping on this property as it enters the neighborhood. There is a berm that is approximately 5 to 8 feet in height which visually separates the area where the service parking lot will be fÌ'om the residential area to the south. There are some existing trees along this right-of-way. The applicant is proposing to put ornamental iron fencing along this southern boundary in-between the berm and the parking lot and they are proposing to add 8 trees along this area. Staff supports that but feels that the Meadowlakes Homeowners Association should be involved in this request because this landscaping would be occurring on property that is offsite fÌ'om the dealership and would be in the Meadowlakes Subdivision. The applicant may be able to address this issue at their meetings with that homeowners association. Staff would support additional landscaping along this particular boundary. The other landscaping issue is along the new right-of-way line for 820 along the north boundary of the site. The plans are consistent with City regulations in terms of landscaping 1Ì"om the very east property line up to the existing entryway. From the existing entryway to the western portion of the property (approximately 800 feet), no landscaping is proposed. Staff feels it is necessary, as Loop 820 is widened, to continue to invoke those rules and regulations that would require landscaping. Perhaps in this case the applicant might be able to visit with TXDOT to fmd out ifthere is an opportunity to show some sort of landscaping on the Five Star property, or possibly, what might be available within the TXDOT right-of-way to show some continuation of landscaping along that entire 1Ì"ontage. Mr. Welch asked ifthe 75-ft TXDOT right-of-way line is included with the replat? Will the applicant put a save and accept on the legal description? Has the Rufe Snow Drive right-of-way been acquired by the City? The applicant responded that the Rufe Snow right-of-way was dedicated on a previous plat. The TXDOT right-of-way has not yet been acquired. Mr. Welch requested that in the future when the right-of-way is acquired a 25-foot setback line be part of the new plat. The applicant needs to understand that once that acquisition ofproperty occurs, there is no setback line. This plat shows the 25-foot setback along the portion that is being replatted tonight. Mr. Green stated that those are all items that will be addressed before this goes to City Council. Mr. Lewis asked if the proposed improvements were going to be made in conjunction with the roadway work so that there could be a condition placed on the approval of the project if the applicant obtained landscaping 1Ì"om TXDOT. Mr. Green stated that staff understands that Sam Pack (owner of Five Star Ford) has lost a certain amount offtontage that has displaced his display area and we are recommending an agreement between the property owner and TXDOT to include something along there in terms of landscaping. Mr. Lewis asked if the timing of the improvements will permit that? Mr. Green responded yes. Ms. Cole asked if there is traffic impact since the entrance is being moved closer to Rufe Snow. Andrea lobe, Public Works Engineer Associate, responded that the driveway meets the minimum distance requirements 1Ì"om Rufe Snow. Chairman Bowen opened the public hearing portion of this case (PZ 2002-13). Oscar Mohkamkar, ASM Architects, stated that they are not doing any improvements on the existing property other than extending the parking. He does not understand why they have to be responsible for landscaping for the portion impacted by the State expansion. He explained that there will be some green space between the state right-of-way and the Five Star property and they are proposing to have irrigation installed in order to maintain those spaces. Chairman Bowen asked if they had discussions with the Meadowlakes Homeowners Association regarding the maintenance and irrigation of the trees along the Meadowlakes side of the property. Mr. Mohkamkar responded that Five Star has proposed about 8 new trees on the south side of the property. There is no irrigation to the north of the berms so the HOA wanted to place the trees just to the south of the berms because there is existing irrigation at that location. Five Star has no objection to that. Charles Hawthorne, 4917 Delta Court, came forward in favor of this project. He stated that his house lies just south of where Five Star Ford's shops end so he is interested in this matter and 100% in favor of it. He stated that if Five Star says they are going to plant trees, they'll do it. He said he has bought seven cars ttom Five Star and ttom experience he knows they are honest and have integrity and if they say they are going to do something, they will. Sam Pack, the owner of Five Star Ford came forward to make the comment that the dealership is willing to provide landscaping in the easement area if the State will allow it. Tim Welch asked Mr. Pack if he had any idea of when they would know that information ttom the State. Mr. Pack responded that he didn't know. He stated that they weren't having a lot of luck trying to get anything meaningful in the way of information ttom the State. Five Star objects to dedicating an additional 15 ft oflandscaping. As it currently is, they are losing 274 parking places. If an additional 15-ft is taken, then it further cripples Five Star's operation, therefore, they don't mind the expense of landscaping on State property. As there were none others wishing to speak, Chairman Bowen closed the public hearing and called for a motion on the fmal plat portion of this case (PS 2002-29). Tim Welch, seconded by Ms. Cole, motioned to approve PS 2002-29 subject to the following: That the legal description include a save and except clause since the TESCO land is already a separate ownership; a general note stating that once TXDOT acquires the right-of-way dedication there is an understanding that there is a 25-ft setback along the frontage of the service road; and, prior to going to City Council, clean up of general notes, such as lot numbers, on the plat. The motion was approved unanimously (7 -0). Ted Nehring, seconded by James Laubacher, motioned to approve PZ 2002-13. The motioned was approved unanimously (7-0). 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 2 4 6 8 ORDINANCE NO. 2646 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS; AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND CHANGING THE ZONING OF PROPERTY OF FIVE STAR FORD LOCATED AT 6618 N.E. LOOP 820 TO HC HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT (PZ 2002-13); PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. , , WHEREAS, notice of a hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission was sent to real property owners within 200 feet of the property herein described at least 10 days before such hearing; and, WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing before the City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation in North Richland Hills at least 15 days before such hearing; and, WHEREAS, public hearings to change the zoning on the property herein described were held before both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, and the Planning and Zoning Commission has heretofore made a recommendation concerning the zone change; and, WHEREAS, the City Council is ofthe opinion that the zone change herein effectuated furthers the purpose of zoning as set forth in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and is in the best interest of the citizens of the City of North Richland Hills; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: Section 1: THAT the Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and the Official Zoning Map of North Richland Hills are hereby amended by changing the zoning of Lots 1, 2R and 3R, Five-Star Ford Addition, City of North Richland Hills, Tarrant County, Texas, to HC Heavy Commercial Zoning District. Section 2: Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of the comprehensive zoning ordinance as amended by this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon final conviction thereof fined in an amount not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each day any such violation shall be allowed to continue shall constitute a separate violation and punishable hereunder. j' ! ! 1 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 Section 3: The City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause the publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clauses of this ordinance as an alternative method of publication provided by law. 2 4 Section 4: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon passage. 6 AND IT IS SO ORDAINED. 8 Passed on this 26th day of August, 2002. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS By: Oscar Trevino, Mayor ATTEST: Patricia Hutson, City Secretary I 1 ¡ II II II II I II W:\~\General\ordinanceS\Map Change.5-Star Ford.2646.wpd Ii I , 2 ) /, , " CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS " Department: Planning & Inspections Department 8-26-02 Council Meeting Date: \."..../ Subject: Consideration of a request for Site Plan Approval by Five Star Ford at 6618 NE Loop 820. Agenda Number: PZ 2002-18 Case Summary - Five Star Ford Dealership is proposing an expansion of the existing facilities involving pre-owned vehicles and vehicles being serviced. This expansion would crèate two new display/parking areas, one located on a vacant tract situated in the northeast corner of the site along the service road frontage (pre-owned vehicles) and a vacant tract located directly east of the service facilities. These parking areas are located within the existing boundaries of the dealership. No expansion is proposed outside of the existing dealership boundaries. Because the proposed parking areas are located within 200' of residential zoning, site plan approval is required. Building Design and Materials - The proposed expansion does not include any new structures, only new paved areas. Both parking/display areas will consist of 5" concrete pavement. Access and Parking - Current access to the dealership is provided by a centralized entry/exit point from the east-bound service road of Loop 820 and a right in/right out point along the eastern boundary of the dealership to Rufe Snow Boulevard. The existing service road entry/exit will be closed and relocated approximately 320' east of the current location. Access to both new parking areas will be from a centralized access easement. '-.../ Landscaping/Screening - The proposed service lot has residential zoning adjacency along the southern boundary requiring a 15' landscape buffer and a 6' masonry wall. An existing 5' earthen berm with a series of trees (parallel to the berm) make up both an existing screen to the adjacent dealership and an landscaped entryway into the Meadow Lakes subdivision. The landscape plan for this area proposes additional landscaping to this existing screen in the form of 8 trees (Live Oaks) between the dealership's property line and the berm (on private property). In addition a 6' ornamental iron fence with 3' Dwarf Wax Myrtles along the southern boundary of this lot is proposed for screening. Staff supports this arrangement as long as the Homeowners Association of the adjacent Meadow Lakes Subdivision is in agreement with the proposal and maintenance responsibility of the landscaping is clearly Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GOlRev.) - røJ Operating Budget - Other ~ ._J ~ Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Department Head Signature ~~ . - City Manager ig , ',-, PZ 2002-18 Five Star Ford Site Plan CC sum. Page 1 of3 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS defined. \...- Proposed landscaping along the Rufe Snow frontage of the service lot exceeds minimum requirements by providing 5 Bur Oaks spaced approximately 30' apart (min. 50' spacing) and the inclusion of a low shrub row. The depth of this landscape setback is approximately 52 feet from the curb or 15' from the new property line. Tree islands and landscaping proposed for this parking lot are in accordance with regulations. Staff has inquired as to whether the applicant would extend the existing berm along the entrance into the Meadow Lake Subdivision to along the east side of this lot (Rufe Snow frontage). A screening wall is only required on the rear of a commercial lot facing a thoroughfare. The parking lot screening ordinance requires a 30 inch screen of one or a combination of shrubs, walls or berms. The applicant has provided shrub screening along Rufe Snow. The landscape plan for the service road frontage (including the new proposed pre-owned vehicle display area) shows a 20' landscape setback (15' min. req.) for that portion of the frontage road from the proposed new entrance to the eastern boundary of the site. Within this setback a combination of Bur Oaks spaced at 45' intervals (50' min. req.) and Dwarf Yaupon and Burford Hollies are proposed. Proposed tree islands and landscaping for this parking lot are in accordance with regulations. Staff is concerned that no landscape setback is proposed for the remainder of the frontage along the service road from the new entrance to the western boundary (over 800'). The site plan shows this area to be double-parked with vehicles. Staff strongly suggests that the applicant. inquire as to the possibility of extending landscaping along this frontage \....., within the TXDOT ROW. Signage/Lighting - An existing pre-owned vehicle sign will be relocated to a new location along the service road frontage. Both parking/display areas show extensive lighting. An elevation of the proposed lighting standard indicates a 24' single pole, double light fixture. No information is given concerning the wattage of these proposed lights. In the service parking lot, the closest light standard to the adjacent residential area is approximately 50'. A note on the site plan states that these lights will feature a cut-off lamp. Comprehensive Plan - The Comprehensivé Plan indicates commercial uses for the majority of this site. A small portion of the site immediately adjacent Rufe Snow is shown as retail. The existing uses are consistent with the Plan. Zoning/Land Use - The site is currently zoned C-2 Commercial and 1-2 Medium Industrial. The applicant is also requesting a rezoning of the entire site to HC Heavy Commercial (ref. PZ 2002-13) North: East: South: West: C-2 / Loop 820, Vacant R-2, LR I Single family res.idences, vacant gas station R-2 / Single family residences R-2, PO / Single family residences, Richland Hills Church of Christ ',--- PZ 2002-18 Five Star Ford Site Plan cc. Page 2 of 3 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS "-. ' PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on, August 8, 2002, recommended approval of PZ 2002-18 by a vote of 7-0 with the following conditions: 1 ) A total of 8 landscape islands to be placed at 100' intervals along the service road frontage west of the existing entrance; 2) The addition of an irrigation· system along this boundary with the capability of covering a maximum 15' width of TXDOT ROW; 3) Elimination of the four landscape islands along Rufe Snow to create 8 parking spaces. The eight trees removed from these parking islands to be used to along the 820 frontage, one landscape island for each 100 feet of frontage west of the existing entrance. UPDATE: The applicant has revised the site plan to include the items recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission except for an approval from the Meadow Lake Homeowners AssoCiation and the creation of 8 landscaped tree islands along the west frontage of 820. The applicant feels that an approval letter from the Association will be available prior to Council's consideration of this request. '"-, RECOMMENDATION: To approve PS 2002·18 a request for Site Plan Approval for Five Star Ford at 6618 NE Loop 820. '-...' Page 3 of 3 C-2 C-2 PD 1-2 C-2 Cl) NRH PZ 2002-18 Five Star Ford Site Plan Prepared by: Planning Dept. 8/02/02 o I 200 400 Feet I PZ 2002-18 CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN APPROVAL REQUEST FOR FIVE STAR FORD LOCATED AT 6618 NE LOOP 820. APPROVED Mr. Lewis began to make a motion for approval ofPZ 2002-18 but Mr. Schopper interrupted to make a comment. Mr. Schopper suggested that the Commission either approve the request as written or add an amendment for a 15- foot setback in order to give Mr. Pack a clear idea of how to negotiate with the State. Mr. Schopper suggested that if P&Z insists on the setback, then the State is going to have to pay more for the right-of- way since the damage to the remainder would be greater. If the setback goes right to the property line, then the State is not going to have to pay as much for the right-of-way since the remainder would not be as damaged. Mr. Schopper suggested that if Mr. Pack has to wait for an answer :&om the State regarding the right-of-way, he could be waiting for a couple of years. Mr. Schopper suggested that the City shouldn't stop Mr. Pack's ability to progress while waiting on an answer :&om the State but provide Mr. Pack with knowledge to negotiate with the State by passing this the way it is written or passing it with the amendment that requires a 15-ft setback. Mr. Lewis withdrew his motion. Mr. Welch asked Mr. Schopper to clarify what he means by "as written." Mr. Schopper replied that as it is written now, there is no setback. The applicant could build to the curb, which could look very bad when this project is completed. Mr. Schopper stated that it is going to make a difference in value whether it is taken up to the curb or whether it complies with the City ordinance for a 15-ft buffer. An additional 90 parking spaces will be lost if the 15-ft setback is required, but Mr. Pack should be compensated by the State for that loss by showing the State an ordinance that shows that he is required to have the 15- ft setback. Mr. Mohkamkar, ASM Architects, Inc., stepped to the podium to comment. He stated that they would be willing to place a landscaping island every 10 to 20 parking spaces to accommodate a tree in order to not lose the entire row of parking along the :&ont. Mr. Schopper responded that during the plat approval there would have been the latitude to do that sort of thing, but during approval of the site plan, P&Z is restricted to dealing with what is submitted. Mr. Mohkamkar asked if approval could be given with the exception of adding the landscape islands every so often. Chairman Bowen pointed out that P&Z does have the latitude to make changes to the site plan. He asked for confIrmation :&om John Pitstick, Director of Development, as to whether or not an exception can be given during site plan approval. Mr. Pitstick responded that approval could be given to add the landscape island with a tree every 20 spaces or whatever the commission wanted. Mr. Laubacher asked if the applicant could be allowed to appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment in the future? For instance, ifP&Z recommends approval with the 15-ft landscape buffer and then the State takes the land, which leaves Mr. Pack unable to comply with the 15- ft buffer requirement, could he then appeal to ZBA as a hardship case? Mr. Schopper responded that he has had a lot of negotiations with the State and in his dealings with the State, he has found that they won't give something unless they have to. Mr. Schopper suggested that if the State were informed that the City was going to enforce the 15-ft setback unless Mr. Pack was allowed to landscape on the State's part of the land, the State would then be more motivated to allow Mr. Pack to landscape on that land so that the State would not have to pay damages for the remaining parking spaces. Mr. Laubacher stated that it seems like it would be the best route to require the 15-ft because it would meet the City ordinance and give the owner an opportunity to work out something with the State. Mr. Pitstick stated that the primary issue with the landscaping is the requirement of trees every 50 feet. To meet the ordinance requirements, he suggested P&Z approve it with the exception of having an open area every 50 feet with a 3-inch caliper tree, and give the owner the option of providing this in a landscape island every 50-ft, or in the State right- of-way. Chairman Bowen called for any other questions or comments. Mr. Welch asked the engineer if they had a driveway permit yet fÌ'om TXDOT and whether or not they were in compliance with the new access management policy. Russell Killen, Halff Associates, stated that they have not acquired the permit but they feel they are in compliance with the new policy and plan on submitting for that permit in the near future. Mr. Schopper motioned to approve PZ 2002-18 as written. Chairman Bowen called for a second. There was none. Mr. Welch began to make a motion but asked John Pitstick for direction on the fÌ'equency of the landscape requirements. Mr. Pitstick reminded the members that the ordinance requires a tree every 50 feet. He stated that a landscape island creates a little bit of a hardship because Five Star would lose a full parking space to the island. Mr. Welch withdrew his motion. Mr. Laubacher, seconded by Mr. Schopper, motioned to approve PZ 2002-18 with the stipulation that a 15-ft landscape buffer zone extend all the way to the extreme western end of the property. The buffer could be on Mr. Pack's property or on State property if the State agrees to it. [Motion Later Withdrawn] Mr. Pack stepped to the podium and asked for an explanation of how this motion would impact him. Mr. Schopper repeated his explanation of negotiating with the State. Mr. Pack stated that with all due respect, that is not what they want. He stated that they will lose an additional 90 parking spaces and they do not want that to happen. Mr. Schopper argued that it's possible they won't lose those spaces if properly negotiated with the State. Mr. Pack stated that he didn't want to take that risk. He has already lost 274 spaces and he doesn't want to lose another 90 spaces. Mr. Schopper repeated his explanation of the State's taking and that Mr. Pack would be paid damages. Mr. Pack stated that it is not about money at this stage. He needs the parking spaces. Ifhe loses those parking spaces, he is unwilling to go forward. Mr. Schopper asked Mr. Pitstick whether or not Mr. Pack could get relief through a variance? Mr. Pitstick stated that, in the future, he could request a variance, or change the zoning, but he believes Mr. Pack would like to settle this now rather than burden him with additional zoning or variance requests in the future. Mr. Schopper stated that the desired end result is for Mr. Pack to keep the 90 parking spaces and for the City to get landscaping and the only way to do that is to motivate the State to help Mr. Pack. Mr. Pack stated that he has been to a commissioner's hearing and gone to mediation and accomplished very little at this point with the State. He stated that he wants to work with the City but he can't be the victim of another 90 parking spaces. Mr. Nehring asked Mr. Pack what he is willing to do ifhe can't get pennission to landscape from the Highway Department? Mr. Pack replied that he is willing to give the City an island tree every 100 feet. The frontage is about 1600 feet. Mr. Pack is landscaping 800 of that 1600. He would be willing to place a tree island every 100 feet on the remaining 800 feet of frontage, which means he would lose 8 parking spaces. He stated that he understands what Mr. Schopper is saying regarding being paid damages by the State, but he can't take that money and spend it to get parking spaces anywhere else. There is no place to go. The only way to get those spaces back would be to create a parking garage and that's not a viable option. At the end of the day, every parking space is a premium to the dealership. Mr. Laubacher asked ifthere is a way that the site plan can be approved with the 15-ft buffer and, in addition, adding some type of automatic variance that kicks in if the State refuses to cooperate. Mr. Pitstick stated that the best way to protect the City and Mr. Pack is to get the trees on Mr. Pack's site. Mr. Pack could put in an irrigation system that fans out onto the State property, and the State right-of-way could be counted as part ofthe landscape buffer. Mr. Nehring asked if 100 feet is allowed? Mr. Pitstick responded that 50-ft is the current ordinance but P & Z could recommend 100-ft ifthe State provides some parkway area. He agrees with Mr. Schopper that there is no way to predict what the State will do, but he considers it unlikely that the State will run the ITontage road right up to the property line. There should be some parkway area. By putting trees on Mr. Pack's property, the City guarantees that the trees will be there, and then counting the State's parkway area, it should look nice. From a precedent standpoint, 5 or 10 years ITom now when the road is completely done, we want the landscaping to look consistent as you drive down 820 and the consistency could be the combination of trees on Mr. Pack's property and State right-of-way landscaping that is irrigated by the irrigation system that Mr. Pack installs and maintains. Chairman Bowen stated that he believes 50-ft would be too close. It would hide the cars, which defeats the purpose of a car lot, so 100- ft seems to be more appropriate for this site. Mr. Welch suggested a compromise. The new parking spaces along Rufe Snow have landscape islands. He suggested getting rid of those landscape islands and putting those trees along the south on the berm providing more of a buffer on that side of the dealership. This would allow Five Star Ford to gain parking spaces along Rufe Snow. They could then add landscape islands along the ITontage road which would result in the loss of some parking spaces along the ITontage road, which would be offset by the gain of parking spaces along Rufe Snow. Mr. Pitstick and the other Commission members agreed that this is a good idea. Mr. Welch, seconded by Ms. Cole, motioned to approve PZ 2002-18 with a recommendation of 8 landscaping islands with trees spaced every 100-ft along the 800 ft section west of the main entrance. The four landscape islands along Rufe Snow will be eliminated to create 8 parking spaces. The trees and landscaping from those four islands will be placed on the south side of the property on the adjacent berm for additional landscape coverage. Chairman Bowen added a comment that the landscaping and trees on the south side of the property adjacent to Meadowlakes Drive must be in conjunction with Homeowner Association approval. Mr. Welch amended his motion to include Chairman Bowen's comment. Mr. Nehring suggested adding a comment regarding TXDOT property as part of the buffer. Mr. Welch amended his motion to include an irrigation system for maximum coverage of 15-ft width along the buffer, which would incorporate TXDOT right-of-way. The motion was approved unanimously (7 -0). .' .Jo CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Planning & Inspections Department Council Meeting Date: 8-26-02 Subject: Consideration of a Site Plan Approval request by River Agenda Number: PZ 2002-19 Crown Investments LLC for a proposed expansion to Huggins Honda Auto.Dealership. Case Summary - The applicant is proposing to expand the existing Huggins Honda Dealership eastward onto this site. The primary use associated with this expansion will be for display of pre-owned vehicles. Because this expansion is located within 200' of residentially- zoned property, a site plan approval is required before construction permits can be issued. A replat was recently approved for this site (ref. PZ 2002-08 Huggins Addition). In addition, a request to close and abandon Susan Lee Lane on this site was also approved. Building Design and Materials - A single-story, 3,200 square foot building is proposed approximately in the center of the site. The building will be oriented toward the Loop 820 Service Road. Primary building material is masonry (not specific) for all facades with a gray ceramic tile accent on the front (service road) facade. The building will be white in color with a blue l' overhang on all four sides of the building. The building design and colors are meant to match the existing Huggins dealership buildings and are consistent with Honda approved designs. The roof is of a flat design with a parapet wall on three sides. The building elevations should note that any roof-mounted HVAC units will be screened from view. Access and Parking - The plan proposes two 32' wide access points from the west-bound "- service road. The western-most access point is located approximately in the same location that Susan Lee Lane intersected with the service road. No access points are proposed onto Nancy Lane. A Fire Lane traverses the site from the proposed ingress/egress points and connects to an existing Fire Lane west of this site. Landscaping/Screening - The site has residential adjacency along the north property line. A 6' masonry, screening wall and a 15' landscape buffer are required along this boundary. The site plan indicates a minimum 15' landscape buffer along this boundary with 3" caliper Southern Live Oak Trees every 30'. In addition, the site plan indicates a 6' masonry wall with mow strip along this boundary. Both of these elements satisfy the minimum screening and buffering requirements. A 15' landscape setback is required along both the Nancy Lane and service road frontages. Within this setback, trees are required at 50' intervals. The site plan Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget ..\ Other - 'f!jI ~ JoR~ Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds Available . ~~a~ Finance Director Department Head Signature '''--I PZ 2002-1 P Huggins Site Plan CC sum. Page 1 of 3 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS éxceeds this requirement by providing a 3" ca'iper Southern Live Oak Tree at 30' intervals. In addition, a 3' tall shrub line (Yaupon Holly) provides screening of the parking/display area along this frontage. Total site landscaping exceeds the minimum 15% required. Staff has suggested to the applicant that in the area of the Susan Lee cul-de-sac that the required screening wall be positioned such that the 15' landscape buffer is provided on the residential side of the wall rather than the commercial side. The applicant has said that he wants to take advantage pf providing landscaping on his side of the fence to improve the looks of his development from the freeway. A dumpster pad is shown behind the proposed building. The plan notes that the pad site will be screened with masonry materials similar of the proposed building. The pad site is located approximately 50' from the adjacent residential property line. Signage/Lighting -The applicant is proposing a two-pole, 30' tall, 30 square foot sign at the intersection of Nancy Lane and the west-bound service road of Loop 820. An additional 18 square foot sign is proposed on the interior of the site near the proposed building site. Both of these signs are in conformance with current regulations. Wall surface signs are proposed on the south (front) and east-side of the building. The largest of these signs measures approximately 10.5' X 1.5' or 15.75 square feet in size. All proposed wall signs are consistent with city regulations. '-- The site plan proposes a total of nineteen 25' taillights. Five of these lights are located in the 15' landscape buffer immediately adjacent the residences north of the site. A note on the plan states that these fixtures will be shielded away from adjacent residential areas. The applicant should provide an illumination plan that verifies the shielding of these lights from the adjacent residential areas. Comprehensive Plan - The Comprehensive Plan was revised to reflect the proposed commercial use when C-2 Commercial zoning was approved for this site last year (ref. PZ 2001-26). Zoning/Land Use - The site is currently zoned C-2 Commercial. North: R-2 / Single family residences East: R-2, C-2 I Single family residence, car display area for Hudiburg Chevrolet Dealership South: West-bound Loop 820 Service Road West: C-2 I Existing Huggins Auto Dealership PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on August 8, 2002, recommended approval of PZ 2002-19 by a vote of 7-0 with the following stipulations: 1) Submission of an Illumination Plan; .,- 2) A height reduction of the light standards along the north property line (adjacent residential uses) and the Nancy Lane frontage from 25' to 15'. Page ~, of 3 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS 3) Include the type of masonry to be used on the proposed building; Update: The applicant has provided an Illumination Plan (attached) and has revised the site plan, however, several issues remain to be clarified. The light standard drawing notes light poles will be either 15' or 25' in height. The symbol used to indicate which light standards are to be 15' and which are to be 25' is difficult to read, especially along Nancy Lane. Staff recommends that a note be placed on the Illumination Plan stating that all lighting along the northern boundary and the Nancy Lane frontage of the site shall be limited to 15' in height. The applicant was required by the Planning Commission's recommendation to specify the type of masonry to be used on the building. This has not been clarified on the attached revision. In addition, the revised building elevations now reflect the use of stucco on that portion of the building above the l' blue overhang. The use of stucco is not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Staff recommends that either that the applicant remove stucco note from the building elevation or submit a Special Use Permit (SUP) to request it's use. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the site plan for Huggins Honda subject to the applicant removing stucco from the elevation plans and identifying the masonry materials to be used on the building and Planning & Zoning comments. ',,-- '-, Page 3 of 3 4813 4812 4813 4809 4808 4809 4805 4804 4805 480 4801 4800 4801 48 47 7 ({) NRH PZ 2002-19 Site Plan Approval Huggins Honda o I 100 200 Feet I Prepared by: Planning Dept. 8/02/02 PZ 2002-19 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST BY RIVER CROWN INVESTMENTS LLC FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED EXPANSION OF HUGGINS HONDA AUTO DEALERSmp. APPROVED Dave Green, Zoning Administrator, summarized the case. This site is the proposed expansion of the Huggins Auto Dealership along 820. This includes an area on which the P&Z Commission recently approved a final plat. It included the closing of Susan Lee Lane and the formation of a cul-de-sac. Nancy Lane is the eastern boundary. The westbound Loop 820 service road runs along the southern portion of the property. This expansion is taking place within 200- ft of residentially zoned property, which requires site plan approval. The pre-owned automobile sales for Huggins Honda will be located on this site. A 3200 sq. ft. building is proposed. This particular property has residential along the northern boundary of the site so a screening wall and 15-ft landscape buffer is required. The applicant has satisfied the City requirements. Along the Nancy Lane ITontage (which has no proposed entrance or exit to the dealership) is a 15-ft setback requirement with trees each 50-ft, and a low shrub row. There is a proposal for some lighting standards, which are situated close to residential property just to the north of the site. Staff would like an illumination plan, which shows that light is being reflected away ITom those adjacent residential areas. Staff would like a note placed on the site plan that all rooftop mounted equipment will be screened ITom view. The building elevations will match the existing Huggins dealership in terms of the style of architecture, color and trim. A reference on the elevation page states that the building will be constructed of masonry material, but the reference is not specific as to which type of material will be used. One hundred percent (100%) masonry is a requirement since this is a non-residential building. Staff suggests that the plan be revised to indicate the actual type of building material that is being proposed. A representative for River Crown Development, Ernest Hedgcoth, came forward and explained that there is a note on the site plan that states that all of the lighting will be shielded ITom the residential property. He stated that the landscape ordinance has been met with trees every 50-ft along Nancy Lane. Mr. Hedgcoth pointed out that the Commission allowed Five Star Ford to place trees every 100-ft while Huggins Honda is required to meet the ordinance with trees every 50-ft. He also explained that Mr. Huggins has not yet chosen the masonry material. He is considering a tilt wall building with a stucco EIFS-type arrangement. It will look very similar to the existing building. Mr. Huggins is also considering white brick. Mr. Hedgcoth assured the Commission that the applicant will come up with a plan for the materials that will be satisfactory to the City. Mr. Hedgcoth stated that the fencing meets the City standards and he assured Mr. Welch that it will be on Huggins' property [this issue was brought up in pre-briefmg - the site plan fencing lines appeared to extend beyond the property line]. Mr. Nehring asked for clarification on lights that will be located in the cul-de-sac area. Mr. Hedgcoth pointed out on the map where the light standards would be located. He showed which lights will be directed in an arc away :&om the residential area. He pointed out other lights which will have a circular pattern that will spill over into the cul-de-sac area. He stated that they do not want to create a dark area in the cul-de-sac. He also stated that in discussions with Mr. Pitstick it was mentioned that the City might put a street light on the cul-de-sac since the cul-de-sac is dedicated to the City and becomes City property. Mr. Laubacher asked if the four lights that are directly next to the residents along the back wall could be lowered. Mr. Hedgcoth indicated that those will be shielded and that it would be possible to lower them to 15- ft. Mr. Welch thanked Mr. Hedgcoth for providing trees every 50-ft. He stated that he is concerned that there are street lights every 50-ft along Nancy. He asked for an indication of the wattage of those lights. Mr. Hedgcoth stated that the engineer told him it is a type P-l fIxture. The wattage ranges :&om 40 to 400. Mr. Hedgcoth believes the bulbs will be 400 wattage. Mr. Welch agreed with Mr. Laubacher's suggestion that the lights along the back be reduced to 15-ft. Mr. Hedgcoth stated that he will furnish an illumination plan, showing the coverage, before going to City Council. Mr. Welch asked if Mr. Hedgcoth had any questions on the Public Works comments. Mr. Hedgcoth indicated that most of those have already been handled. Chairman Bowen asked for further questions. There were none and the Chairman called for a motion. Mr. Nehring, seconded by Mr. Laubacher, motioned to approve PZ 2002-19 subject to Staff and Public Works comments and to include submission of an illumination plan when this goes to Council. Mr. Welch asked for an amendment that the architect have the specific masonry type to present to Council. Mr. Nehring also asked for four 15-ft lights along the back and six 15-ft lights along Nancy (instead of the 25-ft lights). Mr. Hedgcoth stated that he is concerned that there might not be enough illumination :&om a 15-ft light to expand to all Huggins's areas along Nancy. Mr. Welch replied that he would like to keep it in the motion and suggested that Mr. Hedgcoth justifY other use to the Council. Chairman Bowen explained to Mr. Hedgcoth that ifhe could demonstrate to the Council that Huggins would need 25-ft lights along Nancy, the Council would give consideration for it. Mr. Nehring restated his motion at the recording secretary's request. Mr. Nehring, seconded by Mr. Laubacher, motioned to approve PZ 2002-19 subject to Staff and Public Works comments to include a submission of an illumination plan, to include lowering the lights along the back side of the property and along Nancy Lane from 25-ft to 15-ft, and to include the type of masonry that will be used. The motion was approved unanimously (7-0). PZ 2002-19 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST BY RIVER CROWN INVESTMENTS LLC FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED EXPANSION OF HUGGINS HONDA AUTO DEALERSHIP. APPROVED Dave Green, Zoning Administrator, summarized the case. This site is the proposed expansion of the Huggins Auto Dealership along 820. This includes an area on which the P&Z Commission recently approved a fmal plat. It included the closing of Susan Lee Lane and the formation of a cul-de-sac. Nancy Lane is the eastern boundary. The westbound Loop 820 service road runs along the southern portion of the property. This expansion is taking place within 200-ft of residentially zoned property, which requires site plan approval. The pre-owned automobile sales for Huggins Honda will be located on this site. A 3200 sq. ft. building is proposed. This particular property has residential along the northern boundary of the site so a screening wall and 15-ft landscape buffer is required. The applicant has satisfied the City requirements. Along the Nancy Lane frontage (which has no proposed entrance or exit to the dealership) is a 15-ft setback requirement with trees each 50-ft, and a low shrub row. There is a proposal for some lighting standards, which are situated close to residential property just to the north of the site. Staff would like an illumination plan, which shows that light is being reflected away from those adjacent residential areas. Staff would like a note placed on the site plan that all rooftop mounted equipment will be screened from view. The building elevations will match the existing Huggins dealership in terms of the style of architecture, color and trim. A reference on the elevation page states that the building will be constructed of masonry material, but the reference is not specific as to which type of material will be used. One hundred percent (I 00%) masonry is a requirement since this is a non-residential building. Staff suggests that the plan be revised to indicate the actual type of building material that is being proposed. A representative for River Crown Development, Ernest Hedgcoth, came forward and explained that there is a note on the site plan that states that all of the lighting will be shielded from the residential property. He stated that the landscape ordinance has been met with trees every 50-ft along Nancy Lane. Mr. Hedgcoth pointed out that the Commission allowed Five Star Ford to place trees every 100-ft while Huggins Honda is required to meet the ordinance with trees every 50-ft. He also explained that Mr. Huggins has not yet chosen the masonry material. He is considering a tilt wall building with a stucco EIFS-type arrangement. It will look very similar to the existing building. Mr. Huggins is also considering white brick. Mr. Hedgcoth assured the Commission that the applicant will come up with a plan for the materials that will be satisfactory to the City. Mr. Hedgcoth stated that the fencing meets the City standards and he assured Mr. Welch that it will be on Huggins' property [this issue was brought up in pre-briefing - the site plan fencing lines appeared to extend beyond the property line]. Mr. Nehring asked for clarification on lights that will be located in the cul-de-sac area. ,- -~---- - - --~'"^·--"<---~___~__'_ø_~_________~____,"_-._ Mr. Hedgcoth pointed out on the map where the light standards would be located. He showed which lights will be directed in an arc away ttom the residential area. He pointed out other lights which will have a circular pattern that will spill over into the cul-de-sac area. He stated that they do not want to create a dark area in the cul-de-sac. He also stated that in discussions with Mr. Pitstick it was mentioned that the City might put a street light on the cul-de-sac since the cul-de-sac is dedicated to the City and becomes City property. Mr. Laubacher asked if the four lights that are directly next to the residents along the back wall could be lowered. Mr. Hedgcoth indicated that those will be shielded and that it would be possible to lower them to IS-ft. Mr. Welch thanked Mr. Hedgcoth for providing trees every SO-ft. He stated that he is concerned that there are street lights every SO-ft along Nancy. He asked for an indication of the wattage of those lights. Mr. Hedgcoth stated that the engineer told him it is a type P-I fixture. The wattage ranges ttom 40 to 400. Mr. Hedgcoth believes the bulbs will be 400 wattage. Mr. Welch agreed with Mr. Laubacher's suggestion that the lights along the back be reduced to IS-ft. Mr. Hedgcoth stated that he will furnish an illumination plan, showing the coverage, before going to City Council. Mr. Welch asked if Mr. Hedgcoth had any questions on the Public Works comments. Mr. Hedgcoth indicated that most of those have already been handled. Chairman Bowen asked for further questions. There were none and the Chairman called for a motion. Mr. Nehring, seconded by Mr. Laubacher, motioned to approve PZ 2002-19 subject to Staff and Public Works comments and to include submission of an illumination plan when this goes to Council. Mr. Welch asked for an amendment that the architect have the specific masonry type to present to Council. Mr. Nehring also asked for four IS-ft lights along the back and six IS-ft lights along Nancy (instead of the 2S-ft lights). Mr. Hedgcoth stated that he is concerned that there might not be enough illumination ttom a 15-ft light to expand to all Huggins's areas along Nancy. Mr. Welch replied that he would like to keep it in the motion and suggested that Mr. Hedgcoth justify other use to the Council. Chairman Bowen explained to Mr. Hedgcoth that if he could demonstrate to the Council that Huggins would need 25- ft lights along Nancy, the Council would give consideration for it. Mr. Nehring restated his motion at the recording secretary's request. Mr. Nehring, seconded by Mr. Laubacher, motioned to approve PZ 2002-19 subject to Staff and Public Works comments to include a submission of an illumination plan, to include lowering the lights along the back side of the property and along Nancy Lane from 25-ft to 15-ft, and to include the type of masonry that will be used. The motion was approved unanimously (7-0). Other Business CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Planning & Inspections Department Council Meeting Date: 8/26/02 Subject: Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance amending Agenda Number: PZ 2002-20 and revising the Planned Development regulations of the city. Ordinance. No. 2647 Case Summary A number of concerns continue to arise regarding our current planned development (PD) regulations and how they have become a way to get around newly established development standards. It seems that most requests for planned developments involve deviations from zoning district regulations in an effort to reduce standards rather than dealing with unusual situations on properties that are hard to develop. Planned Development (PD) zoning was established to allow larger tracts with mixed use~ that could be processed concurrently for simplicity and efficiency or to allow difficult tracts to be developed or redeveloped with reasonable variances. Planned Developments are not typically used simply to get variances from signs or subdivision regulations. ',-, The City Council has established Quality Development and Redevelopment as a major goal for the City, and has adopted new regulations to raise the community's development standards. In the past couple of years the City of North Richland Hills has adopted new standards for masonry, landscaping, buffering and architectural features while many of the planned development cases involve reduction in these standards without offering offsetting amenities. In an effort to encourage proper community standards for planned development requests while still allowing for unique development and redevelopment situations, staff is recommending that PD requests be categorized into three types of requests. (RD) Redevelopment of Existing Sites (R) New Single Family Developments (NR) New Multifamily & Commercial Developments Source of Funds: Bonds (GOlRev.) Operating Budget Other _ ~ .Jt2~ Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Finance Director Department Head Signature ··~~~c ¡ - ity Mm1a or gnature , --- PZ 2002-20 PD changes CC sum. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Redevelopment of Existing Sites (RD) - Staff is recommending that all planned development requests that involve redevelopment of existing sites be able to request deviations from all development standards when unique situations or difficulties are demonstrated in meeting current development requirements. Each deviation request not caused by an existing condition shall require documentation outlining a unique development request other than financial. New Single Family PD's (R)- Staff is recommending that all new planned development requests that involve single family developments must meet the following minimum standards: -must be a minimum of 10 acres -can only deviate lot size and access -no deviations from general condtions such as fences, parking and garage entry requirements -restricted to maximum density of base district New Non-Residential and Combined PD's (NR) - Staff is recommending that all new planned development requests that involve commercial developments or combined commercial and residential planned developments must meet the following minimum standards: ......... -must be able to describe a unique development situation, other than financial for all requested variances -are limited to 40% residential uses -cannot increase the overall density as established in the base district -are restricted to deviations from land uses, lot and area requirements, parking, landscaping, screening and lighting -are not allowed to apply for deviations from signs and masonry requirements Staff is recommending the establishment of the above mentioned categories for planned development requests. We think this will support new development standards yet allow for unique situations and hard to develop properties to seek relief and encourage proper development in North Richland Hills. Recommendation: The Planning & Zoning Commission has had a briefing on this item on Thursday, August 8,2002. The Planning & Zoning Commission will meet on Thursday, August 22,2002 for a formal vote. PZ 2002-20 PC changes CC Page 2 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. 2647 2 4 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 520 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, REVISING THE REQUIREMENTS FORPD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 6 8 10 WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning the matters herein dealt with, which recommendations were made after the holding of a public hearing before said Commission on such matters; and 12 14 16 WHEREAS, notice has been published of the time and place of a public hearing held before the City Council concerning the changes herein made, which public hearing has been duly held; and, 18 20 WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance herein made is in the best interest of the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of North Richland Hills; NOW, THEREFORE, 22 24 26 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: 28 Section 1: THAT Section 520 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of North Richland Hills be amended to read as follows: 30 "SECTION 520: PD - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 32 A. GENERAL PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION 34 36 The Planned Development District is intended to provide for three distinct types of applications requiring planning and site plans but with differing standards. It is designated by a base district designation with a "PD" suffix. The three types of applications are: 38 40 (a) Redevelopment of fully developed non-residential property (RD); (b) New residential development (R); and (c) New non-residential development and new development of non-residential uses combined with residential uses (NR). Such planned development designations shall only be used with base districts with appropriate regulations to permit flexibility in the use and design of land and buildings in situations where modification of specific base district regulations is not contrary to its intent and purpose, or 42 44 W:\NRH\General\Ordinances\Text Change.2647.wpd 1 2 significantly inconsistent with the planning on which it is based and will not be hannful to the community. While great flexibility is given to provide special restrictions which will allow development not otherwise permitted, procedures are established herein to insure against misuse of the increased flexibility. The PD suffix for PD districts created after October 1,2002, shall include the type "(RD), (R), or (NR)" PD application. 4 6 B. PERMITTED USES 8 10 Any use specified in the base district as limited by the site plan adopted by the ordinance granting a Planned Development District shall be permitted in that district. The size, location, appearance, and method of operation may be specified to the extent necessary to insure compliance with the purpose of this ordinance. 12 14 c. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 16 1. General Development standards for each separate PD District shall be those of the base district as modified by the site plan adopted by the ordinance granting the PD District. No PD District shall be created except in combination with a base district designation. All PD applications and site plans shall list all requested deviations from the standard requirements set forth in the base district (applications without this list will be considered incomplete). 18 20 22 24 2. (RD) Standards Redevelopment (RD) PD Districts shall be limited to non-residentially zoned property with existing structures and may be of any size and shall be allowed deviations from the base district iflisted in a site plan approved by the ordinance creating the PD District. Such deviations shall be limited to lot and area requirements, land uses, masonry requirements, parking, access, screening, landscaping, accessory buildings, signs, lighting, and other requirements as the City Council may deem appropriate. 26 28 30 32 34 3. (R) Standards Residential (R) PD Districts shall be a minimum often (10) acres in size and shall not be permitted any deviation from base district standards except for access and for lot and area requirements and then only if the maximum density of the base district is not exceeded. No deviation from General Conditions of base districts shall be permitted. Site plans may include typical elevations and shall include any restrictions imposed by council action. 36 38 40 42 4. (NR) Standards NR PD shall be limited to new non-residential and combined residential and non- residential undeveloped property and shall be a minimum of three acres in size and shall meet all the base district requirements unless the site plan approved by the ordinance creating the district specifically allows one or more of the following 44 W:\NRH\General\Ordinances\Text Change.2647.wpd 2 44 2 deviations therefrom: land uses, lot and area requirements, parking, access, screening, fencing, landscaping, accessory buildings, density, and lighting. No deviations from sign and masonry requirements of the base district shall be permitted. Residential uses in these districts shall not exceed 40% of total area of the district. 4 6 D. ORDINANCE REQUIRED 8 10 In approving a Planned Development District, the amending ordinance shall include the base district designation with a PD suffix and, for PD districts created after September 1, 2002, the application, (RD), (R), (NR) shall also be included. The ordinance shall adopt a site plan which shall contain any deviations permitted for such district. No PD designation shall be effective without an ordinance adopted site plan. 12 14 E. PROCEDURES 16 18 1. Application Procedure - All applications for a Planned Development shall be treated in the same manner as an amendment to this Ordinance as prescribed in Article 2, Section 200, "Amendments." 20 22 2. Site Plan Requirements - A site plan shall accompany every application for a Planned Development submittal. Such site plan shall include the contents established for Planned Development Site Plans contained in Article 5, Section 510 together with a list of requested deviations as permitted by this Section. If such plan is approved, it shall be made a part of the amending ordinance. The city council is not restricted to approving or rejecting such site plan, and may modify, require amendments to the plan or require additional detail. The council may approve the plan as amended or modified, or it may refuse to grant the change. 24 26 28 30 3. Explanation of Reason for Application - Each application shall include an explanation for the reason why deviations from the base district requirements are being sought and identify rationale other than financial considerations for each such deviation" 32 Section 2: Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of the comprehensive zoning ordinance as amended by this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon final conviction thereof fined in an amount not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each day any such violation shall be allowed to continue shall constitute a separate violation and punishable hereunder. 34 36 38 Section 3: It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses and phrases of this ordinance are severable and, if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by the final judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the city council without the 40 42 W:\NRH\General\Ordinances\Text Change.2647.wpd 3 2 incorporation in this ordinance of any such invalid phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. 4 Section 4: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon passage. 6 AND IT IS SO ORDAINED. 8 Passed on this 26th day of August, 2002. 10 12 14 By: 16 ATTEST: 18 20 Patricia Hutson, City Secretary 22 Approved as to form and legality: 24 26 George A. Staples, Attorney 28 W:\NRH\General\Ordinances\Text Change.2647.wpd CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Oscar Trevino, Mayor 4 " CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Planning & Inspections Department Council Meeting Date: 8/26/02 Subject: Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance amending Agenda Number: , PZ 2002-21 the Zoning Ordinance to allow educational and institutional uses in residential districts. Ordinance. No. 2648 Case Summary Staff has reviewed the current zoning ordinance and is recommending allowing some limited educational and institutional uses in residential districts. Our current ordinance allows for public schools, post offices, churches and water towers as a permitted use but does not allow other public and institutional uses that might be present near a residential neighborhood. Requiring these uses to be rezoned to office or commercial zoning could create spot zoning in a residential zone. However the below mentioned uses could be appropriately placed in some residential settings. The Planning & Zoning Commission at the August 8 regular meeting recommended bringing back a formal ordinance. '''-- Staff is recommending that Community Centers, Fire Stations, Private Schools, Senior Citizen Centers and Municipal Buildings be allowed by right in Residential Districts. However, the Planning & Zoning Commission at the August 8 regular meeting recommended bringing back a formal ordinance under a Special Use Permit. In most instances public facilities are needed in all areas of the city for public safety and public service responses, and therefore it is staffs belief that significant consideration is given to delivery of services to assure a timely response throughout the city. Staff also feels that adequate consideration and sensitivity is given in selecting a site for a municipal facility with City Council oversight that further zoning control through a special use permit is not warranted. Recommendation: Staff is recommending that Community Centers, Fire Stations, Private Schools and Senior Citizen Centers be allowed in the R1 S, R1, R2, R3, R4D, R6T, R8 and R7MF districts as a permitted use. The Planning & Zoning Commission will meet on Thursday, August 22, 2002 for a formal vote. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GOlRev.) Operating Budget _ Othe< - ¿f ~c,Q j)~tt:A Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Finance Director i Department Head Signature '-I rIøoc~~~ PZ 2002-21 Inst uses CC sum, , 2 4 6 8 10 -~--",."",">--~-----_._-~...,..,.-,.__.."."..~,~,-------._"""","~----. ORDINANCE NO. 2648 PZ 2002-21 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 310C OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, AND ALLOWING CERT AIN EDUCA TIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning the matters herein dealt with, which recommendations were made after the holding of a public hearing before said Commission on such matters; and 12 14 WHEREAS, notice has been published of the time and place of a public hearing held before the City Council concerning the changes herein made, which public hearing has been duly held; and, 16 18 WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance herein made is in the best interest of the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of North Richland Hills; NOW, THEREFORE, 20 22 24 26 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: 28 Section 1 : 30 32 Section 2: 34 36 38 Section 3: 40 42 Section 4: 44 THA T the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of North Richland Hills is hereby amended by amending Table 310C of Section 310 of such zoning ordinance to read as set forth on Exhibit "A" hereto. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of the comprehensive zoning ordinance as amended by this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon final conviction thereof fined in an amount not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each day any such violation shall be allowed to continue shall constitute a separate violation and punishable hereunder. The City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause the publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clauses of this ordinance as an alternative method of publication provided by law. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon passage. AND IT IS SO ORDAINED. 1 Passed on this 26th day of August, 2002. 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 ATTEST: By: Patricia Hutson, City Secretary Approved as to form and legality: George A. Staples, Attorney W:\NRH\General\Ordinances\Zone text ord 2648.wpd CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Oscar Trevino, Mayor 2 ^ .~ 'm~'_,,"^._,¥.___"'~__'_"__~_~_~_ RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRIC cIÎ GJ ~ 3 ro CD IQ a:::: IQ u c: IQ IQ IQ ë 'E GJ ¡¡ ,Q Section 310 ~ ë "E ë CD CD U ~ 'E CD CD CD "E cIÎ E " GJ 'E '~ ro " " " IQ Q) CD ëiS U) ëi) co ëiS ëñ ëñ "E " a:::: 0 Q) GJ CII 'u E u. ëiS :r: a:::: 'a ..... CD CD Q) U. U) E Q) CD a:::: a:::: a:::: Q) Q) 0 E ro oð " (J) " ~ Table of Permitted O¡ a:::: CD 0 ~ E ï:: ~ ~ ~ ëiS CD ..... E .: .. E ro ëi) .!: c: Q) () ü5 'E 'E 'E Q) c: ~ .. '¡: 0 0 .¡:: ~ ..... a:::: E :.:J 13 co 0 CJ () ëi) '0 ~ co co co 0 .æ u. ,Q :::II c: .!: ëã u. u. u. X .!: - :; E 5 ..... ~ - () 'u CD 0 ~ .: 0 " Uses CD Q) Q) ëi c: -' c: "3 CD ,~ E 0 E E CD O¡ Õ> Õ> ~ co ~ () '0 .2 Õ c. ~ 0 0 CII CII '5 (J) .S c: .S 0 ..... ~ IE 0 1: '0 0 ~ CD U. Z CJ ::c 0 .!: (J) ü5 (J) N ~ 0 0> Q) () (J) 0 ~ ..-- :.:J ~ ..-- ..-- C\I (\') "<t <D co :r: I'-- ..-- U) U) CJ () (J) a:::: a:::: a:::: a:::: a:::: a:::: a:::: ~ a:::: 0 z CJ ::c 0 ..-- £::! ::J - C. EDUCATIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL Cemetery/Mausoleum p p S S S Church, Sanctuary, Rectory or p p p p p p p p p p p p p P P Synagogue Civic, Social/Fraternal Organization C C C C C S S S S S College/University p p p Community Center P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Dance Studio/Martial Arts Studio P P P P Day Care Center/Kindergarten S p p p p C S S S Emergency Clinic p p p p p P Family Counseling Clinic p p p Facility for care of alcoholic, narcotic, S S S S Psychiatric rehab Fire Station P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Hospital C C C C S S S S bi9fafy P P P P P P P Medical Clinic p p p p P P Museum p p p Nursing HomelOrphanage p p p P Post Office p p p p p p p p p p p p p P P Private or Parochial School P P P P P P P P P P P P Pblblic Bblilding (not listed olsowhoro)Municipal Building P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Public School P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Senior Citizen Center P P P P P P P P P P P Social Services Administrative Office p p p p S Social Services Facility with Temporary Lodging S S S S Trade or Business School S S S S P .. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS " Department: Planning & Inspections Department Council Meeting Date: 8/26/02 ',-- Subject: Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance increasing Agenda Number: PZ 2002-22 the minimum residential masonry requirements and changing methodology for masonry. Ordinance. No. 2649 Case Summary The Planning & Zoning Commission has directed staff to bring forward an ordinance that would increase the masonry requirements for residential structures in North Richland Hills. Our current ordinance requires 75% masonry and it is calculated as only the first floor of residential structures. Based on a review of area cities the Planning & Zoning Commission is recommending going to a requirement of a minimum of 90% of the structures be masonry and to include the second floor of the structure. However, the City of North Richland Hills is consistent with other cities in our area and the 75% requirement allows for some creativity in single family house appearances. The other minor change includes a revision that allows accessory buildings in the R1 S district to be exempt from the masonry requirement. Section 640 of the zoning ordinance already exempts accessory buildings from height, roof pitch and masonry regulations. Recommendation: \,- The Planning & Zoning Commission is recommending that the minimum masonry requirement for residential structures be 90% of all wall sections on all floors above the finish floor level of the foundation. The Planning & Zoning Commission will meet on Thursday, August 22,2002 for a formal vote. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GOlRev.) Operating Budget Other = ø ~~r-p~ Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Finance Director ciMJΕ’~ Department Head Signature ',--. PZ 2002-22 Res Masonry CC sum. RESIDENTIAL MASONRY REQUIREMENTS FOR AREA CITIES Masonry % 2nd Floor Stucco/EFI S/Hardyplank North Richland Hills 75% No No No PD's Hurst 80% No Yes Yes No Euless 90% Yes Yes No No Bedford 65% No No No No Colleyville N/A South lake N/A 2 4 6 8 10 ORDINANCE NO. 2649 PZ 2002-22 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 600 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, AND INCREASING THE RESIDENTIAL MASONRY MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND CHANGING CALCULATION METHODOLOGY FOR MASONRY; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning the matters herein dealt with, which recommendations were made after the holding of a public hearing before said Commission on such matters; and 12 14 16 18 WHEREAS, notice has been published of the time and place of a public hearing held before the City Council concerning the changes herein made, which public hearing has been duly held; and, 20 WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance herein made is in the best interest of the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of North Richland Hills; NOW, THEREFORE, 22 24 26 28 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: 30 Section 1 : 32 34 Section 2: 36 38 40 Section 3: 42 44 Section 4: THAT the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of North Richland Hills is hereby amended by amending Table 6-1 of Section 600 of such zoning ordinance to read as set forth on Exhibit "A" hereto. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of the comprehensive zoning ordinance as amended by this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon final conviction thereof fined in an amount not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each day any such violation shall be allowed to continue shall constitute a separate violation and punishable hereunder. The City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause the publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clauses of this ordinance as an alternative method of publication provided by law. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon passage. 1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 AND IT IS SO ORDAINED. Passed on this 26th day of August, 2002. By: ATTEST: Patricia Hutson, City Secretary Approved as to form and legality: 20 22 24 George A. Staples, Attorney W:\NRH\General\Ordinances\Zone txt ord2649.wpd CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Oscar Trevino, Mayor 2 ARTICLE 6 SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS Section 600. MASONRY REQUIREMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS A. Required Masonry Percentage The minimum required percentage of masonry on the exterior wall surface of all residential primary structures, as viewed from each elevation, shall be in accordance with the schedule contained in Table 6-1. EXEMPTION: An exemption to the masonry requirement shall apply to existing residential structures, including all permanent structures, which do not meet the masonry requirement. Any enlargement of an existing residential structure, including all permanent structures, shall provide an amount of masonry which matches the adjacent surfaces of the existing structure. Table 6-1 Minimum Required Masonry Percentage Residential Districts Zoning Districts Structure Type LL ø C/) 0 ~ ~ ..... ..... (\ ('t) ...,. co ex) r-- 0 « Q: Q: Q: Q: Q: Q: Q: Q: a.. Primary Structures 75% 75% +ã-ºk +ã-ºk +ã-ºk +ã-ºk +ã-ºk +ã-ºk 100% 75% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% Accessory Bldgs. NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA (under 200 s.f.) Accessory Bldgs. NA +ã-ºk 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% (200 s.f. or more NA (See OréiA:JAÐe 2427) (See Ordinance XXXX) B. Masonry Calculation New m3sonry construction sh311 consist of 3ny combin3tion of brick or stono, or if 3ppro\.'ed by the City Council, other equiv31ent in 3ppo:Jr3nco masonry m:Jtori3ls. For the purposo of this requirement, tho extorior 'Nail surface sh311 be defined 3S tho aro:J botwoon the exposed exterior 'N311 surfaco bot\voon tho top of the found3tion 3nd the pl3te of tho first floor, as \'iewod from 3 ninety degroo (90°) porpondicul3r point f3cing tho wall. Masonry construction shall consist of any combination of brick, tile, stone, concrete block, or precast or reinforced concrete materials. This requirement shall apply to all wall sections on all floors above the finish floor level of the foundation. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS i> ---~. ' Department: Planning & Inspections Department Council Meeting Date: 8-26-02 Subject: A Public Hearing to consider a request by Birdville Agenda Number: SRB 2002-02 Independent School District for hardship variances to Sign Regulations Ordinance No. 2640 Case Summary: The applicant is proposing to erect an electronic message board along the Precinct Line Road frontage just east of the Birdville Athletic Center parking lot(approximately 20 feet behind the existing sidewalk). The site is currently zoned U Institutional. The Sign Ordinance permits electronic message boards outside of the Freeway Overlay Zone as long as the sign message consists of non-commercial, public related information. The current sign ordinance also allows a major development pole sign a maximum of 25 feet high and 100 square feet of area. The following summarizes the proposed sign versus current sign requirements; · Major Development Signs are limited to a maximum of 25' in height. The proposed sign is 17' 10" in height. · Major Development Signs are limited to 1 00 square feet of area. The proposed sign is 8 feet by 12 feet or 96 square feet. '-- . The area of the electronic message is limited to 40 square feet in size. The proposed message board contains 33.9 square feet. . A maximum of 10% of the total sign area may be devoted to a sponsor. BISD is proposing 14 inch letters for the Hudiburg sign or 13.36% of the total sign to be devoted to a sponsor. · The sign ordinance requires a double pole masonry-clad sign with landscaping. The proposed sign meets these requirements. Attached is a letter from the District outlining their desire- for an electronic message sign that would convey activities associated with the adjacent Fine Arts/Athletic Complex. The District plans to partner with Hudiburg Chevrolet in construction of the sign. Hudiburg will be the sign's sponsor and will have their namellogo attached as shown on the accompanying pictures. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GOlRev.) Operating Budget ~,~~ Department Head Signature Acc,ount Number Sufficient Funds A vattàhle Finance Director ~~ SRC 2002-02 Birdville Independent School District Sign Request Page 1 of2 ""'" 'f' . - .....,-'.,.,!'";";~.~,';~ . !'~~'~'F-T'" '';1'' -i""'"'7~."'~",..~·~.... .' CITY OF NORTH RICH LAND HILLS '~_. BISD originally requested a single pølesign with a sponsorship advertising area of 30%. As a result of encouragement from staff they have reduced the sponsorship area to 13% and changed to a two pole masonry clad sign with landscaping. The Sign Ordinance authorizes the Sign Review Board to grant variances to the Ordinance that will not be contrary to the public interest and where, because of special conditions, the enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship. BISD has outlined the public service aspect that the proposed sign would offer and states that the proposed sponsorship area' will allow them to effectively advertise events at the Athletic Complex. BISD is addressing the issue of hardship by stating that the difference in 14 inch letters for Hudiburg versus 10 inches gives approximately 350 feet of readable visibility of the sign. BISD also states that the sign is approximately 20 feet off the road and 14 inch letters are needed for proper visibility. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is not aware of a hardship that exists to prevent them from meeting our ordinance. BISD has attempted to meet the intent of the sign ordinance and will be presenting to Council their hardship request. , '-- '",- Page 2 of 2 r MID-CITIES BLVD. BISD FINE ARTS/ATHLETICS COMPLEX 200' Buffer Ε“ NRH SRB 2002-02 BISD Prepared by: Planning Dept. 7/12/02 "- '" "- WHATABURGER PROPOSED SIGN LOCATION ^, / ".^ J ____i I \ \ \ \ 250' ~ '----- I ',- '- " '--- 1J :;0 m () z () - r Z m ::u o o I 200 Feet I ·------- ,- -- -- - ,- d_ .------. --- - -._---- --.------ --,.--.. ~--_.-. . --- - ~ -- ._- -.- ----~_.._------_._._-- -.- - ------.-- -- ---.- - 'N ¡~H SIGN REVIEW BOARD APPLJCA TION C¡jy 01 Nor! -¡ Richland Hii/s 7301 NE Loop 820 (plr;iJse Jrint o( type all rr:slJ(JlISe~;) Norlh Rich/and Hills, TX -------.--.. _. 817427-6300 -- -- ---- ---- ..- .-'- ~ ----._-~.-----._--~------_._~-----. - ---~- ------- --..-------..--- ____n___ ________.______ PART 1. APPLJCANT INFORMATION t-'c-'--.----,----___ .,_______________,_______ ___, --- Ndrne 01 appl¡ciJnt: ]HJZI)V1 LLE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL Dl STIU CT SiJéE:! addr¡;ss of applicanl' ---- 6]25 EAST BELKNAP City/State/Zip Code of applicant: Telephone numbér of applicant: 8]7-547-5900 HALTOH C I T'l , TX 76] J 7 FAX number of applicant' 8]7-547-5909 Are you the owner of the Are you the owner's agent? NOTE: If you are not the owner of the property, you musl aHach propeny? a letter from the property owner giving you permission 10 submit 0 Yes 0 No ~ Yes D No this application, I PART 2. SUBJECT PROPERTY INFORMATION Subject Propeny Legal DesGrlptJon: I SEE ATTACHHENT A I , 1.0T 1 BLOCK 1 I Subject Property Street ,A.ddress: l 9200 MID CITIES BLVD. , NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TX 76180 PART 3. REQUEST TYPE I 0 ,/ 0 I Interpretation Request ¡;a Sign Variance Request Nonconforming Use ! , Current zoning Cl3SsliÎcation, Note: A map or plot plan of the property and drawings of the proposed I construction must be submitted with this application, The applicants or their II - INSTITUTIONAL ¡ representatives must be present at their scheduled public hearing, II hereby cer1ify tha1 I am, or that I represent. the legal owner of the propeny described above and do hereby submit this reouest for a variance for conSideration by the Sign Board Review, Dale JUNE 10, 2002 Print Name BILLY 'VL JODD Signature -- PART 4. FOR OFFiCE USE ONL Y ------ ._~---- _.__.._..~ ------ -------- Date of Review BO;Jrd r~ublic Heallllg: Taxes. liens and /-\ssessmenl~; Paid'! Coso Number 0 Yes 0 No ------------~. --- - -- ----- --"------- -- ----- ._--~-------- ---~~----- - ~ ----. --- ---------- -. --- -- ------- --- ____u__ Vall~lIlcl' /-\ Jproved Datl' of FineJi Aç jull: Ft'e~;: $5000U 0 YI'::; 0 l'>Jo "-- , ,-- (;c) lditiull:. 01 Apl)lov;I/: '1 hi:, IcqlJ(::.1 wI/I /loll)c :;Uw¡jlllr'd IOJ tW:JII/lil ulltilllic :Jpplir::ltir) 11r:c I:; paid, - .. -- ~D ~~ --~~._...._.p~.~-- Birdville Fine Arts/Athletics Complex ~¡¿( [J Mjd (:i\j,,:; Elvd, . N, Hid ¡], J Id ]JiIJ:;, ']"'):0:; '/(j I H(J . H I '/,:14'/:,~HIII . ]'( IX H ¡ ,/,:¡i]'I.:,~JfJ~ . www,IJi¡dvilk"I: j ¿,\}:.U:; June 12, 2002 City of North Richland Hills 730] N, E. Loop 820 North Rjchland Hills, TX 76180 Dear Mayor and City Council, The Birdville School District enjoys a great tradition and relationship with the City of North Rjchland Hills and we want to thank you for your support of the past, present, and future accomplishments of our district. The Birdville School District is fortunate to enjoy the multiple uses of its Fine Arts/Athletics Complex located at 9200 Mid Cities Blvd. in North Rjchland Hills, The Complex is host to football and soccer games from the Birdville School District, metroplex, and state, as well as numerous band and ROTC competitions. The second floor conference/banquet center allows the district and its associated groups to have access to a first class venue for meetings, seminars, and banquets. The Birdville School District is also pleased to share its state of the art complex with the City of North Richland Hills and the multiple events the city promotes, The District, however, believes that the complex is in need of the ability to communicate all the activities that are associated with the complex. The best way for the complex to communicate to the community is through an electronic message center. BirdvilIe School District has the opportunity to partner with another major employer and business leader in the city, Hudiburg Chevrolet, in a joint venture to place a Light Emitting Diode display (LED) on Precinct Line. This addition to the Fine Arts/Athletics Complex will further distance the complex from the competition as the top Fine Arts/Athletics Complex in the state, The message center will serve as a major voice for the district and events that are held at the Fine Arts/Athletics Complex. A message center will give the complex added appeal to attract more events, because of the added ability to promote and advertise events months, weeks, and days in advance, and up to twenty times per hour. Increased event scheduling aids the areas economy as well as the district revenue Birdville Independent Schoo] District The Birdville School District appreciates, as always, working with the City of North Richland Hills and is presenting this petition for the councils approval of variances to its sign regulations. The approved variances enable the district to accomplish its goal of providing the community, faculty, staff, and students with a valuable communication tool. The Birdville School District thanks you for your service to the city and your consideration of this variance request. Sincerely, .J~ Dr. Stephen Waddell Superintendent, Birdville Independent School District PART 5. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST List the pertinent section(s) of the Sign Regulations and indicate the specific interpretation(s), variance(s), or nonconforming use exceptiones) being requested. Section 12 CD) Commercial sign sponsorship. maximum area of company name and/or logo is limited to 10% of sign area. The district is requesting an increase of3.37% to a total of 13.37% of the sign area be made available for company name and/or logo. This will increase the letter size on the sign from 10 inches to 14 inches. State the grounds for the request and detail any special conditions that cause hardships that in your opinion justify the variances or exceptions being requested. Explain any unique circumstances, if applicable, not considered by the Sign Regulations. The Birdville School District takes pride in the fact that any construction by the district be first class and enhance the area. The variances sought by the district do not minimize the integrity of the Sign Regulations or the community. The request for an increased area of sponsorship panel allows the district the ability to market the marquee to a single sponsor and because of visibility of sponsors logo the sponsor is willing to fund the entire cost of the marquee. The single sponsor gives the marquee more credibility and class. verses the alternative of multiple sponsors and our marquee having the appearance of a strip center sign. Hardshivs: 1.) 2" letter height equals 50 foot visibility with an average speed of 40 :MPH. according to code the maximum height of letter is 10 inches. a passer buyer would not have quality visibility of the sign until about 250 feet. Increasing the letter size to 14 inches gives the passer buy approximately 350 feet of readable visibility of the sign which is about the distance from the north and south edge of the property line. that fronts Precinct line dr. 2.) The sign being offset a minimum of twenty feet from the property line also creates a hardship to clear visibility. but visibility improves about 40% with the 14 inch letters. 3,) There are businesses on each side of the property line as well as numerous telephone poles. which create obstructions to view the sign. once again visibility improves approximately 40% with the 14 inch letters. JUL-17-02 WED 02:08 PM FAX NO. P. 01 Memorandum To: John Pitstick. Director of Development. City of North Richland Hills From: Mike Morgan, Development Manager CC: Hurst City Council and City Manager ~ Date: July 17 2002 He: Case #SRB 2002-02, a request from Sirdville ISO to vary from your City's sign ordinance regarding masonry clad support poles. Thank you for notifying us of this case. As we understand it, Birdville ISD wishes to erect a 17' 10", single pole, electronic message board along Precinct Line Road frontage just east of their stadium parking lot. They are asking for a variance from your sign ordinance that requires two masonry-clad support columns. They wish to use one support column. The City Of Hurst recommends adherence to your sign ordinance requirements as well as efforts to soften the effect of such a large sign. As you know. Hurst and North Richland Hills share opposite sides of Precinct Line Road and both cities have an interest in the area's visual environment. Hurst is in the process of amending its sign ordinances, and one goal is to reduce the proliferation of pole signs. We will be requiring more monument signs and multi-tenant signs to avoid the visual clutter of constant signage evident in many commercial corridors in the Metroplex. Hurst admires and wishes to emulate the examples of attractive, multi-tenant, landscaped signage at an appropriate height evident at the Crossing Shopping Center in North Richland Hills. There are no signs for this entire 400,000 sf shopping center of the type and size requested by your applicant. In addition, North Richland Hills is to be congratulated for the tasteful and appropriately sized signs (about 15 feet) at Home Depot and Rooster's Bay restaurant (two masonry columns) and CVS's monument signs. Recent developments on the Hurst side have also been held to lower heights than requested. We have been asking for and getting multi-tenant or monument signs, usually landscaped to improve their appearance. Examples include the CookChildren's clinic and Rosa's Café. Even the Wal-Mart Super Center to be constructed on Precinct Line will only have a 20 foot. two-column, multi-tenant sign, masonry clad to match the new building, and topped with a metal arch similar to other roof architecture along Precinct Line Road. At its HalWOod entrance, Wal-Mart will only have an 8-foot high, landscaped monumE:V't sign. We recognize the school district's interest in presenting electronic messages of upcoming activities and their desire for financial assistance by leasing a percentage of the sign to commercial interests. However, we think an appropriate example of how to do that is the relatively low monument sign at Tarrant County College on SH 26. TeC's electronic sign is landscaped. its masonry matches the campus, and its size at 1 JUL-17-02 WED 02:08 PM ,\, FAX NO. P. 02 about 12~15 feet is appropriate for its location. We recommend that 8írdvilfe ISD follow that model for signage on Precinct Line Road. BISD already has a massive sign on the stadium's east wall, and no one can miss its location. From Rooster's Bay south to the Crossing, the area is dominated by the concrete parking field for the stadium. Rather than a large, intrusive sign at this location, what the area needs is more greenery to soften and humanize the effect of the concrete. We respectfully suggest that every effort should be made to control the size of the sign, to ensure that it is landscaped, and to guide the school district to a design more consistent with the other signage in the area, with particular emphasis on the quality appearance of the electronic sign at TCe on SH 26. Again, thank you for the opportunity to give input. . pago 2 ~I ',---, ' '- \ '-. ' __'if '. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: BudQet & Research Council Meeting Date: 8/26/02 Subject: Public HearinQ on Proposed Tax Rate for 2002-2003 Fiscal Year Agenda Number: GN 2002-100 The proposed tax rate for 2002-2003 is 57¢, which is above the effective tax rate calculation required of Texas cities. The effective tax rate is defined as the rate that would produce approximately the same property tax revenues that were generated last year. This year's effective tax rate is calculated at $.549631. This is primarily because some property values increased and we also experienced an increase in new construction. The proposed 57¢ tax rate is distributed as follows: Interest & Sinking Fund (Debt Service) Maintenance & Operations (General Fund) .240647 .329353 State law mandates that a rate 3% above the effective tax rate requires a public hearing. It is therefore necessary to conduct a public hearing on the tax rate and allow public comment on this proposed rate. The "Notice of Public Hearing" has been published in accordance with State law and was published in the August 15, 2002 Star Telegram. The publication was a quarter page advertisement and listed the City Council members who voted in support of the tax rate when it was discussed at the Council meeting on August 12, 2002. Per State law, the "Notice of Public Hearing" has also been posted on the City website and run as 60 second spots on Citicable. At the August 12 meeting Council voted to maintain the 57¢ tax rate for the tenth consecutive year. The hearing is advertised for 7:00 p.m. on August 26, 2002. In order to obtain the maximum input of the citizens on the proposed tax rate, it is suggested that the public hearing be opened and public comment permitted. Recommendation: To direct staff to place an ordinance on the September 9, 2002 City Council agenda to adopt a tax rate of 57¢ for fiscal year 2002-2003. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Othi«~(' De artment Head Si nature Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds Available ORDINANCE NO. xxxx AN ORDINANCE LEVYING A TAX RATE FOR THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS FOR THE 2002 TAX YEAR BE IT ORDAINED AND ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS THAT: We, the City Council of the City of North Richland Hills do hereby levy or adopt the tax rate on $100 valuation for this City for tax year 2002 as follows: $ .329353 for the purposes of maintenance and operations. $ .240647 for the payment of principal and interest on debt of this City. $ .570000 total tax rate. The tax assessor-collector is hereby authorized to assess and collect the taxes of the City of North Richland Hills on this the 9th day of September 2002. 1. That there is hereby levied and shall be collected as provided by law, an Ad Valorem tax for the year 2002 on all property, real and personal, except such property as may be exempt from taxation by Constitutions in the statutes of the State of Texas, and ordinances and resolutions of the City of North Richland Hills, situated within the corporate limits of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas, on January 1, 2002 and that the amount to be applied to the value of such property shall be 57¢ per $100 valuation. 2. That the tax so levied and assessed shall be apportioned to the accounts and funds in the amount as set forth above. The amounts collected for payment of principal and interest on debt of the City shall be deposited into an interest and sinking fund for that purpose until a total of $6,750,000 is deposited from the 2002 Ad Valorem tax levy. 3. That the taxes provided for herein are in accordance with the appropriate State statutes. 4. Ad Valorem taxes levied by this Ordinance shall be due and payable on October 1, 2002, and shall become delinquent on the first day of February 2003. Payment of such tax is due as provided by the Texas Property Tax Code. 5. If the tax is unpaid after February 1, 2003, such tax will become delinquent and penalty and interest will attach and accrue as provided by the Statutes of the Texas Property Tax Code Sec. 33.01. 6. In the event the taxes become delinquent and in the event such delinquent taxes are referred to an attorney for collection, an additional amount of fifteen percent (15%) of the total amount of tax, penalty and interest then due shall be added as collection costs to be paid by the taxpayer. 7. Taxes herein levied and uncollected shall be a first prior and superior lien against the property, and the said lien shall be superior liens charges, and encumbrances, and such lien shall attach to personal property with the same priority as to real property. 8. The lien provided herein shall be attached as of January 1, 2002. 9. Should any section, provIsion or clause of the Ordinance be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. 10. The Ordinance shall become effective from and after the date of its approval and adoption as provided by law. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas upon first and final reading, at a regular meeting on the 9th day of September 2002. Oscar Trevino - Mayor ATTEST: Patricia Hutson - City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Attorney for City APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Karen Bostic, Managing Director ·... CITY OF NORTHRICHLAND HILLS ~ Department: BudQet & Research Council Meeting Date: 8/26/02 Subject: Public HearinQ on Proposed 2002-2003 BudQet Agenda Number: GN 2002-101 The budget work session to review the proposed 2002-2003 budget was held August 2-3, 2002. At the work session, City Council reviewed the operating funds budget, the capital project funds budget, and the budgets for the Crime Control & Prevention District and the Park & Recreation Facilities Development Corporation. Subsequent to this session, the changes City Council has, requested have been included in the 2001-2002 Revised Budget and the 2002-2003 Proposed Budget. The notice of public hearing was published in the Star Telegram newspaper in accordance with State law. The public hearing for the 2002-2003 Annual Budget was advertised for 7:00 p.m., August 26, 2002. \ At the August 3 budget meeting, the Crime Control District Board reviewed the proposed 2002-2003 Crime Control & Prevention District Budget and recommended it to Council in the amount of $4,921,981. The Board will conduct a public hearing at 6:15 p.m. in the Council Chambers on August 26, 2002, and make its formal recommendation on the . proposed budget. ',- At its August 26 Board meeting, the Parks and Recreation Facilities Development Board reviewed the operating and capital projects budgets for the Corporation. They recommended approval of the budget. The Board will conduct a public hearing on these budgets at 6:30 p:m., August 26 and then make its formal recommendation to Council on adoption of the 2002-2003 Budget. The 2002-2003 Proposed Annual Operating Budget for all operating funds totals $79,717,374. The General Fund budget totals $31,442,605. The second largest operating fund is the Utility Fund with a proposed budget of $19,529,310. The General Debt Service Fund totals $7,933,046. The proposed budget for the Aquatic Park is $3,593,514 and the proposed budget for the Park & Recreation Facilities Development Fund is $8,756,566. The Crime Control & Prevention District proposed budget for 2002-2003 is $4,921,981. ;-- \ Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other ~~; I De artment Head Si nature Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Budget Director CITY OF NORTH·RICHLAND HILLS "- The Golf Course budget for 2002-2003 is proposed at $2,091,040 and a $1 increase to the .. green fee ceiling will be introduced August 30th. The 2002-2003 proposed Capital Projects Budget totals $36,114,530. The 2002-2003 Proposed budget is based on èontinuing the 57¢ tax rate for the tenth year. The notice of public hearing has been published in accordance with the City Charter requirements. The proposed budget document was filed with the City Secretary for public viewing on August 5, 2002. Recommendation: To open the public hearing and receive public comments for the Proposed 2002-2003 Budgets for both operations and capital projects. Following the public hearing, direct staff to draft an ordinance to adopt the annual budget at the September 9,2002 Council meeting. '- CITYOOUNCIL ACTION ITEM NRH Office of the City Manager CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ~ August 2, 2002 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of North Richland Hills North Richland Hills, Texas The past year has been a trying one for our nation. In the aftermath of the September 11 th terrorist attacks the American people banded together in support of a long fight against terrorism. However, the economy, which was already in a state of decline, continued to fall as the airline industry was at a stand still for days and the tourism industry suffered a blow from which it has not yet fully recovered. As a result, our local economy was affected. Fortunately, the City Council had the foresight to plan for days of economic downturn, and the City staff was instrumental in implementing a contingency plan to insure that the North Richland Hills budget remained sound. In the spirit of our country's unity and the patriotism that has flowed through all of us since that terrible day, the American flag and its colors are a fitting back drop for this year's budget. Direction: Goals and Values The goals established by the City Council for the City of North Richland Hills serve as a guide for our City in terms of our direction in planning for the future. This year these goals, as outlined below, were especially significant in preparing our work plan for the coming year as it is projected that the City will have fewer resources than we have had in the past: 1. SAFETY AND SECURITY - strive to be the safest City in Tarrant County; to provide top quality Police, Fire and Emergency Medical Services; to provide opportunities for Citizen involvement in community safety programs; to provide safe streets and neighborhoods. 2. QUALITY DEVELOPMENT - strive to insure a strong local economy and retail base; to provide a more streamlined permit process; to maintain standards in providing quality new development; to provide quality facilities and infrastructure; and to seek opportunities for developers to contribute to the quality of the community. 3. QUALITY REDEVELOPMENT & REINVESTMENT - strive to improve the quality of major corridors; to improve the quality of older neighborhoods; to insure that property owners are responsibly maintaining properties; to improve the infrastructure in older areas; to insure that citizens and businesses will continue to invest in North Richland Hills. P.O. Box 820609 . North Richland Hills, Texas' 76182-0609 7301 Northeast Loop 820' 817-427-6003' FAX 817-427-6016 -----~ 4. FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE CITY GOVERNMENT - strive to maintain a financially sound debt ratio with a reasonable debt structure; to use "pay as you go" financing when possible; to continue to seek upgrades to the City's bond rating; to support the fiscal policies of the City. 5. QUALITY OF LIFE AMENITIES FOR THE COMMUNITY - strive to provide well maintained parks, library, trails, recreation facilities and senior facilities; to provide more parks for the neighborhoods; to provide more family oriented facilities, programs and services; to expand cultural arts programs and activities; to provide improved special events for the community. 6. EFFECTIVE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM - strive to insure that the expansion of IH Loop 820 is completed with minimal disruption to City facilities; to provide expanded mass transportation opportunities; to improve the quality of neighborhood streets; to upgrade the major corridors; to provide for better air quality through better traffic flow. As a supplement to these Goals, the City Council established a set of COfe organizational values and assigned a specific meaning to each value to inspire city employees to strive toward excellence in the provision of services to our citizens. These core values are: RESPECT · Treating others in a courteous, fair and equitable manner · Valuing differences: points of view, style · Honoring the organization's chain of command · Acknowledging successes and the contribution of others · Following up with feedback SERVICE · Providing services to our community and others · Solving problems · Helping the customer to understand · Sensitive to the needs and feelings of others · Taking action, providing a timely response PRODUCTIVITY · Producing results, completing projects - on time, at or under budget · Planning your work activities to achieve goals · Meeting or exceeding job standards and expectations · Look for ways to be more productive while being cost effective INTEGRITY · Honest communication · Being trustworthy · Following through on your commitment 11 -,,'. · Acting with high professional, moral, and ethical standards · Supporting the City of North Richland Hills - goals, values and decisions RESPONSIBILITY · Being knowledgeable and skilled in your job · Holding yourself and others accountable for actions and results · Being loyal and taking ownership in the City goals, values, services and departmental work program · Taking pride in your work · Willingness to take command and initiative when appropriate INNOVATION · Looking for better ways to do your job · Willingness to learn · Being open to new ideas, new approaches · Willingness to take reasonable risks · Thinking creatively and evaluating options TEAMWORK · Participating and involving others in team efforts · Listening and understanding the other's viewpoint · Willingness to cooperate with others and share resources · Fulfilling defined roles and responsibilities · Work and resolve differences and disagreements Together these values make up the acronym R-SPIRIT, with respect listed first as the City Council felt that this was the most important value. The slogan used to refer to these values is Respect our Spirit indicating that those involved with the organization should strive to reflect these values in their daily work activities. In an effort to incorporate the core values into the daily lives of our City employees, a group of City employees developed and implemented a core values campaign and employee recognition program. The campaign involves highlighting one of each of the core values every two months throughout the year. The recognition program involves three different levels of recognition. These levels are "On the Spot" awards, bi-monthly core values awards, and an employee of the year award. Since the program has been implemented, 3 of the bi- monthly core values have been awarded. The Service award was presented to Tonja Tilley of the Library in March, the Productivity award was presented to Ken Raney of Support Services in May, and the Integrity award was presented to Clay Caruthers of Budget & Research in July. In addition, the Human Resources Department is planning an employee recognition banquet for January of next year where the first employee of the year award will be presented. 111 Accomplishments: Accountability to Citizens The following is a brief list of some of the items the City has accomplished as City Council and staff works toward the attainment of each City goal. As is evident from this list, the City goals are in fact the framework for identifying targets for action and establishing a work plan as many of the City Council's priorities were achieved or implemented this past fiscal year. Safety and Security 1. With the purchase of a new fire engine and a new "Frazer" ambulance, the Fire Department upgraded its equipment, which will allow the firefighters to respond more efficiently to emergency calls. 2. Defibrillator monitors were installed in several City facilities and several City employees were trained on the use of these life saving devices in an effort to help save lives by providing immediate response in cardiac emergency situations. 3. The outdoor warning siren system was upgraded to allow two way communication between the sirens and the central control points which will allow trouble shooting of sirens and readiness status at a glance. These sirens are tested daily to insure they are functioning properly. 4. Response time to priority 1 Police emergency calls continue to decrease going from 5 minutes and 32 seconds in 2000/2001 to 5 minutes 26 seconds in 2001/2002. 5. The special investigation unit continues its fight against drugs in our City. The unit made 93 arrests and seized $29,953 in cash as well as 3 vehicles belonging to drug dealers. 6. The Police Department installed a new Automated Fingerprinting Identification System allowing the NRHPD to connect to the Texas Department of Public Safety fingerprinting system and submit searches to the FBI's fingerprinting database. Quality Development 1. The City saw 179 new businesses open their doors this past year. These developments included a second Home Depot, a second super Wal-Mart with one of the most unique designs in the area, a Kroger signature store in The Crossing Shopping Center, a Staples Office Superstore, and CVS Pharmacy. 2. North Richland Hills experienced an increase in construction activity including 510,371 square feet of manufacturing, office, retail, restaurant and recreational space valued at $32.5 million. 3. Six City Entryway signs were installed at major corridors into North Richland Hills, helping individuals recognize when they are in NRH and improving the image of our City. IV 4. North Richland Hills saw more residential construction this past fiscal year with 334 new home starts and the issuance of residential permits valued at a total of $51.7 million. Quality Redevelopment and Reinvestment 1. The Neighborhood Identity Program was implemented this past year in an effort to stimulate community wide support and involvement in improving and enhancing the livability of neighborhoods and business districts in NRH. Property owners discarded 279.4 tons of debris including trash, fence materials, and brush during the Community Clean Up Days held as a part of this innovative program. 2. Both Senior Centers received renovations this past year. Bursey Road Senior Center received new flooring, energy efficient lighting, and new interior paint. Dan Echols Senior Center was expanded to 9,720 square feet, the interior was painted, and the center was retrofitted with energy efficient lighting. 3. NRH initiated steps to create a partnership with the City of Richland Hills to study the redevelopment of the South Grapevine Highway corridor. It is anticipated that redevelopment efforts in this area will spur further enhancements improving the appeal of this major corridor to our City. 4. Rufe Snow Drive and North Tarrant Parkway are under construction to widen and improve these major roadways in our City. These projects will improve access to businesses, promote mobility, ease traffic congestion, and improve the image of our City. 5. Reinvesting in aging infrastructure, the City replaced or repaired 2 miles of water main on 12 streets within the City. Financially Responsible City Government 1. North Richland Hills received its twelfth consecutive Distinguished Budget Award for the presentation of the North Richland Hills operating budget, and the Finance Department received the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the Certified Annual Financial report for the nineteenth consecutive year. 2. The City will save approximately $445,000 in interest expense over a 14 year period by issuing the 2002 refunding of general obligation bonds. In addition, the Debt Service Fund will see savings of $30,000 to $35,000 annually as a result of refunding. In fact, over the last 2 years, refunding existing debt has saved the city $1.5 million over the life of the debt. 3. A purchasing card program was implemented this past year. This program will decrease the amount of paper as well as the time it takes to purchase items under $1,000 dollars by giving selected individuals in each department the discretion to make these small dollar purchases with the use of these City issued cards. 4. North Richland Hills contracted with a new third party administrator for all medical and dental claims. This action was financially responsible in that it will lower the City's claims v administration fees, and freeze these rates until January 2004. In addition, the City expects to see a vast improvement in claims administration and customer service to our ' employees and retirees. Quality of Life Amenities for the Community 1. The Cultural Arts program is in its second year, and due to the success of the first "A Lotta Night Music" Concert Series, an additional concert was added this past spring. This concert series has been very successful. 2. The City Council approved a mechanism for funding Public Art last year, and established the Public Art Review Committee. This committee has been working actively to start a Public Art program in NRH and has already been successful in procuring loaned art for several City facilities. 3. NRH20 Family Water Park added space to the season pass processing area, enlarged and enhanced the seating for the concessions area, and increased the amount of - shaded seating available for patrons in preparation for this season. Security at the facility was also improved with the repairing of lights in the parking lot and the re-striping of parking areas. In addition, new security cameras were installed at the park.. 4. The NRH Public Library became the first Library in Texas to become a member of the Congress Cooperative Digital Reference Service, which allows NRH librarians to call on the resources of major research libraries around the world to assist patrons with their information requests. 5. The Library also implemented a new online reference service using state grant funds in cooperation with the cities of Irving and Carrollton. This new service, called AnswerZone, is also the first of its kind in Texas and assists users with reference questions. Effective Transportation System 1. In an effort to get the most out of the dollars that the City Council has set aside for street maintenance, City staff and the CIP committee implemented a new Preventive Street Maintenance Program. This will allow staff to expand street maintenance beyond the street overlay program, and use various techniques including slurry seal and white topping where it is appropriate which will go farther in bringing up the overall condition of City streets. Work under this new program will begin this summer. 2. This past year the Public Works department resurfaced 6 lane miles of streets with a two-inch asphalt overlay and crack sealed 38 lane miles of streets. 3. The Police Department used the traffic radar trailer in specific areas of the City once each week throughout the year in an effort to improve responses to citizen traffic complaints. 4. The design process was initiated on 2 planned trail projects, the South Electric Trail and Walker's Creek Trail. In addition, the City has received approval from TXDOT to proceed vi with the solicitation of bids for the construction of the Cottonbelt Trail. These trails will provide alternative transportation routes by providing facilities for walking or biking to locations throughout the City. THE 2001/2002 REVISED BUDGET In October 2001 a budget Contingency Plan was initiated in response to the slowing economy and the September 11th tragedy. It was determined that the greatest impact to the organization was going to be a reduction in sales tax revenues and reduced interest income. Since sales tax revenue and interest income make up approximately 30% of total General Fund revenues, it was imperative that management be proactive and implement a Contingency Plan as quickly as possible. The first line of defense was to determine the impact of the revenue shortfall to all operating funds in the city. The Contingency Plan consisted of several different scenarios starting with an immediate plan of action at the first level of revenue shortfall followed by subsequent actions in the event the shortfall was greater than initially estimated. Freezing all new hire and vacant positions, reducing travel and training citywide, eliminating certain capital purchases, delaying remaining capital purchases and other cost saving measures were part of the immediate actions taken in October. These budget reductions are reflected in the revised budget. To date, the action taken last October has beeR sufficient to offset revenue shortfalls. At this time, it is not anticipated that further acti()n will be necessary. The revised budget also reflects appropriation of fund balance. This is done to pay for prior year expenditures that were encumbered in 2000/2001, as approved by the City Council, but actually purchased, paid for and completed in fiscal year 2001/2002. The most important changes to the revised budget are explained in the following narrative. General Fund Revised 2001/2002 As part of the Contingency Plan described above, sales tax revenues were revised downward almost $551,000, and interest income was revised from $382,000 to $212,159, a reduction of almost $170,000. These reductions were significantly offset by an electric franchise payment from TXU Electric that was approximately $387,000 more than anticipated. Although some revenues have been revised slightly upward and some have been revised slightly downward, overalf, General Fund revenues in the revised budget are almost $169,000 less than the adopted budget. However, when the appropriation of fund balance for prior year encumbrances of $603,672 are included, bottom line revenues are $30,568,283, which is 1.44% greater than the adopted budget. The Contingency Plan implemented in October 2001 reduced expenditures to help offset the anticipated reduction in revenues. In the General Fund, expenditures were reduced by almost $434,000, and the pay-as-you-go capital reserve was reduced by almost $275,000. Bottom line revised 2001/2002 expenditures are budgeted at $30,534,597, $413,503 or 1.4% more than adopted. This increase is a combination of contingency plan reductions, $603,672 V11 in encumbrances from prior year, departmental savings reflected as reductions in departmental budgets and the addition of $212,500 in service enhancements discussed in the service enhancement section of this letter. However, when you subtract $603,672 for prior year encumbrances, revised expenditures are actually $190,000 less than adopted. Revised revenues over expenditures in the 2001(2002 General Fund are projected to be $33,686. This includes purchases with cost savings discussed in the service enhancement section of this letter. In accordance with Council direction and in an effort to meet the established goals for the City, as part of the revised budget it is recommended to fund several requests that were proposed for 2002/2003. All replacement capital that was requested in the 2002/2003 line item is recommended to be included in the 2001/2002 revised budget. These capital replacement requests total $140,000. Also, a $125,000 transfer to the Equipment Services Fund requested for next year is proposed to be included in the 2001/2002 revised budget. Further, several service enhancements that were requested for next year are proposed for the current year budget. Below is a list of the requests. A more in depth discussion of these items can be found in the service enhancement section of this letter. a) An increase of $200,000 to the street maintenance program to continue the Preventive Street Maintenance Program; b) The purchase of a second traffic trailer for $12,500 to assist in traffic control and to collect data for the Streets division of Public Works; c) The purchase of editing stations, a camera and editing deck for a total cost of $32,374 for Citicable; d) An increase of $10,000 to be used in the South Grapevine study. Utility Fund Revised 2001/2002 Although the Utility Fund was not directly impacted by September 11th, it was affected by the slowing economy, the lowering of interest rates, and most significantly, the higher than usual rain this season which has been almost 10 inches above the average rain fall. As a result, revenues from interest income have been reduced by approximately $287,000. Water sales are down due to the unusually cool, wet weather we experienced well into July of this year. It is anticipated that water sales will be $872,000 less than adopted. Revenues from sewer sales have been revised upward $384,000 over adopted. This is the result of the pass through rate, which was increased to cover increased water costs and sewage treatment costs from the City of Fort Worth and the Trinity River Authority. This pass through rate increase was not included in the adopted budget. The net effect of the revenue adjustments and the appropriation of $103,498 in fund balance for prior year encumbrances is a reduction to Utility Fund revenues of $640,332. The Contingency Plan adjustments implemented in October 2001 reduced Utility Fund expenditures by $24,000 and reduced Utility Fund reserves by about $700,000. In addition, departments identified about $20,000 more in cost savings this year for a total budget Vlll decrease of almost $744,000. With the encumbrances added back into the budget, the net decrease to Utility Fund expenditures is $640,000. The prior year encumbrances are purchases and other expenditures that were encumbered in 2000/2001, as approved by the City Council, but actually purchased, paid for and completed in fiscal year 2001/2002. The cost to purchase water and treat sewage from Fort Worth and Trinity River Authority is expected to remain about the same in the revised budget. Aquatic Park Revised 2001/2002 It is anticipated that NRH20 will have 260,500 visitors to the park this year. This is about 10,000 more visitors than last year and is equal to the 2000 season, which was a record year. However, it is projected that revenues in the revised budget will be approximately $102,000 less than the adopted budget. This reduction is primarily due to reduced interest income, a reduction in merchandise, food and beverage revenues and slight decreases in other revenue areas. Interest income has been reduced as a result of the slow economy, and the other revenue adjustments have been made to more accurately reflect actual revenues from prior years. Revised revenues are $3,349,263, including a $4,429 appropriation of fund balance for prior year encumbrances. Revised expenditures have decreased $102,000. The reduction in expenditures is mainly due to a $100,000 decrease in funds budgeted for minimum wage increases that did not occur this year. Projected revenues over operating expenses for 2001/2002 will allow the water park to place approximately $400,000 in reserves for major infrastructure repairs, future aquatic park expansion, and insurance. Golf Course Revised 2001/2002 The Golf Course is projecting a decrease in net revenues of almost $140,000 and a decrease in expenses of approximately $68,000. Revenues, while up over this time last year, are down when compared to projections because of a decrease in the number of rounds played due to a greater number of rain days. The balance of the difference between revenues and expenditures comes out of the projected ending balance for the course. Although staff would like to see expenses decrease as much as the reduction in revenue, this is difficult due to the number of fixed costs associated with course maintenance. The fixed costs are for items such as debt service, payment of the management fee and licenses to operate the course. There are also costs that, although not fixed, are still necessary even if the doors do not open. Examples of these costs are electricity and water charges, leases for equipment and full time personnel salaries. Although staff has made efforts to reduce the budget as much as possible, we will continue to closely monitor expenses to determine where further reductions can be made. It is projected that total rounds of golf will be 49,000 this year, compared to 44,000 rounds last year, an increase of 11.3%. The increase in play can be attributed to favorable weather IX conditions and improved greens. Net revenues of $2,291,810 are projected to be $795 greater than expenses of $2,184,320. BuildinQ Services Fund Revised 2001/2002 The impact of the Contingency Plan on this fund was a reduction of $9,151 in interest income and a $30,000 reduction in the transfer from the General Fund. The revenue reduction was offset by reducing building maintenance projects by $30,000 as well as a reduction to travel and training. Estimated revised revenues are $1,681,216, including an appropriation of fund balance for prior year encumbrances of $39,566. Revised expenditures are $1,681,216 including encumbrances of $39,566 and $9,005 in reserve for capital projects. Eauipment Services Fund Revised 2001/2002 Implementation of the Contingency Plan reduced interest income in this fund by $28,138 and reduced the transfer in from the Crime Control District by $63,447. The revenue reduction was offset by not replacing a Chevy Blazer and a Chevy Tahoe for the Police Department that were included in the adopted budget, and reducing travel and training. Estimated revenues are $2,813,251 including a $410,606 appropriation from fund balance, $206,718 of which is for prior year encumbrance rollovers. Included in total expenditures of $2,813,251 are equipment purchases and refurbishing of $1,482,468, which includes $201,936 in encumbrance rollovers from prior year. Self Insurance Fund Revised 2001/2002 The Self Insurance Fund has been impacted greatly by the phenomenal cost increases that have been seen in the insurance industry as a whole. The slowing economy also impacted interest income, which was reduced by $58,551. In addition, health insurance claims are estimated to be $606,567 greater than anticipated in the adopted budget due to increased medical costs. Over the past several years, insurance costs have increased not only in North Richland Hills but nationwide as well. The average increase in the State of Texas over the last three years has been 19%. The increase to City insurance costs for the same period of time has been 13%. Total revenues for this fund are projected to be $4,776,448 including an appropriation of fund balance of $518,516 to offset the cost increases. Included in total expenditures of $4,776,448 are health/medical costs of $3,695,632, $515,500 for all other insurance, $467,259 in personnel expenses and $10,006 in prior year encumbrance rollovers. It is estimated that the year end reserve for claims balance will be $2.1 million. Information Services Fund Revised 2001/2002 Total revised revenue is projected to be $2,482,652. This includes reductions of $43,000 in interest income and a reduction to the transfer from the General Fund of $87,935. Also included in total revenues is $183,337 in appropriation of fund balance to offset prior year encumbrances. Total revised operating expenditures have decreased almost $100,000 as a part of the Contingency Plan. Included in this reduction is the delay in replacing certain computer equipment until next year as well as decreases to travel and training. Total expenditures of $2,482,652 include equipment replacement, debt service, $116,696 addition x to reserves, $183,337 in prior year encumbrances and $13,000 for the purchase of Fire Inspector laptops which were approved as part of the recommendations from the study of the Fire Department conducted last year. Promotional Fund Revised 2001/2002 Occupancy tax revenues are expected to be approximately the same as adopted at $220,000. Interest income has been revised to $2,900, a decrease of $4,800. The revenue reduction has been offset with a $1,300 reduction to expenditures and a decrease in the ending balance. Total projected revenues of $223,900 are expected to be $9,290 greater than budgeted expenditures. Donations Fund Revised 2001/2002 Although interest income was revised down $8,891 as a result of September 11 th economic impacts, overall revenues are projected to increase $8,059 over adopted. The increase is primarily the result of increased revenues from water bill contributions. As approved by Council in February of this year, the voluntary contribution was increased by 50¢ to $1.50. The distribution of the contribution is 65¢ for the Library, 65¢ for the Animal Shelter and 20¢ for special events and arts. It is estimated that contribution revenues will be $105,000 for this year. Revised expenditures are $111,529 or $14,052 more than adopted. This includes $267 for prior year encumbrances and $10,785 for a kennel cleaning system that was removed from the General Fund budget as a result of the Contingency Plan. The Donations Fund is projected to end the year with a $35,930 balance of revenues over expenditures. Speciallnvestiaation Fund Revised 2001/2002 Revised revenues have been adjusted upward by $159,593. Included in this are revisions to MDT and radio reimbursements. At the time the revenue estimates were made for the 2001/2002 adopted budget, it looked like several cities were going to drop out of the MDT program which was reflected in MDT revenues. Some of the cities that were anticipated to drop out did not do so, which allowed revenues to be revised upward $48,216. Radio system reimbursements were revised upward $13,591. Keller joined the radio system program after revenue projections were made last year for the 2001/2002 adopted budget. Also, other cities made modifications during the year adding radios to the program, which generates additional revenue. Also included in the revised revenues is a reimbursement from Tarrant County for $31,632. This reimbursement was a one-time payment made because Tarrant County 911 had accumulated excess funds over and above established reserves. Xl Finally, a transfer from the Crime Control District of $59,902 is included in revised revenues. In the adopted budget the loan payment was included in the CCD but for accounting purposes, it is simpler to make a transfer from the CCD to the Special Investigation Fund and make the payment from this fund. Revised expenditures are projected to be $329,181. This is a $91,062 increase over the adopted budget. Included in this increase are matching funds for a grant received by the Police Department, additional funds to be combined with the grant proceeds to purchase new surveillance equipment, and inclusion of the loan payment to the General Fund that was budgeted in the CCD in the adopted budget. Also included is $3,194 in prior year encumbrances. This fund is projected to end the year with $101,379 in projected revenues over expenditures. DrainaQe Utilitv Fund Revised 2001/2002 The only changes in this fund are a decrease in drainage fees of $9,000 and a decrease to interest income of $5,300. It is projected to end the year with a balance of approximately $303,546. Parks Development Fund Revised 2001/2002 Sales tax revenue projections have been revised downward by approximately $275,000 and interest income has been revised downward by $51,800. Both of these revisions were included in the Contingency Plan implemented in October. An interesting note is that in light of the overall economic decline, the Tennis Center is having its best year ever, which is reflected in a $62,145 increase in Tennis Center revenue projections. The increase ranges from tennis lessons revenue to merchandise that is sold in the pro shop. Also, grant revenue has been revised upward by $680,000 in anticipation of the City receiving additional grants this year. Another change to the revised revenues is the appropriation of debt service reserve. With the refinancing of the Park Development Fund debt this year, it was no longer necessary to keep the debt service reserves at the same level. The revised budget reflects applying the reserves toward the debt payments. Revised revenues of $6,108,057 are $622,164 greater than adopted. Although it appears that debt service has increased since adopted, this is not the case when the appropriation of debt service reserve reflected in revised revenues is taken into account. The revised budget reflects the gross debt payment of $1,166,358 offset by revenues from the appropriation of debt service of $201,000 versus showing just the net amount of the debt that impacts the operating budget, which is $964,758. Total expenditures of $6,108,057 include $12,477 in prior year encumbrances, $1,166,358 in debt service and an increase to the reserve for capital projects of $412,372. XlI Crime Control and Prevention District Revised 2001/2002 Sales tax revenue projections have been revised downward by approximately $275,000 and interest income .":Jy $16,000 as part of economy related adjustments. Since this fund is almost wholly funded by sales tax, it is necessary to borrow $126,485 more from the Transition Fund than was included in adopted to help offset the revenue reductions. Total revised revenues, including the loan from Transition, are $4,540,455, which is almost $153,000 less than adopted. Total revised expenditures have decreased almost $153,000 as a result of Contingency Plan adjustments. The reduction includes decreases to travel and training, the deletion of the purchase of two new patrol vehicles and a reduction in the transfer to the Equipment Services Fund for the replacement of Police Department vehicles. Included in total revised expenditures of $4,540,455 is $12,093 for prior year encumbrance rollovers. THE 2002/2003 PROPOSED BUDGET Highlights and Analysis In an effort to achieve the goals set by the City Council, a number of new initiatives are planned for 2002/2003 as well as continuation of others from previous years. Highlights of the coming year are: 1. ContinuinQ Support for Preventive Street Maintenance - The 11 th consecutive year of major funding for street maintenance will see the continuation of $600.000 devoted to this highly visible program. With the new approaches to be used as part of the Preventive Street Maintenance Program, Citizens can expect to see greater improvement in the overall condition of streets in North Richland Hills over the next few years. 2. Equipment & BuildinQ Services Plan - Staff continues to update this plan originally presented to City Council in 1997/1998. The plan allows the City to continue its programs of facility infrastructure maintenance and equipment replacements with no property tax increase, while monitoring the investment the City has in these valuable assets. The 2003 plan is presented in the 2002/2003 proposed CIP budget and includes enhancements to be discussed later in this letter. 3. Aquatic Park Infrastructure - The eighth consecutive year of infrastructure funding will see $325,000 allocated to reserves for future maintenance and major repairs of the Aquatic Park. Total accumulated reserves at the end of fiscal year 2002 are estimated to be approximately $1.6 million. 4. Support of Alliance for Child Advocacy Center - This program will receive $10,130 in the next budget year with funding from the Crime Control and Prevention sales tax. The program reaches out with assistance to at-risk children in Northeast Tarrant County. Xlll 5. 5th Year Reserve for Capital Improvements - The 2002/2003 budget proposes to continue funding the reserve for capital projects to provide a pay-as-you-go approach to fund small capital projects. The total proposed funding for this reserve is $550,000. This would bring the total amount transferred to the reserve over $2.3 million. 6. Service Enhancement for 2002/2003 - Service enhancements to address Goals and Targets established by City Council are included for consideration in the 2002/2003 proposed budget. Management and staff have identified items with high priorities that are responsive to the needs of our growing community. These enhancements are discussed in detail later in this letter. While the 2002/2003 budget addresses many of the Goals and Targets Council has established for the City, the proposed budget strives to further enhance or modify existing services and add new programs which will help the City meet its goals. Property Values & Tax Analysis Net taxable value growth is up once again. As of the July 2002 tax roll, the new values are 7.4% greater than last year and include $107.8 million in new construction. The average home value in North Richland Hills was $108,341 in July 2001. The average home value for the current year, based on the July 2002 tax roll, is $119,981. The estimated revenue to be generated from the net taxable value at a 99% collection rate is $15,753,635. The proposed budget includes revenues to the Debt Service Fund in the amount of $6,332,156 to pay for bonds and certificates of obligation, and $417,844 for the tax increment financing districts. The revenue to the General Fund, $9,003,635, is a 5% increase over prior year. The proposed budget includes no changes to the current tax rate of 57¢ per $100 valuation. General Fund Proposed 2002/2003 The General Fund provides funding for the tax supported operations of the City. The major sources of revenue to this fund are sales taxes (representing 28.6% of the General Fund revenues) and property taxes (representing 28.6% of revenues). In 2002/2003, revenues in the General Fund are projected to increase over 2001/2002 adopted revenues by $1.4 million, a 4.5% increase. Included in the revenues is an appropriation of fund balance in the amount $235,000. This amount is being used to help fund the $550,000 transfer to the pay-as-you-go capital reserve. The major increases in revenues are summarized as follows: · Franchise Fees $432,812 · Property taxes $425,246 $345,229 $95,153 · Sales taxes · Charges for Services XIV As stated in the previous section regarding property values, proposed tax revenues are projected at $15.753,635 based on the current 57¢ tax rate. Of this amount, $6,332,156 is needed for debt service and $417,844 is needed for the Tax Increment Financing districts. General Fund sales taxes are projected at $9,014,148 (an increase of 4% over last year), which includes business gains as well as business losses. The new businesses included in the projections are the Home Depot at Mid-Cities and Precinct Line, Wal-Mart at Davis and North Tarrant Parkway, Staples on Loop 820, and three months of revenue from the new Super Target. In the General Fund, department budget requests totaled $32,123,584. Management is proposing a 2002/2003 General Fund budget in the amount of $31,349,365, a 4% increase over the adopted 2001/2002 budget (excluding any service enhancements), and $774,219 less than departmental budget requests. Careful evaluation was made in reducing these funding requests. At the proposed level, City services will be delivered at the same high quality level as in past years. The projected revenues over expenditures for the General Fund are $79,129, including service enhancements. Utilitv Fund Proposed 2002/2003 Water sales and charges generated from the North Richland Hills system for 2002/2003 are projected to be $12,214,007, a 3% decrease from prior year adopted. The projected decrease in revenues is the result of lower water usage this year (which is anticipated to carry on the first quarter of our 2002/2003 fiscal year) due to the unusual wet summer we are experiencing. Sewer sales and charges are projected to be $6,602,928, $1,042,928 more than prior year adopted. The increase in sewer revenue is the result of the increase in the pass through rate for sewer treatment as a result of increased charges from the City of Fort Worth and the Trinity River Authority. Total Utility Fund revenues are projected to be $19,529,310, about the same as the 2001/2002 adopted budget. Proposed expenditures are estimated at $19,529,310 (including service enhancements) which is a .1% decrease from 2001/2002 adopted. Included in the budget is a 6% increase in the budget for Fort Worth to provide water and treat sewage and a 10% increase to the Trinity River Authority for the same services. The total increase to both entities is $673,510. These increases are passed on to our customers by means of a "pass through" rate increase resulting in higher revenues to help offset the higher expenditures. Also included in total expenditures is $75,079 to be added to reserves and $60,000 for a mini-excavator. This service enhancement is explained in greater detail in the service enhancements section of this letter. xv Aauatic Park Proposed 2002/2003 Revenues of $3,593,514 at NRH20 are approximately $244,000 greater than the 2001/2002 revised budget. Included in the proposed revenues is a 75¢ increase in the admission price. The increase is in anticipation of a new attraction that will go on line in the 2004 season and will help offset additional costs associated with this attraction. Also included is a loan from the infrastructure reserve in the amount of $100,000. This loan is to pay for the replacement of the current locker system at the park. It is anticipated that this loan will be repaid within 2 Yz years from the revenues that the lockers generate. Operating expenditures are projected to be $3,593,514. Included in total expenditures is $100,000 in non-departmental in anticipation of an increase in the minimum wage rate next year that will impact our costs. Also included in total expenditures are additions to reserves of $437,459. The reserves for future infrastructure & major repairs and the reserve for insurance continue to be budgeted at $325,000 and $75,000 respectively. The reserve for future park expansion is budgeted at $73,959. Replacement of the current locker system is included in the proposed budget for $100,000 and is discussed in detail in the service enhancement section of this letter. Golf Course Proposed 2002/2003 The Golf Course is projecting net revenues of $2,091,040 and expenses of $1,953,342 for the proposed budget based on an estimate of 50,000 rounds of golf being played. Projected revenues include a $1.00 increase per round. We are proposing to use the majority of this proposed increase to begin a systematic equipment replacement program to provide better planning for our maintenance operations. Expenses are budgeted at almost $300,000 less than 2001/2002, which is a 15% decrease. Included in the total expenses is $508,213 for debt service. Buildina Services Fund Proposed 2002/2003 The total proposed budget of $1,742,301 includes operating expenses of $1,372,915, capital expenses of $300,000, and debt service payments of $46,204. This is an increase of 3.7% over current year. The ten-year plan approved by City Council in 1997 has been updated for 2003 and is included in the 2002/2003 proposed CIP budget. Eauipment Services Fund Proposed 2002/2003 Total expenses of $2,572,769 include operations and maintenance of $1 ,291 ,262, equipment purchases of $1,148,374, debt service payments of $105,859, and a state inspection analyzer for $5,610 that is described in detail in the service enhancements section of this letter. Funding for police and fire vehicle replacements is included. The ten-year plan approved by City Council in 1997 has been updated for 2003 and is included in the 2002/03 proposed CIP budget. XVI Self Insurance Fund Proposed 2002/2003 The Self Insurance Fund pays for city-wide expenses related to major medical coverage for employees, workers compensation coverage, property and general liability coverage, life insurance and all administrative expenses associated with this program. The proposed Self Insurance Fund budget for 2002/2003 would meet all expected expenses. The proposed budget for health/medical is $624,000 greater than current year adopted and $18,000 greater than revised. A transfer from the General and Utility Funds in the amount of $314,171 is included to help offset these cost increases. A discussion of the cost increases is included in the revised section of this letter. Staff is proposing a proactive approach in limiting future increases through the evaluation of several cost saving measures in the coming year. One of the options that would result in estimated cost savings of about $400,000 per year is a change in medical network providers. Other cost saving measures to be evaluated as a part of this process could save the City an additional $100,000 per year. A more in depth discussion of this initiative, which is included in the proposed budget, is part of the "Committing to Quality Employees" section of this letter. Information Services Fund Proposed 2002/2003 The Information Services Fund pays for citywide expenses associated with major computers, microcomputers, data network, Geographical Information System, and telecommunications. The proposed Information Services budget totals $2,434,591, approximately the same as 2001/2002 adopted. The budget also includes a $219,965 payment to the debt service fund for the financing of the computer system. Promotional Fund Proposed 2002/2003 The Promotional Fund, which provides visitor/tourism services and economic development for the City, projects occupancy tax proceeds and interest income in the amount of $219,600. Total proposed expenditures for the Promotional Fund are projected at $217,747. This fund is continuing to decline due to occupancy levels at our local hotels. We do not see an improvement in this over the foreseeable future. As a result, we believe we need to refocus the expenditures and utilize these funds as much as possible for promotional and special economic development projects, and not as much for operational expenses. Therefore, we are proposing to reallocate some of the personnel costs to the Utility and General Funds. Donations Fund Proposed 2002/2003 The Donations Fund, which derives most of its revenue from contributions made through city water bills, projects revenues of $165,000 for 2002/2003. The increase is mainly due to the 50¢ increase in the voluntary contribution implemented in February 2002 and discussed in detail in the revised section of this letter. Next year will be the first full year with the increase in place. The contributions are allocated to the Library, Animal Control, and special events and arts. Proposed expenditures are $127,922 including $30,000 for a 50tti Anniversary Celebration that is covered in detail in the service enhancements section of this letter. It is projected that the fund will have revenues in excess of expenditures of $37,078. XVII The Special InvestiQation Fund Proposed 2002/2003 Revenues for this fund are derived from Federal and State forfeited funds and reimbursements from neighboring cities involved in the Mobile Data Terminal program, the 800 MHz radio system and the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) program. Total revenues are budgeted at $348,379, and expenditures are proposed at $309,355. Revenues are projected to exceed expenditures by $39,024. DrainaQe Utility Fund Proposed 2002/2003 This Fund accounts for the monthly fees charged to residents and businesses to pay for the cost of drainage improvements throughout the City. Revenues are transferred to the Debt Service Fund to pay for principal and interest on bonds approved by voters for drainage improvements. Estimated transfers for 2002/2003 are $794,288. An ending balance of $254,758 is projected for this fund. Parks Development Fund Proposed 2002/2003 Total revenues are projected to be just over $8.7 million in 2002/2003, approximately $3.2 million more than the 2001/2002 adopted budget. The majority of the increase results from grant funds expected to be received for various trail projects included in the proposed budget. Also included in the increase is sales tax revenue that accounts for business gains and loses projected for the next year. Total expenditures are projected to be $8.7 million, including debt service of $1,382,906, and reserves for capital projects of $5.4 million. Included in the debt service figure is $227,070 to reimburse the General Debt Service Fund for certificates of obligation sold for park projects in 1998. This Fund also provides funding for park operations, administration and $880,625 for maintenance of park and recreation facilities constructed using the half-cent sales tax. Crime Control District Proposed 2002/2003 Sales tax revenues are projected to be over $4.4 million in the Crime Control District for 2002/2003. This is $223,000 more than current year adopted. The increase is attributable to business gains next year such as Wal-Mart and Super Target. Total expenditures are projected to increase from $4,693,309 to $4,921,981, a 4.9% increase. Included in the increase is a $350,000 transfer to the Equipment Services Fund toward the replacement of sixteen vehicles. More detail is included in the Crime Control District Section of this book. XVlll PROVIDING for NRH CITIZENS THROUGH ENHANCEMENTS TO SERVICE While the City goals provide direction in planning for day-to-day operations in the coming year, these goals also help identify and prioritize necessary service enhancements in the 2001/2002 revised budget as well as the 2002/2003 proposed budget. Funding for these enhancements has been established through funds available in the current year revised budget, estimated savings in the current year revised budget as well as projected revenues in the 2002/2003 proposed budget. These enhancements expand existing services or add new programs to City services. Because resources are limited, there are some unfinanced needs; however, staff believes the enhancements presented to you in the following narrative are critical in order to address the most pressing needs of our growing community. Enhancements in the Revised BudQet FY 2001/2002 ~""-~fT~"-'--" . I?l~"--e.n.ti,,-e $treet Maintenance Program Following the precedent that the City Council set last year, it is proposed to again increase funding for the annual Preventive Street Maintenance program from $400,000 per year to $600,000 per year using funds available in the current year revised budget. This $200,000 in additional funding makes it possible to continue with the Preventive Street Maintenance program as it was implemented, allowing the City to get the most out of these dollars and be more effective in slowing the overall deterioration rate of the streets in North Richland Hills. Êilßârii:Jed Traffic Enforcement Program The number one complaint received in the traffic section of the Police Department is regarding vehicles speeding through neighborhood streets. In an effort to respond to these complaints and gather real data with regard to the problem, the Police Department has placed a radar trailer on streets where complaints are received. This radar trailer displays the speed of oncoming vehicles and records the speed, date, and time of those vehicles that exceed the speed limit. The Police Department uses this data to plan for traffic enforcement allowing the officers to target those areas where problems exist. The data collected from these radar trailers is also beneficial to the Public Works department by providing traffic counts for our City streets. It is proposed to purchase another radar trailer with funds available in the current year revised budget. We believe another radar trailer is necessary in order to respond to' the increasing number of requests to place these radar trailers on our streets. A second radar trailer will allow the Police Department to reduce the backlog of those waiting for the trailer to be placed on their street, and reduce the wait time to place a trailer on a street from weeks to days. The total cost to improve traffic enforcement, enable the collection of valuable data regarding traffic counts, and impact safety and security as well as effective transportation is $12,500. S.iiíjìíjij Money for Future Needs Additional revenue has been identified in the current year revised budget that will allow us to take measures now to save costs thereby insuring the availability of funds XIX to meet the needs of the 2002/2003 budget. To this end, it is recommended to place $125,000 in the Equipment Services Reserve so these funds will be available for future equipment needs. In addition, approximately $140,000 has been identified in the current year revised budget that will allow us to proceed with capital purchases departments requested in the proposed 2002/2003 budget. These capital purchases include replacement of worn office furniture for various departments, minor capital equipment, traffic signal maintenance equipment and handheld mobile radios for the Public Works department, fitness equipment for the Recreation Center, and minor equipment for the Fire Department. Purchasing these items now will save costs and provide for additional funds in the 2002/2003 proposed budget. Taking these measures also adds to Goal 4: Financially Sound City Government. Incentive Cost Savim:ls' Proa'ram - Revised 'FY 200112002 Since the 1998/1999 budget, City management has been identifying departmental savings in the current year revised budget and allowing departments to utilize these funds to purchase non-operating items such as capital that were not able to be funded in the adopted budget. It is proposed to continue this Incentive Cost Savings Program in the 2001/2002 revised budget as a few departments have identified savings within their operational budgets once again this year. This program encourages departments to be fiscally responsible by encouraging them to find ways to save money to purchase needed equipment or make operational improvements. Items are purchased at the end of the fiscal year when savings have been verified. The following are some of the items recommended for purchase with identified cost savings in the revised budget: . The Communications Department has identified over $32,000 in savings and proposes to use this money to purchase a non-linear editing system, a DVCAM camera and a DVCAM editing deck for Citicable. This additional equipment will allow Citicable to further enhance and expand its original programming by providing a second editing station. In addition, the new DVCAM equipment will allow Citicable to save costs in the future as the operation will be able to eliminate the more expensive BetaCam format that is currently used for some programming. These purchases will improve our ability to distribute timely information to North Richland Hills citizens providing additional quality of life amenities for the community. . The Development Services Department has identified $10,000 in savings that it proposes to add to the study of the Grapevine Highway corridor to our City. As you recall, $15,000 was approved for this study in the 2001/2002 adopted budget. It is recommended to provide this additional funding to insure a more thorough study of the possibilities for this unique area. In addition, the City of Richland Hills will contribute funds to this study, as Richland Hills will also benefit from this project. xx Proposed Service Enhancements - FY 2002/2003 As was mentioned in the opening remarks of this letter, this year has been trying and our local economy has been affected by national events that continue to grip our nation. As a result of the slow economy, staff is projecting fewer resources in the 2002/2003 proposed budget. All requests for funding of expanded or additional services in the coming year have been carefully reviewed with the state of the economy in mind, and heavily weighed against the goals set forth by the City Council. The following service enhancements and new programs proposed for the 2002/2003 fiscal year are identified as critical to effectively meet the needs of our growing City as well as the vision of the City Council. Each program will contribute to one or more of the six goals for North Richland Hills. Council Goa/1: Safety & Security .,.< .' Increasing Court Security In light of recent events, upgrading the security of our Municipal Court operation is a pressing need. Municipal Court does not currently have the ability to electronically monitor the building or the ability to monitor objects being carried into the courtroom. Installing a monitoring system inside and outside the building, and providing metal detectors at the entrance to Municipal Court would increase the safety of court patrons and employees through the provision of 24 hour monitoring, remote alarms to notify the Marshal's office when immediate assistance is needed, and prohibiting undesirable objects such as weapons from entering the courtroom. It is recommended to use the Building Security restricted cash to purchase a camera system and a metal detector to place at the entrance of the courtroom. The Building Security restricted cash is comprised of fees collected by Municipal Court and is restricted by the State for use only on building security items. The total expense to increase security at Municipal Court is $22,577, which will be offset by revenue from the Building Security restricted cash. Enhancing Emergency Medical Services & Emergency Preparedness Emergency response operations have received significant attention since September 11th. It is recommended to provide $15,800 to improve the quality of North Richland Hills emergency response services in the Fire Department Emergency Medical Services Operation. These funds would be· used to purchase handheld data computers for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) units, and to participate in a regional emergency planning council. The EMS handheld data computers ($11,800) would benefit NRH emergency medical response in that these computers would allow EMS personnel to provide accurate and timely reports of patient data to hospitals as well as to the ambulance billing services, and would eliminate double entry of information and the errors generated from such practices. Currently, EMS units fill out a paper report to leave at the hospital, then reenter the information into the EMS system upon returning to the station. The handheld computers would allow entry directly into the system and a report could be printed for the hospital and the ambulance billing service. XXI The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) is heading up a regional emergency planning council made up of cities and Tarrant, Dallas, Collin and Denton counties. The purpose of this planning council is to increase communication capabilities among the members of the council, provide a repository of resources, contacts and equipment necessary in the event of a disaster or emergency situation, and to coordinate the emergency preparedness plans of the various cities and counties into one regional emergency response plan. The cost to participate in this council ($5,000) will give North Richland Hills input into this regional emergency response plan, and provide our City the benefit of the use of equipment available in the region as well as emergency contacts within the region. Contracting Vehicle Impound Services/lmprovements to Property & Evidence Section It is recommended to close the vehicle impound lot and contract out for this service next fiscal year. The facility now used for this service is not large enough to handle the current volume of impounded vehicles, and the cost for relocation of the operation would be almost $1 million. Retrofitting the current space to meet the demands would also be costly and would require drainage improvements, installation of all weather surface material in the parking lot, and replacement of the gate system in order to comply with City ordinances and provide the proper safeguards. Ordinance 2630, passed by the City Council in June of this year, enables the City to contract with a private company for these services. In addition, it is proposed to reassign the Property Evidence Technician currently assigned to the Vehicle Impound Lot to the Property/Evidence section in order to insure an efficient property and evidence collection operation. The amount of evidence collected by this section has increased dramatically since the operation was started in 1995/1996. In the first year of operation, the division collected 2,715 pieces of evidence. It is estimated that 15,880 pieces of evidence will be collected this year. Due to the significant increase in the amount of property and evidence processed by this division, this additional position is vital to the operation because it will allow the department to maintain the integrity of evidence used in courtroom testimony, conduct more frequent audits of evidence including narcotics, weapons and money, and dispose of evidence in a timely manner. The impact to the total budget (General Fund and Crime Control and Prevention District) is a cost of $142,682, which is primarily due to the loss of revenues. Contracting out vehicle impound services would allow the City to avoid the expense of retrofitting and expanding the current space, which is estimated to be over $1 million. Council Goal 3: Quality Redevelopment & Reinvestment ¡¡;iþjfiÌ1qiVg the Neighborhood Identity Program As was mentioned in the discussion of accomplishments, this past year the City Council implemented the Neighborhood Identity Program to promote the livability of residences and businesses in NRH. In an effort to address the livability of Multi-family housing units in the City, it is recommended to expand the Neighborhood Identity Program to include a Multi-family Housing Inspection Program. This program would XXll involve one building inspector who would perform regular inspections of each apartment complex in the city. The goal of the program would be to perform two inspections annually on both the interior and exterior components of multi-family housing communities. The inspector would review exterior fascia, wood trim, plumbing, swimming pools, fencing, parking lots, dumpsters, electrical and mechanical, HV AC and other key features to ensure livable condi~ions. Inspectors would also inspect vacant units at random as well as units where residents cannot get resolution from the apartment owner. The cost to expand the Neighborhood Identity Program in this way would be $36,304 with implementation in January 2003. The program would be funded through a monthly charge to each apartment complex in the City. This program will require coordination with the owners of multi-family dwelling units in the City, and staff would plan to include motels and extended stay motels in this program in the near future. IH Loop 820 Strategic Planning Area The areas along IH Loop 820 in our City were identified by the Comprehensive Land Use plan as a future Freeway Business District. The plan recommends "a transition plan for promoting change in this area to mid-rise offices, entertainment, hotels and large retail and service facilities serving a regional customer base". Staff is currently exploring a study of this area, and plans to begin the process of identifying consultants to conduct such a study in the last quarter of fiscal year 2002/2003 with selection of a firm and commencement of a study planned for the early part of the 2003/2004 fiscal year. Council Goal 4: Financially Responsible City Government "Pay As You Go" Capital Projects The Reserve for Capital Improvements in the General Fund was established in the 1998/1999 budget to provide "pay as you go" funding for small capital projects such as improvements to City facilities and infrastructure. The 2002/2003 budget continues funding this reserve by placing $550,000 in the reserve as approved by the Council. The City Council has provided for over $2.3 million to fund "pay as you go" projects since the Reserve was established. Over the last few years, this Reserve has provided funds for design and site acquisition for the new Fire stations as well as the City's sidewalk program. It is proposed to use $150,000 of this reserve in 2002/2003 to purchase a traffic signal light communication system. Currently, Public Works personnel must visit each of the 44 different traffic signal light locations to update and troubleshoot malfunctions. This process causes delays in operation and increases overtime use by the department. A spread spectrum radio system will allow the ability to monitor the operation of specific traffic signals from the office area, providing for more efficient troubleshooting and synchronization of traffic signals. This project is included in the 2002/2003 proposed CIP budget. Ç'qulßiiiéñt ÞLirêhàsês'to- imprõvé"~ffiCienêy There are situations in which it makes sense for the City to purchase equipment necessary to perform certain projects in house rather than lease equipment or contract XXlll out work. Two situations have been identified in the coming year in which it is more cost effective to purchase equipment now that will allow us to save time and money in the future. The first situation is in the Equipment Services Division and results from changes in State requirements regarding emission testing of vehicles when they are inspected each year. Currently, the City has 151 vehicles that will be affected by the change in requirements. This number will increase over the next 5 years. In order to avoid taking the vehicles to outside vendors for inspection, it is recommended to purchase the necessary emission analyzer. The purchase of this equipment would allow the City to avoid having to take vehicles to outside vendors to perform inspections, which saves costs and allows us to avoid increased down time due to long lines at inspection stations. The actual cost of purchasing the emission analyzer, the inspection decals, and a 5 year maintenance agreement is $25,200. After subtracting cost savings that result from purchasing this system rather than outsourcing, the total net budgetary impact is $5,610. The Public Works Department uses a mini-excavator to repair water and sewer lines in areas where there is limited access such as backyards. Currently, the department rents a mini-excavator at a cost of $6,000 per year. With the addition of the 950 Priority 3 Wastewater Rehabilitation projects required by the EPA, the need for the mini-excavator will increase dramatically, which will increase expenditures for renting this equipment. On top of this, the City will realize an additional $5,000 to $10,000 in savings annually by using the mini-excavator more often because this equipment is less intrusive than other methods. These savings result from not having to replace as much fencing, sod and other items that would be damaged as a result of using more intrusive equipment. The use of this less intrusive method is also beneficial to the residents because it minimizes damage to their property. All things considered, owning this equipment will not only save money over the long run and allow less intrusive water and sewer line repairs, but it will also allow staff to conduct such repairs more quickly and efficiently. The cost to purchase this equipment is $60,000, and the life expectancy is 15 to 20 years. Council Goal #5: Quality of Life Amenities for the Community ElÞiihs/òn of the UNight of Holiday Magic" The "Night of Holiday Magic" is on its way to becoming the signature event for North Richland Hills, as it is the most extensive holiday event in Northeast Tarrant County. The 2001 event was a huge success, and proved to be even more spectacular than the year before. In order to accommodate a larger crowd and provide additional activities and entertainment, the planning committee is requesting $40,225 in additional funding. The additional money will allow the event to be extended from 4 hours to 5 hours, provide access to remote parking through the use of shuttle buses, provide additional children's activity areas, and provide more quality entertainment by booking a family "headliner" band. Expansion plans also include more lights, XXIV decorations, and Christmas sets as well as an expanded fireworks show and more choices in the food court. NRH 5d" Anniversary Celebration In 2003, the City of North Richland Hills will mark its 50th anniversary. It is proposed to include $30,000 in the 2002/2003 budget in order to plan a series of celebration events and activities to mark this special year. City staff has performed research and gathered a number of ideas for commemorating this Golden Anniversary. The City Council has appointed residents and business owners to a "Celebration Committee" that will work with City staff on event planning, organization, community involvement and fund raising. Initial ideas include commissioning a significant piece of public art as a gift to NRH citizens, dedicating a time capsule to mark the occasion, relating the marketing of existing events to the 50th anniversary, and planning a large culminating event tied to the 4th of July celebration. Enhancing Customer SeNice at NRH20 The water park continues to see success, and all surveys have indicated that customers are generally satisfied with the service they receive at NRH20. However, one area of concern has devetoped in the area of locker rentals. The locker system currently in place was originally installed when the park opened. These lockers have developed some challenges over the years. First, the lockers are difficult to lock, and as a result, many times customers do not lock them properly. Second, each locker column is tied together with a nylon cord that serves as part of the locker door hinge. Because of this construction, if one locker unit is damaged or in need of repair, the entire column must be taken out of service until repairs can be made. Third, the manufacturer has discontinued the original color selected for the lockers. The closest available color is red, so when new lockers must be put in place, the obvious color difference is unsightly and draws attention to the fact that there are problems with the lockers. The final challenge is with maintenance and support of this locker system. A new company is now responsible for the maintenance and repair of this particular locker product; however, it has become apparent that this company is not able to support the locker system. As a result, out of the 600 total lockers at the park, only 150 are in working order. It is recommended to replace the locker system at NRH20 in preparation for the 2003 season. A loan in the amount of $100,000 from the reserve for water park infrastructure has been included in the proposed budget to purchase a new locker system. It is anticipated that the new locker system will generate increased revenue from locker rentals, which will allow this loan to be repaid in just over two years. In addition, staff is currenUy comparing the benefits of purchasing versus the benefits of leasing the locker system. Staff will proceed with the optiÓn that is most cost effective. ' xxv Committina to Quality Emplovees Fostering commitment among employees and motivating quality customer service attitudes from all our employees involves recognizing that they are the City's most valuable asset. In this spirit, management evaluates the City's compensation and benefits program annually to determine its competitiveness and fairness. After careful review and consideration, it is recommended to continue the merit system, to provide funding for implementation of recommendations resulting from the compensation and classification study that is currently underway, and to evaluate and consider appropriate medical and dental plan cost control initiatives for the coming year. These recommendations are an effort to ensure the City continues its ability to recruit and retain quality employees in order to provide quality service to the citizens of North Richland Hills. In addition, staff will be following through with the employee values campaign and recognition program by hosting an employee banquet during which the employee of the year will be recognized. On June 24 of this year, the City Council authorized staff to move forward with the Compensation and Classification study that was approved in the 2001/2002 budget. The City has contracted with Waters Consulting Group, Inc. to conduct this comprehensive study. The study will include a labor market analysis, an internal evaluation of all job classifications, and the preparation of up-to-date job descriptions. Throughout the process, an employee oversight committee will monitor the progress of the study, and report to management regarding key decisions. The study is scheduled to be complete toward the end of this year, with implementation to begin in January 2003. Due to the nature of the study, it is likely that salary ranges as well as individual salaries will need to be adjusted. With this in mind, staff is planning for the budgetary impact and is proposing to include $838,242 in the 2002/2003 budget for implementation of the recommendations. Financial limitations may preclude the study from complete implementation in one fiscal year, as such the City may phase in implementation over the next 2 to 3 years. The consultant plans to include implementation options in their final report. It is recommended to proceed with implementation in the upcoming fiscal year, as we believe this to be an urgent and critical need for the organization. ¡'{fit i:~~{ i!.f!Jt?FHmd#fHfft-. Í1 In 1996/97, the City Council approved the Market Adjustment Plan to keep salaries competitive. The plan involves an annual study including a survey of 10 cities and a review of the Employment Cost Index to determine the level of adjustment necessary to remain competitive in the labor market. Because the compensation and classification study will conduct a similar but more comprehensive study for each and every position in the City, it is recommended that the annual market adjustment be conducted in accordance with the findings of the compensation and classification study. In future years, we would recommend that the annual Market Adjustment be conducted in a manner that will maintain the findings of the compensation and classification study so that the City does not fall behind in the labor market. XXVI _rf4Ε“lftiL~T~~iliimí1li~ The City has experienced continual increases in medical costs over the last 3 years. In fact, costs have increased an average of 13% over the last three years. Considering the current state of the economy and the likelihood that this trend will continue, we believe it is important to take proactive measures to evaluate our options with regard to reducing some of these medical costs. To this end, the Human Resources Department along with the City's insurance consultant have identified some options that will help to limit the future growth of these costs. One example is to look at joining a different network provider. This option alone is anticipated to save over $400,000 annually. Staff is proposing to form an employee task force to evaluate the various options and make recommendations with regard to the appropriate cost saving measures. This task force will work with Human Resources and the City's insurance consultant to educate employees on cost saving measures, and will review the possibilities of changing networks as well as the cost sharing structure. Any changes to the current plan would be effective January 1, 2003. PROPOSED FINANCING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 Although the economy has been in a state of decline for the past several months, we believe conditions are favorable for a turn around in the near future. Some new businesses will be opening in our City in the coming year, which we anticipate will result in additional sales tax revenue. In addition, we are still experiencing a significant amount of new residential construction. Weare optimistic that we will be looking at a brighter economic outlook in the coming months. Even though our revenues - ad valorem tax and sales tax - are not as strong as they have been historically, as mentioned staff is optimistic about the future. We do believe it would be desirable to increase the senior exemption from $35,000 to $36,000 for next fiscal year. With the continual increases in costs, it is felt this would assist out Senior Citizens in a positive way. This exemption is included in the revenue estimates. There are three rate and/or fee increases proposed for 2002/2003. The first is a 75¢ increase in resident and non-resident ticket prices at NRH20 to help build reserves for infrastructure maintenance and improvements, and to address increased operation costs. This is the first admission increase at NRH20 in 2 years. Even with this increase, we are still well below the price of one day admission to most of the major amusement venues in the Metroplex. In fact, with the increased admission at NRH20, the non-resident admission would still be $15.82 below the price of one-day admission to Hurricane Harbor. The second proposed rate increase results from rate increases by the Trinity River Authority and the City of Fort Worth for water costs and sewage treatment. It is proposed to increase the pass through rate on utility bills. The water pass through rate will increase 14¢, going from 13¢ to 27¢, and the sewer pass through rate will increase 9¢ going from 43¢ to 52¢. Finally, it is recommended to increase the per round fee at the golf course by $1.00. As a result of increased competition, decreased rounds, and other market factors, golf course revenues are down. This increase is necessary to assist in the continued success of the golf xxvn course including equipment replacement and other capital needs in the future. Staff will be evaluating the possibility of establishing an equipment replacement reserve fund for the golf course over the next few months. The 2002/2003 budget is based on maintaininQ the current 57 é tax rate. If approved this will be the 10111 consecutive year for maintaining this rate. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION This plan of services is the end result of several months of coordinated efforts of numerous City personnel. It begins with the City Council's direction for the City in the form of goals and targets for action. City staff takes these goals and examines operations, programs, and priorities to meet the needs of the City. From this work, a financial plan, or budget, is prepared that undergoes careful examination by department directors, the Budget Department, and City Management. Each of these individuals has done a superlative job, and I am most grateful for their hard work and dedication. I also wish to thank the Council for their exceptional leadership in communicating to Management their priorities and vision for the future of our City. It is hoped that this budget plan for 2002/2003 is an accurate reflection of the Council's vision in every respect and will serve as a road map leading the City to another successful year. Respectfully submitted, ~!~ City Manager xxviii Budget Summaries LIVE WCRK PLAY NRH S P I R I T 1 _._~.,__...__w~______·_~·,_,,·_~·,_~~~·'~_'_·'_^_·_·~·_-"--"-..-.....------.~,--~-"-~.-,-.- FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 1 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES GENERAL FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Taxes $19,081,296 $20,550,712 $21,532,105 $21,512,310 $22,789,821 Fines & Forfeitures 1,550,557 1,802,897 1,815,322 1,745,509 1,792,427 Licenses & Permits 1,738,091 1,641,102 1,601,668 1,635,746 1,549,405 Charges for Service 1,296,665 1,669,449 1,611,855 1,671,418 1,707,008 I ntergovern mental 2,657,784 2,662,919 2,985,010 2,985,010 3,004,725 Miscellaneous 511,444 572,321 587,206 1,018,290 653,348 TOTAL REVENUES $26,835,837 $28,899,400 $30,133,166 $30,568,283 $31,496,734 EXPENDITURES City Council $132,716 $139,464 $178,008 $158,382 $170,916 City Manager 504,433 495,573 479,016 481 , 173 478,858 Communications 496,287 446,152 545,417 493,759 536,067 City Secretary 322,754 356,816 404,229 402,523 448,588 Legal 199,581 198,362 192,166 189,366 238,465 Human Resources 106,540 110,090 11 7,590 117,447 118,970 Finance 597,956 648,479 669,447 677,347 709,020 Budget & Research 255,193 246,591 288,364 287,836 310,849 Municipal Court 853,827 931,885 1,003,765 1,075,790 976,803 Inspections 640,041 703,699 617,973 563,618 592,298 Planning 188,713 257,198 455,872 477,747 478,393 Library 1,155,147 1,242,494 1,342,622 1,339,950 1,420,084 Environmental Services 911,379 970,401 1,086,751 1,074,757 1,098,227 Public Works 2,671,566 2,802,954 2,783,584 2,787,964 2,881,514 Parks & Recreation 1,942,124 2,082,038 2,343,894 2,366,347 2,449,824 Police 7,081,331 7,356,989 8,051,441 8,133,185 8,388,134 Fire 5,904,596 6,254,090 6,933,290 6,997,154 7,153,396 Building Services 778,720 724,660 870,646 840,646 905,472 Non-Departmental 707,423 799,003 1,025,390 671,573 1,158,487 Sub-Total $25,450,327 $26,766,938 $29,389,465 $29,136,564 $30,514,365 Reserve for Capital Improvements $500,000 $650,000 $681,629 $406,861 $550,000 PlY Encumbrance Rollovers $603,672 Operating Transfers In/Out $218,800 $577,500 $50,000 $175,000 $285,000 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $26,169,127 $27,994,438 $30,121,094 $30,322,097 $31,349,365 Proposed Service Enhancements $212,500 $93,240 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $26,169,127 $27,994,438 $30,121,094 $30,534,597 $31,442,605 BALANCE $666,710 $904,962 $12,072 $33,686 $54,129 II FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 2 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES , GENERAL FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 TAXES Current Property Taxes $6,693,898 $7,567,946 $8,578,389 $8,578,389 $9,003,635 Delinquent Property Taxes 102,372 118,382 70,729 136,000 82,729 Penalty and Interest 87,499 99,940 55,000 110,000 65,800 Franchise Fees 3,020,221 3,271,109 3,241,481 3,671,199 3,674,293 Utility Fund Franchise Taxes 347,425 353,600 544,037 525,072 562,133 Sales Taxes 8,480,236 8,749,397 8,668,919 8,118,100 9,014,148 Mixed Beverages 100,663 107,594 102,900 102,900 102,900 Payment in Lieu of Taxes 248,982 282,744 270,650 270,650 284,183 Sub-Total $19,081,296 $20,550,712 $21,532,105 $21,512,310 $22,789,821 FINES AND FORFEITURES Municipal Court Fines $1,254,771 $1,468,891 $1,512,322 $1,446,509 $1,464,427 Library Fines 42,399 52,868 47,000 52,000 53,000 Warrant & Arrest Fees 253,387 281,138 256,000 247,000 275,000 Sub-Total $1,550,557 $1,802,897 $1,815,322 $1,745,509 $1,792,427 LICENSES AND PERMITS Miscellaneous Permits $159,625 $139,245 $127,308 $125,892 $128,830 Building Permits 722,441 648,114 618,000 618,000 640,000 Electrical Permits 70,290 79,283 77,250 88,500 92,000 Plumbing Permits 67,033 87,538 72,100 69,500 72,100 Curb & Drainage Insp. Fees 161,719 87,235 103,000 120,500 133,000 Re-Inspection Fees 12,240 11,034 8,240 6,500 7,000 License Fees 3,280 6,858 7,210 15,804 14,000 Contractor Registration Fees 80,065 82,825 82,400 82,400 82,600 Plan Review/Application Fee 0 32,217 61,200 70,800 73,320 Animal License/Adoption Fees 76,715 63,922 69,010 70,010 74,360 Animal Control Impoundment 43,571 54,734 61,800 58,100 60,500 Crematorium Revenues 6,055 5,229 5,665 2,150 2,250 Auto Impoundment Fees 183,088 172,977 154,500 140,400 0 Food Service Permits 79,080 86,110 82,400 90,715 90,470 Food Managers School 14,065 15,330 10,300 13,000 13,500 Fire Inspection Fees 32,587 35,232 33,475 33,475 33,475 Publicity Fees - Recreation 26,237 33,219 27,810 30,000 32,000 Sub-Total $1,738,091 $1,641,102 $1,601,668 $1,635,746 $1,549,405 4 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 2 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES GENERAL FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 CHARGES FOR SERVICE Park Facility Rental $3,560 $3,468 $3,605 $4,500 $5,000 Recreation Center Rental 18,059 14,667 14,420 14,000 15,000 Ambulance Fees 409,329 759,223 665,000 747,000 745,000 Garbage Billing 242,274 261,577 257,000 257,000 243,720 Maps & Codes 34,460 1,511 1,000 1,180 1,200 Recreation Fees 332,676 344,819 340,675 345,000 352,000 Cultural Arts 0 5,875 7,500 5,800 6,500 Athletic Revenue 93,062 101,069 100,502 127,000 110,000 Recreation Special Events 34,923 33,905 37,595 32,000 32,000 Planning & Zoning Fees 6,239 30,078 25,000 27,500 29,000 Sale of Accident Reports 20,237 18,129 18,058 19,500 19,500 Vital Statistics 52,559 54,924 45,000 53,003 51,316 Mowing 20,194 18,398 25,000 32,500 32,000 Non-Resident Library Fees 11,135 6,508 6,000 675 0 Video Services Income 14,481 12,218 62,000 3,730 62,000 Video Tape Sales 3,477 1,480 3,500 1,030 2,772 City Cable Sponsorships 0 1,600 0 0 0 Sub-Total $1,296,665 $1,669,449 $1,611,855 $1,671,418 $1,707,008 INTERGOVERNMENTAL Indirect Costs: General CIP $210,000 $216,300 $227,115 $227,115 $105,000 Utility Fund 1,024,992 1,055,750 1,108,538 1,108,538 1,163,965 Park & Rec Facilities Dev. Corp, 202,608 208,688 219,122 219,122 230,078 Crime Control District 337,092 247,212 364,573 364,573 382,802 Aquatic Park Fund 75,540 77,818 81,709 81,709 85,794 Direct Cost - General Fund 807,552 857,151 983,953 983,953 1,037,086 Police Department Salaries Sub-Total $2,657,784 $2,662,919 $2,985,010 $2,985,010 $3,004,725 MISCELLANEOUS Interest Income $445,959 $402,074 $382,000 $212,159 $234,911 Sale of City Property 7,317 6,284 0 0 0 Grant Proceeds-Crim. Justice 23,433 66,663 102,818 70,000 57,390 Grant Proceeds-CDBG 15,562 11,047 20,000 23,400 25,000 Overtime Reimbursements 11,389 8,111 10,000 10,000 10,000 Sponsorships - T ASP 49 0 0 0 0 Other Income (32,350) 45,294 31,100 39,157 33,558 Golf Course Loan Payment 0 0 0 0 0 Special Invest. Fund Loan Payment 40,085 32,848 41,288 59,902 57,489 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 0 603,672 235,000 Sub-Total $511,444 $572,321 $587,206 $1,018,290 $653,348 TOTAL REVENUES $26,835,837 $28,899,400 $30,133,166 $30,568,283 $31,496,734 5 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 3 - SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES , GENERAL FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 City Council $132,716 $139,464 $178,008 $177,082 $170,916 City Manager $504,433 $495,573 $479,016 $481 , 173 $478,858 Communications Public Information $181,599 $188,645 $233,803 $235,667 $229,913 Citicable 314,688 257,507 311,614 278,287 306,154 Total Communications $496,287 $446,152 $545,417 $513,954 $536,067 City Secretary City Secretary $172,022 $207,118 $225,309 $258,870 $261,744 Record Management 150,732 149,698 178,920 179,231 186,844 Total City Secretary $322,754 $356,816 $404,229 $438,101 $448,588 Legal $199,581 $198,362 $192,166 $189,366 $238,465 Human Resources $106,540 $110,090 $117,590 $118,074 $118,970 Finance Accounting & Administration $425,182 $453,599 $463,917 $474,233 $496,028 Purchasing 172,774 194,880 205,530 207,275 212,992 Total Finance $597,956 $648,479 $669,447 $681,508 $709,020 Budget & Research Budget $81,998 $79,255 $88,712 $88,364 $93,428 Tax 142,053 127,590 156,440 156,675 170,852 Internal Audit 31,142 39,746 43,212 42,797 46,569 Total Budget & Research $255,193 $246,591 $288,364 $287,836 $310,849 Municipal Court Ad mi n istratio n/Prosecution $248,002 $270,435 $269,146 $364,456 $267,266 Court Records 252,811 297,800 332,999 326,771 311,587 Warrants 236,351 246,918 271,667 259,302 267,210 Teen Court 50,861 48,928 55,084 54,530 54,094 Judicial 65,802 67,804 74,869 73,056 76,646 Total Municipal Court $853,827 $931,885 $1,003,765 $1,078,115 $976,803 Inspections $640,041 $703,699 $617,973 $577,223 $592,298 Planning $188,713 $257,198 $455,872 $489,565 $478,393 Library General Services $159,073 $169,769 $181,104 $183,139 $186,200 Public Services 542,789 594,690 635,868 669,662 669,867 Technical Services 453,285 478,035 525,650 519,595 564,017 Total Library $1,155,147 $1,242,494 $1,342,622 $1,372,396 $1,420,084 6 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 3 - SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES ¡ GENERAL FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 Environmental Services Environmental Resources $232,074 $257,827 $267,604 $272,846 $281,093 Humane Division 504,253 491,303 578,423 563,725 572,937 Consumer Health 175,052 221,271 240,724 256,029 244,197 Total Environmental Services $911,379 $970,401 $1,086,751 $1,092,600 $1,098,227 Public Works General Services $181,684 $131,212 $124,870 $124,452 $133,275 Traffic Control 642,928 656,341 836,607 884,980 917,533 Street & Drainage 1,846,954 2,015,401 1,822,107 2,050,293 1,830,706 Total Public Works $2,671,566 $2,802,954 $2,783,584 $3,059,725 $2,881,514 Park & Recreation General Services $125,544 $129,459 $138,369 $138,605 $143,390 Parks Maintenance 831,215 885,467 977,987 998,550 1,036,834 Recreation Services 705,524 646,532 737,356 749,741 752,030 AthleticProgram Services 163,022 169,887 193,464 210,080 203,574 Senior Adult Services 115,205 116,744 129,947 128,565 142,624 Youth Outreach & Cultural 1,614 133,949 166,771 167,614 171,372 Total Park & Recreation $1,942,124 $2,082,038 $2,343,894 $2,393,155 $2,449,824 Police General Services $369,905 $382,759 $421,035 $428,746 $435,647 Administrative Services 553,593 533,351 587,899 581,057 603,550 Criminal Investigation 1,429,644 1,499,278 1,621,341 1,647,039 1,692,563 Uniform Patrol 3,080,195 3,166,052 3,467,600 3,519,983 3,640,923 Tactical Unit 22,656 35,981 35,697 33,745 34,678 Technical Services 624,764 664,296 734,319 753,265 760,258 Detention Services 283,287 292,964 332,775 343,686 335,327 Property Evidence 98,445 101,531 117,164 118,344 112,345 Communications 618,842 680,777 733,611 744,872 772,843 Total Police $7,081,331 $7,356,989 $8,051,441 $8,170,737 $8,388,134 Fire Department General Services $219,525 $228,122 $283,097 $275,931 $295,148 Operations 4,414,583 4,687,781 5,059,739 5,093,434 5,326,786 Emergency Medical 641,034 657,169 803,311 887,224 738,451 Fire Inspections 346,055 366,393 372,345 361,979 362,429 Emergency Management 283,399 314,625 414,798 410,022 430,582 Total Fire $5,904,596 $6,254,090 $6,933,290 $7,028,590 $7,153,396 7 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 3 - SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES ; GENERAL FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002/03 , Building Services $778,720 $724,660 $870,646 $840,646 $905,472 Non-Departmental $707,423 $799,003 $1,025,390 $750,390 $1,158,487 Reserve for Capital Improvements $500,000 $650,000 $681,629 $406,861 $550,000 Operating Transfers Out $218,800 $577 ,500 $50,000 $175,000 $285,000 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $26,169,127 $27,994,438 $30,121,094 $30,322,097 $31,349.365 Prevenative Street Maintenance Program Increase to Street overlay program $200,000 Expanded Traffic Enforcement Program Traffic Trailer $12,500 Tax Relief For Seniors Increase Senior Exemption to $36,000 $14,911 Increasing Court Security Building Security $18,268 Metal Detectors $4,309 Building Security Revenue ($22,577) Expansion of Special Event Night of Holiday Magic $40,225 Enhancing Emergency Medical Services & Emergency Preparedness EMS Handheld Data Collection $11,800 Regional Emergency Planning Council $5,000 Expanded Neighborhood Identity Program Apartment Inspection Program $36,304 Apartment Inspection Program Revenue ($40,000) Strategic Plan $25,000 Incentive Cost Savings Program ($42,374) Non-Linear Editing Stations $10,474 DVCAM Camera $9,900 DVCAM Editing Deck $12,000 Add'l Money - S. Grapevine Study $10,000 Total Proposed Enhancements $0 $0 $0 $212,500 $93,240 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $26,169,127 $27,994,438 $30,121,094 $30,534,597 $31,442,605 BALANCE $666,710 $904,962 $12,072 $33,686 $54,129 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 4 - SUMMARY OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUE AND DISTRIBUTION NET TAXABLE VALUE: Total Appraised Value as of July 25, 2002 Less Exemptions: Disabled Veteran Over 65 Homestead Disabled Persons Less: Personal Property Nominal Value Loss Abatement Value Loss Agricultural Value Loss Freeport Inventory Value Loss Pollution ControllProrated Absolute Total Reduction to Values Add: Estimated Minimum ARB protested values as of 7-25-01 Incomplete Property NET TAXABLE VALUE ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAX COLLECTIONS: Net Taxable Value Proposed Tax Rate per $100 Valuation Estimated Total Tax Levy at 100% Collection Less Estimated 1 % for Uncollectables Less TIF Transfer Less Debt Service Transfer TOTAL ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAX COLLECTIONS(Operations) 99% TAX RATE DISTRIBUTION SCHEDULE: General Fund - Maintenance & Operations Debt Service Fund % of Total Tax Rate 57.6% 42.4% TOTAL DISTRIBUTION OF TAX RATE 100% DISTRIBUTION OF ESTIMATED TAX REVENUE: Transfer to Debt Service Fund General Fund - Maintenance & Operations TOTAL ESTIMATED TAX REVENUE 100% Collection 6,750,000 9,162,762 $15,912,762 9 $3,028,629,970 (3,080,249) (87,512,767) (229,058,424) (7,120,197) (329) (25,247,493) (7,017,520) (9,975,250) (303,560) ($369,315,789) $79,531,554 $52,866,931 $2,791,712,666 $2,791,712,666 $0.57 $15,912,762 ($159,128) ($417,844) (6,332,156) $9,003,635 Tax Rate Distribution $0.328213 $0.241787 $0.57000 Projected Collection 6,750,000 9,003,635 $15,753,635 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 . SCHEDULE 5 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES GENERAL DEBT SERVICE FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 Beginning Balance $2,326,581 $2,004,734 $1,747,747 $1,802,490 $1,021,174 REVENUES Ad Valorem Taxes $5,250,000 $5,501,000 $6,100,000 $6,100,000 $6,750,000 TIF #1 Transfer ($194,605) ($184,852) ($417,844) Transfer In From: Drainage Utility 739,572 746,207 757,403 757,403 794,287 Park & Rec. Facilities Dev. Corp. 147,952 255,336 233,500 233,500 227,070 Interest on CIP 249,957 136,314 0 0 0 Information Services Fund 0 213,147 221,353 221,353 219,965 Equipment Services Fund 0 107,475 105,178 105,178 105,859 Building Services Fund 0 48,151 47,502 47,502 46,204 Utility Fund 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 0 Utility Rev Bond Fund 0 18,915 0 0 0 Bond Refunding Proceeds 0 1,319,000 0 0 0 Payments-Hazmat 19,669 19,669 19,669 19,669 0 Interest Income 140,489 89,426 59,756 50,000 50,000 City of Watauga, CIP Participation 0 0 19,785 19,785 19,785 TOTAL REVENUES $6,555,139 $8,462,140 $7,377,041 $7,377,038 $7,795,326 EXPENDITURES Existing Bonds & C.O.'s $6,703,630 $7,178,272 $7,527,225 $7,232,440 $7,841,646 1992 Lease Purchase 84,514 77,471 84,514 84,514 0 SanwaGEL(Afis/Radio) Issuance Costs/Paying Agent Fees 88,842 186,966 91,400 91,400 91,400 Bond Refunding Escrow Payment 0 1,221,675 0 0 0 Reserve for Future Debt Service 0 0 750,000 750,000 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $6,876,986 $8,664,384 $8,453,139 $8,158,354 $7,933,046 NET REVENUE ($321,847) ($202,244) ($1,076,098) ($781,316) ($137,720) ENDING BALANCE $2,004,734 $1,802,490 $671,649 $1,021,174 $883,454 II 10 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 6 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES UTILITY FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Water Sales and Charges $12,419,237 $11,877,750 $12,574,550 $11,667,045 $12,214,007 Sewer Sales and Charges 6,000,863 6,339,352 5,560,000 5,907,177 6,602,928 Payment from Watauga 56,000 0 0 0 0 Appropriation of Fund Balance ° 0 0 103,498 0 Miscellaneous 985,929 999,613 1,416,900 1,233,398 712,375 TOTAL REVENUES $19,462,029 $19,216,715 $19,551,450 $18,911,118 $19,529,310 EXPENDITURES Operatina Administration $186,935 $184,547 $195,675 $193,126 $225,593 Public Works 2,839,649 3,085,822 3,424,053 3,444,632 3,417,066 Development 348,170 413,159 486,978 490,028 566,142 Right of Way Maintenance 73,322 70,625 88,491 88,491 88,491 Utility Billing & Collections 972,772 951,587 1,065,652 1,050,584 1,084,649 Budget & Research 120,689 133,855 151,534 152,322 161,180 Accounting Services 99,772 100,235 114,954 114,909 122,554 Purchase of WaterlSewer FTW 2,435,267 2,949,642 4,120,890 4,120,890 4,371,000 Purchase of WaterlSewer TRA 5,235,835 5,627,970 4,286,600 4,286,600 4,710,000 Building Services 697,119 749,042 779,004 779,004 812,329 Non-Departmental 209,903 307,763 484,347 486,347 504,945 Sub-Total $13,219,433 $14,574,247 $15,198,178 $15,206,933 $16,063,949 Other & Reserves Debt Service $1,044,559 $1,532,676 $1,012,546 $1,012,546 $981,781 Franchise Fees 347,425 353,600 544,037 530,332 562,133 Indirect Costs 1,025,000 1,055,750 1,108,537 1,108,537 1,163,965 Payment In Lieu Of Taxes 248,982 282,744 270,650 270,650 284,183 Transfer from Utility CIP Reserve to 123,500 123,500 175,000 175,000 175,000 Information Services Fund Transfer to Self Insurance Fund 0 0 0 0 79,171 Transfer from Water to Sewer 0 0 500,000 500,000 0 Market Adjustment 0 0 40,013 0 84,049 Reserve for Capital Projects 3,453,130 1,294,198 702,489 3,622 75,079 Sub-Total $6,242,596 $4,642,468 $4,353,272 $3,600,687 $3,405,361 SUB-TOTAL $19,462,029 $19,216,715 $19,551,450 $18,807,620 $19,469,310 PlY Encumbrance Rollovers $103,498 SUB-TOTAL $19,462,029 $19,216,715 $19,551,450 $18,911,118 $19,469,310 Proposed Service Enhancements $60,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $19,462,029 $19,216,715 $19,551,450 $18,911,118 $19,529,310 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 11 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 7 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES UTILITY FUND - WATER OPERATIONS ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Water Sales and Charaes Water Sales $12,106,808 $11,571,860 $12,320,250 $11,448,273 $11,932,707 Water Taps 76,750 74,295 65,300 65,300 65,300 Water Inspection Fees 47,496 19,780 25,000 36,570 37,000 Service Charges 170,338 181,621 150,000 165,000 165,000 Water Wells 8,167 18,365 9,500 9,500 9,500 Miscellaneous 9,678 11,829 4,500 4,500 4,500 Sub-Total $12,419,237 $11,877,750 $12,574,550 $11,729,143 $12,214,007 Payment from WatauQa $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Miscellaneous Interest Income $306,087 $292,303 $257,100 $84,900 $132,000 Sale of City Property 0 0 0 0 0 Late Charges 227,909 230,038 232,500 232,500 234,825 Joint Use Reimbursement-Watauga 38,926 66,770 43,000 43,000 43,000 Subdivision Meter Revenue 57,009 62,275 57,900 57,900 58,000 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 0 62,098 0 Sub-Total $629,931 $651,386 $590,500 $480,398 $467,825 TOTAL REVENUES $13,049,168 $12,529,136 $13,165,050 $12,209,541 $12,681,832 EXPENDITURES Operatina Administration $112,161 $110,728 $117,405 $115,876 $135,356 Water Operations 2,224,927 2,333,792 2,649,284 2,633,618 2,588,472 Purchase of Water FTW 1,725,992 2,002,959 3,220,000 3,220,000 3,381,000 Purchase of Water TRA 3,284,988 3,008,262 2,160,000 2,160,000 2,310,000 Development 208,902 247,895 292,187 302,367 339,685 Right of Way Maintenance 43,993 42,159 53,095 53,095 53,095 Sub-Total $7,600,963 $7,745,795 $8,491,971 $8,484,956 $8,807,608 Finance/Utilitv Collections Meter Reading $180,895 $172,499 $197,343 $189,913 $198,691 Utility Billing/Customer Service 322,432 309,904 340,961 340,446 346,846 Utility Collection Services 80,336 88,549 101,086 100,557 105,253 Accounting Services 59,863 60,141 68,972 68,945 73,532 Budget & Research 72,413 80,313 90,920 91,393 96,708 Sub-Total $715,939 $711,406 $799,282 $791,254 $821,030 12 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 , SCHEDULE 7 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES UTILITY FUND - WATER OPERATIONS ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001102 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 Building Services $418,271 $449,425 $467,402 $467,402 $487,397 Non-Departmental $125,942 $184,657 $290,608 $337,324 $302,967 Sub-Total $8,861,115 $9,091,283 $10,049,263 $10,080,936 $10,419,002 Other & Reserves Debt Service $626,735 $919,606 $657,389 $657,389 $628,340 Franchise Fees 234,516 212,160 377,237 351,874 364,995 Indirect Costs 625,250 633,450 665,122 665,122 710,019 Payment In Lieu Of Taxes 149,389 169,646 162,390 162,390 170,510 Transfer from Utility CIP Reserve to 74,100 74,100 125,600 125,600 125,600 Information Services Fund Transfer to Self Insurance Fund 0 0 0 0 47,503 Transfer to Sewer 0 0 500,000 500,000 0 Market Adjustment 0 0 24,008 0 50,429 Reserve for Capital Projects 2,478,063 1,428,891 604,041 (333,770) 129,434 Sub-Total $4,188,053 $3,437,853 $3,115,787 $2,128,605 $2,226,830 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $13,049,168 $12,529,136 $13,165,050 $12,209,541 $12,645,832 Service Enhancements: Mini-Excavator $36,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $13,049,168 $12,529,136 $13,165,050 $12,209,541 $12,681,832 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 13 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 . SCHEDULE 8 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES UTILITY FUND - SEWER OPERATIONS ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Sewer Sales and Charaes Sewer Sales $5,749,556 $6,108,144 $5,356,250 $5,739,827 $6,394,178 Sewer Taps 25,438 20,562 19,250 19,250 19,250 Sewer Inspection Fees 45,854 17,196 30,000 20,000 20,000 Service Charges 170,337 181,621 150,000 165,000 165,000 Miscellaneous 9,678 11 ,829 4,500 4,500 4,500 Sub-Total $6,000,863 $6,339,352 $5,560,000 $5,948,577 $6,602,928 Payment from Watauaa $56,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Miscellaneous Interest Income $204,058 $194,869 $171,400 $56,600 $88,000 Sale of City Property 0 0 0 0 0 Late Charges 151,940 153,358 155,000 155,000 156,550 Transfer from Water 0 0 500,000 500,000 0 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 0 41,400 0 Sub-Total $355,998 $348,227 $826,400 $753,000 $244,550 TOTAL REVENUES $6,412,861 $6,687,579 $6,386,400 $6,701,577 $6,847,478 EXPENDITURES Operatina Administration $74,774 $73,819 $78,270 $77,250 $90,237 Sewer Operations 614,722 752,030 774,769 823,696 828,594 Sewer Treatment FTW 709,275 946,683 900,890 900,890 990,000 Sewer Treatment TRA 1,950,847 2,619,708 2,126,600 2,126,600 2,400,000 Development 139,268 165,264 194,791 201,579 226,457 Right of Way Maintenance 29,329 28,466 35,396 35,396 35,396 Sub-Total $3,518,215 $4,585,970 $4,110,716 $4,165,411 $4,570,684 Finance/Utilitv Collections Meter Reading $120,596 $114,999 $131,562 $126,608 $132,461 Utility Billing/Customer Service 214,955 206,603 227,308 226,964 231,230 Utility Collection Services 53,558 59,033 67,392 67,038 70,168 Accounting Services 39,909 40,094 45,982 45,964 49,022 Budget & Research 48,276 53,542 60,614 60,929 64,472 Sub-Total $477,294 $474,271 $532,858 $527,503 $547,353 14 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 . SCHEDULE 8 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES UTILITY FUND - SEWER OPERATIONS ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001102 FY 2002103 Building Services $278,848 $299,617 $311,602 $311,602 $324,932 Non-Departmental $83,961 $123,106 $193,739 $224,883 $201,978 Sub-Total $4,358,318 $5,482,964 $5,148,915 $5,229,399 $5,644,947 Other & Reserves Debt Service $417,824 $613,070 $355,157 $355,157 $353,441 Franchise Fees 112,909 141,440 166,800 178,457 197,138 Indirect Costs 399,750 422,300 443,415 443,415 453,946 Payment In Lieu Of Taxes 99,593 113,098 108,260 108,260 113,673 Transfer from Utility CIP Reserve to 49,400 49,400 49,400 49,400 49,400 Information Services Fund Transfer to Self Insurance Fund 0 0 0 0 31,668 Market Adjustment 0 0 16,005 0 33,620 Reserve for Capital Projects 975,067 (134,693) 98,448 337,489 (54,355) Sub-Total $2,054,543 $1,204,615 $1,237,485 $1,472,178 $1,178,531 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $6,412,861 $6,687,579 $6,386,400 $6,701,577 $6,823,478 - Service Enhancements: Mini-Excavator $24,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $6,412,861 $6,687,579 $6,386,400 $6,701,577 $6,847,478 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 - 15 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 9 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES GOLF COURSE FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Green Fees $1,387,904 $1,070,469 $1,370,474 $1,144,750 $1,163,940 Other Golf Revenue 404,152 323,650 417,429 351,600 354,880 Carts 490,476 373,757 498,200 392,000 421,245 Food & Beverage 490,314 350,821 473,290 392,000 425,000 Appropriation from Reserves 0 298,514 0 254,500 0 TOTAL REVENUES $2,772,846 $2,417,211 $2,759,393 $2,534,850 $2,365,065 Cost of Goods Sold $378,199 $246,947 $327,938 $243,040 $274,025 NET REVENUES $2,394,647 $2,170,264 $2,431 ,455 $2,291,810 $2,091,040 EXPENDITURES Pro Shop $248,317 $212,994 $243,411 $220,000 $231,446 Driving Range 14,066 10,690 14,400 12,000 10,500 Golf Carts 164,674 146,808 150,772 154,995 156,656 Course Maintenance 594,705 619,193 639,611 639,000 647,858 Food & Beverage 179,562 177,527 178,063 161,000 154,794 General & Administrative 134,916 210,471 115,183 126,199 110,255 Fixed Charges 175,675 179,974 127,600 116,500 130,620 Capital 243,227 0 283,500 254,500 3,000 Debt Service 592,132 556,153 500,126 500,126 508,213 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,347,274 $2,113,810 $2,252,666 $2,184,320 $1,953,342 Reserve for Equipment Purchases $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,003 Payment to Debt - Water $0 $56,454 $106,695 $106,695 $106,695 BALANCE $47,373 $0 $72,094 $795 $0 16 FISCALYEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 10 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES AQUATIC PARK FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Admissions $1,731,874 $1,703,015 $1,889,154 $1,781,719 $1,896,443 Advanced & Group Sales 622,102 706,258 650,380 782,840 809,847 Food and Beverage 389,952 350,904 431,565 413,645 413,645 Merchandise 171,582 146,370 236,046 174,275 174,275 Lockers 36,497 29,259 38,908 35,949 29,259 Other 14,375 54,246 14,125 17,288 17,288 Aquatic Classes/Special Events 74,518 69,622 88,749 73,837 77,257 Interest Income 86,273 91,988 80,850 45,281 55,500 Donations 25,000 22,000 21,500 20,000 20,000 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 0 4,429 0 Loan from Infrastructure Reserve 0 0 0 0 100,000 TOTAL REVENUES $3,152,173 $3,173,662 $3,451,277 $3,349,263 $3,593,514 EXPENDITURES OperatinQ General Services & Utilities $495,268 $567,846 $598,794 $700,484 $691,705 Public GroundslAquatics/Maint. 648,628 765,286 747,008 769,738 761,480 Business & Office Administration 360,960 375,242 421,746 399,691 409,492 Gift Shop/Concessions 407,230 463,488 465,513 461,490 459,722 Sales/Special Events/Admissions 209,042 183,727 266,515 297,581 296,562 Sub-Total $2,121,128 $2,355,589 $2,499,576 $2,628,984 $2,618,961 Other & Reserves Debt Service $261,620 $220,595 $228,273 $228,273 $221,858 Indirect Costs 75,540 77,818 81,709 81,709 85,794 Market Adjustment 0 0 4,967 0 21,792 Reserve For: Infrastructure & Major Repairs 325,000 325,000 325,000 325,000 325,000 Park Expansion 293,885 119,660 130,884 0 73,959 Insurance 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 38,500 Non-Departmental 0 0 105,868 5,868 107,650 Sub-Total $1,031,045 $818,073 $951,701 $715,850 $874,553 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,152,173 $3,173,662 $3,451,277 $3,344,834 $3,493,514 PlY Encumbrance Rollovers $4,429 Service Enhancements: New Locker System $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,152,173 $3,173,662 $3,451,277 $3,349,263 $3,593,514 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 17 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 11 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BUILDING SERVICES FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Chan:les for Service General Fund $657,157 $724,660 $758,146 $728,146 $792,972 Utility Fund 575,556 636,542 666,504 666,504 699,829 Transfer from General/Utility Funds 343,105 225,000 225,000 225,000 225,000 Sub-Total $1,575,818 $1,586,202 $1,649,650 $1,619,650 $1,717,801 Other Interest Income $35,071 $35,193 $31,151 $22,000 $24,500 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 0 39,566 0 Sub-Total $35,071 $35,193 $31,151 $61,566 $24,500 TOTAL REVENUES $1,610,889 $1,621,395 $1,680,801 $1,681,216 $1,742,301 EXPENDITURES Operatina General SeNices $93,840 $130,826 $130,209 $131,230 $137,144 Building SeNices 1,000,250 1,076,511 1,192,649 1,181,151 1,235,771 Transfer to Capital Budget 280,000 328,714 300,000 270,000 300,000 Sub-Total $1,374,090 $1,536,051 $1,622,858 $1,582,381 $1,672,915 Other & Reserves Debt SeNice $0 $48,151 $47,502 $47,502 $46,204 Market Adjustment 0 0 7,679 0 20,242 Other 0 2,795 2,762 2,762 0 ReseNe for Capital Projects 236,799 34,398 0 9,005 2,940 Sub-Total $236,799 $85,344 $57,943 $59,269 $69,386 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,610,889 $1,621,395 $1,680,801 $1,641,650 $1,742,301 PlY Encumbrance Rollovers $39,566 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,610,889 $1,621,395 $1,680,801 $1,681,216 $1,742,301 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 18 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 . SCHEDULE 12 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001102 FY 2002103 REVENUES Charaes for Service Transfers From: General Fund $701,388 $758,793 $787,095 $787,095 $826,462 Utility Fund 623,904 673,855 734,502 734,502 771,227 Crime Control & Prevention District 0 150,000 382,500 319,053 350,000 Utility CIP 1 Utility Construction 91,524 98,862 107,760 107,760 113,149 Crime Control & Prevention District 54,036 60,915 63,618 63,618 66,799 Park & Recreation Devlp. Fund 43,848 47,362 51,625 51,625 54,206 Other Funds 15,420 25,119 27,380 27,380 28,749 Sub-Total $1,530,120 $1,814,906 $2,154,480 $2,091,033 $2,210,592 Other Interest Income $63,338 $64,620 $63,250 $35,112 $38,500 Sale of City Property 32,866 39,979 26,500 26,500 26,573 Transfer from General/Utility Fund 162,500 287,500 125,000 250,000 125,000 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 333,318 410,606 172,104 Sub-Total $258,704 $392,099 $548,068 $722,218 $362,177 TOTAL REVENUES $1,788,824 $2,207,005 $2,702,548 $2,813,251 $2,572,769 EXPENDITURES Operatina General Services $100,856 $122,688 $136,485 $137,422 $143,843 Equipment Services Operations 882,517 990,102 1,105,540 1,079,569 1,147,419 Equipment Purchases 483,768 941,608 294,400 294,400 570,300 Police Vehicles/Equipment 0 0 386,579 323,132 463,074 Fire Vehicles/Equipment 0 0 663,000 663,000 115,000 Sub-Total $1,467,141 $2,054,398 $2,586,004 $2,497,523 $2,439,636 Other & Reserves Debt Service $0 $107,475 $105,178 $105,178 $105,859 Market Adjustment 0 0 7,534 0 21,664 Other 201 28,358 3,832 3,832 0 Equipment Services Reserve 321 ,482 16,774 0 0 0 Sub-Total $321,683 $152,607 $116,544 $109,010 $127,523 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,788,824 $2,207,005 $2,702,548 $2,606,533 $2,567,159 PlY Encumbrance Rollovers $206,718 Service Enhancements: State Inspection Analyzer $5,610 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,788,824 $2,207,005 $2,702,548 $2,813,251 $2,572,769 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 19 FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001 SCHEDULE 13 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES SELF INSURANCE FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES . Health/Medical $2,815,993 $2,880,009 $2,990,592 $3,021,844 $3,283,599 Workers' Compensation 650,448 672,366 670,461 693,471 727,571 General Liability/Unemployment 313,902 328,280 293,760 299,860 308,000 Property Insurance 0 0 32,000 32,000 49,000 Interest Income 141,984 137,584 131,750 62,000 87,003 Other Income 332,287 392,283 70,000 50,000 50,000 Transfer from General/Utility Funds 0 0 0 0 314,171 Appropriation of Reserve 0 0 0 606,567 0 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 0 10,706 0 TOTAL REVENUES $4,254,614 $4,410,522 $4,188,563 $4,776,448 $4,819,344 EXPENDITURES Health/Medical $2,778,965 $3,522,596 $3,089,065 $3,695,632 $3,713,419 Workers' Compensation 334,047 94,070 298,000 298,000 332,000 Other Insurance 91,016 111,236 131,500 131,500 187,200 Personnel Expenses 403,378 384,422 470,891 467,259 500,725 Reserve for Insurance Claims 560,997 221,030 113,107 88,051 0 Life Insurance Premiums 86,211 77,168 86,000 86,000 86,000 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $4,254,614 $4,410,522 $4,188,563 $4,766,442 $4,819,344 PlY Encumbrance Rollover $10,006 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $4,254,614 $4,410,522 $4,188,563 $4,776,448 $4,819,344 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 20 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 14 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES INFORMATION SERVICES FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Telecommunications Transfer From: General Fund $195,312 $196,245 $196,245 $196,245 $206,058 Utility Fund 45,612 42,376 44,883 44,883 47,127 Other Funds 45,996 44,588 42,084 42,084 44,189 Sub-Total $286,920 $283,209 $283,212 $283,212 $297,374 Computers Transfer From: General Fund $1,020,504 $1,020,730 $1,051,355 $963,420 $1,041,998 Utility Fund 419,640 543,165 443,991 443,991 466,190 Crime Control District 100,032 100,081 103,083 103,083 108,238 Other Funds 204,840 198,918 207,569 207,569 217,949 Sub-Total $1,745,016 $1,862,894 $1,805,998 $1,718,063 $1,834,375 Other Revenues Interest Income $80,812 $84,050 $81,000 $38,000 $48,000 Transmitter Lease 70,350 64,364 68,040 64,040 58,342 Other Income 31,913 21,342 23,700 21,000 21,500 Transfer From Utility Fund Reserve 134,880 0 175,000 175,000 175,000 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 0 183,337 0 Sub-Total $317,955 $169,756 $347,740 $481,377 $302,842 TOTAL REVENUES $2,349,891 $2,315,859 $2,436,950 $2,482,652 $2,434,591 EXPENDITURES OperatinQ General Services $175,750 $174,421 $200,941 $192,580 $184,184 Major Computer Systems 553,738 524,379 384,927 382,946 372,449 Microcomputer Systems 617,586 350,721 504,064 436,742 655,428 Telecommunications 203,334 232,831 307,278 287,716 286,020 Data Network 189,226 271,214 255,004 269,185 233,139 GIS System 165,971 154,204 173,287 172,484 165,294 Public Safety 1,407 157,663 231,236 215,522 264, 117 Sub-Total $1,907,012 $1,865,433 $2,056,737 $1,957,175 $2,160,631 Other & Reserves Debt Service $0 $213,147 $221,353 $221,353 $219,965 Market Adjustment 0 0 10,243 0 53,995 Other 606 11,542 4,091 4,091 0 Reserve for Systems Improvements 442,273 225,737 144,526 116,696 0 Sub-Total $442,879 $450,426 $380,213 $342,140 $273,960 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,349,891 $2,315,859 $2,436,950 $2,299,315 $2,434,591 PrY Encumbrance Rollover $183,337 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,349,891 $2,315,859 $2,436,950 $2,482,652 $2,434,591 Incentive Cost Savings: ($13,000) Fire Inspector Laptops $13,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,349,891 $2,315,859 $2,436,950 $2,482,652 $2,434,591 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 21 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 15 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PROMOTIONAL FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Occupancy Tax Proceeds $225,317 $230,589 $220,000 $220,000 $215,000 Interest Income 7,252 6,120 7,700 2,900 3,600 Other Income 2,789 8,726 1,000 1,000 1,000 Appropriation of Fund Balance 37,926 6,567 0 0 0 TOTAL REVENUES $273,284 $252,002 $228,700 $223,900 $219,600 EXPENDITURES Economic Development $273,284 $252,002 $213,041 $214,610 $212,947 Non-Departmental 0 0 2,869 0 4,800 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $273,284 $252,002 $215,910 $214,610 $217,747 BALANCE $0 $0 $12,790 $9,290 $1,853 22 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 16 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES DONATIONS FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Contributions - NRH Water Bills $82,792 $88,615 $83,000 $105,000 $121,000 Contributions - Shelter Fund 10,313 14,738 16,200 12,250 12,700 Donations - Spay/Neuter 5,921 5,933 2,000 3,500 3,600 Critter Connection 22,163 6,308 10,000 3,400 3,500 Library Book Sale Proceeds 4,647 2,749 3,000 3,000 3,000 Coffee Bar Proceeds 700 1,300 2,700 2,700 2,700 Transmitter Lease Income 0 28,181 0 0 0 Grant Proceeds 15,270 0 0 0 0 Interest Income 19,366 19,990 20,000 11,109 12,000 Other Income 2,333 9,139 2,500 6,500 6,500 TOTAL REVENUES $163,505 $176,953 $139,400 $147,459 $165,000 EXPENDITURES Library $61,372 $45,068 $45,000 $48,000 $50,000 Animal Services 22,903 0 0 0 0 Critter Connection 19,220 (3,679) 36,477 47,262 31,922 Special Events and Arts 10,685 10,882 16,000 16,000 16,000 Sub-Total $114,180 $52,271 $97,477 $111,262 $97,922 PlY Encumbrance Rollover $267 Sub-Total $114,180 $52,271 $97,477 $111,529 $97,922 Service Enhancements: 50th Anniversary Celebration $30,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $114,180 $52,271 $97,477 $111,529 $127,922 BALANCE $49,325 $124,682 $41,923 $35,930 $37,078 23 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 17 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDlTU~ES SPECIAL INVESTIGATION FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001102 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Federal Forfeited Funds $30,810 $25,804 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 State Forfeited Funds 8,212 7,925 3,500 10,000 8,000 Municipal Forfeitures 99 1,617 1,000 6,258 1,000 MDT Reimbursements 154,954 68,704 34,944 83,160 45,420 AFIS Reimbursements 0 0 12,156 12,156 12,156 Radio System Reimbursements 165,704 167,540 186,017 199,608 196,364 Tarrant County EMS Reimbursement 0 0 0 31,632 0 Interest Income 9,291 13,028 12,350 6,844 6,750 Other Income 87 1,542 1,000 60,902 58,689 Appropriation of Fund Balance 190,333 167,552 0 0 0 TOTAL REVENUES $559,490 $453,712 $270,967 $430,560 $348,379 EXPENDITURES Forfeited Funds $26,987 $12,207 $5,000 $32,966 $7,500 MDT Maintenance & Equipment 290,120 56,697 34,944 34,944 35,844 Radio Maintenance 159,283 167,433 186,017 186,017 196,364 AFIS Maintenance & Equipment 655 95,507 12,158 12,158 12,158 Locally Seized Funds 24,052 17,594 0 0 0 Loan Payment to General Fund 58,393 104,274 0 59,902 57,489 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $559,490 $453,712 $238,119 $325,987 $309,355 PlY Encumbrance Rollovers $3,194 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $559,490 $453,712 $238,119 $329,181 $309,355 BALANCE $0 $0 $32,848 $101,379 $39,024 24 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 18 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES DRAINAGE UTILITY FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 Beginning Balance $360,395 $391,021 $394,635 $316,449 $303,546 REVENUES Drainage Fees $765,153 $723,256 $749,000 $740,000 $740,000 Interest Income 9,971 9,369 9,800 4,500 5,500 TOTAL REVENUES $775,124 $732,625 $758,800 $744,500 $745,500 EXPENDITURES Debt Service $739,572 $746,207 $757,403 $757,403 $794,288 Other Expenditures 4,926 60,990 0 0 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $744,498 $807,197 $757,403 $757,403 $794,288 BALANCE $391,021 $316,449 $396,032 $303,546 $254,758 25 FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SCHEDULE 19 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT FUND ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Sales Tax $4,240,118 $4,374,699 $4,368,793 $4,093,384 $4,591,041 Interest Income 272,128 316,700 173,800 122,000 126,000 Youth Assn. Maintenance Fees 27,986 21,421 33,000 27,000 28,000 Tennis Center Revenue 231,065 272,582 230,300 292,445 297,000 Intergovernmental Grants 570,080 470,591 680,000 1,359,751 3,714,525 Other Income 5,484 515 0 0 0 Appropriation of Debt Service Reserve 0 0 0 201,000 0 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 0 12,477 0 TOTAL REVENUES $5,346,861 $5,456,508 $5,485,893 $6,108,057 $8,756,566 EXPENDITURES OperatinQ Park Facilities Development Admin. $325,470 $416,546 $352,678 $355,467 $376,895 Parks & Public Grounds 499,814 630,784 861,275 865,010 880,625 Tennis Center Operations 332,491 370,334 403,277 404,083 457,880 Sub-Total $1,157,775 $1,417,664 $1,617,230 $1,624,560 $1,715,400 Other & Reserves Debt Service - Revenue Bonds $1,241,592 $1,252,939 $964,758 $1,166,358 $1,155,836 Debt Service - CO's 147,952 255,336 233,500 233,500 227,070 Indirect Costs 202,608 208,688 219,122 219,122 230,078 Market Adjustment 0 0 11,615 0 40,168 Non-Departmental 0 0 9,393 9,393 0 Reserve for Capital Projects 2,596,934 2,321,881 2,430,275 2,842,647 5,388,014 Sub-Total $4,189,086 $4,038,844 $3,868,663 $4,471,020 $7,041,166 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $5,346,861 $5,456,508 $5,485,893 $6,095,580 $8,756,566 PlY Encumbrance Rollovers $12,477 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $5,346,861 $5,456,508 $5,485,893 $6,108,057 $8,756,566 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 26 NI~H Office of the City Manager r:ITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS August 2, 2002 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Crime Control & Prevention District Board of Directors City of North Richland Hills North Richland Hills, Texas The Crime Control and Prevention District was approved by voters in February 1996 establishing the district for five years. The voters approved a district Board of Directors that is made up of seven City Council members. A continuation referendum was held on May 5, 2001. Continuation of the collection of a half-cent sales tax was approved as the funding mechanism by which the city would provide improved police services to the citizens of North Richland Hills. Goals and Strategies of the District included: 1. Reduce response time to calls for service. 2. Reduce occurrence of call stacking. 3. Increase officer visibility. 4. Enhance crime-fighting tools through new equipment and updated technology. 5. Reduce gang-related activity. To accomplish these goals the following resources were provided: 1. Addition of sworn and support personnel. 2. Upgrading of compensation plan to retain and attract highly qualified police personnel. 3. New Equipment - vehicles and computers. 4. Needed training and other operating costs. When the District was implemented, the District Board and Council indicated that future increases in operating expenses for the Police Department and any additional programs or services would be paid by the Crime Control District. This would therefore, not adversely impact property taxes for police services. P,O, Box 820609· North Richland Hills. Texas - 76182-0609 7301 Northeast Loop 820·817-427·6003- FAX 817-427-6016 In July of 1996, the District began collecting sales tax. At that time a Transition Reserve was established which would help to lessen the impact in the event the continuation referendum did not pass in the year 2001. It is recommended to continue with the transition fund as a reserve for operations in the event that the District is not reauthorized in 2011. Last year, the Council agreed to increase the reserve goal to $4.6 million, which would be two-thirds of operation costs in ten years. The estimated accumulated reserve for transition as of September 30,2002 will be approximately $3.8 million. Original sales tax projections estimated collections of approximately $3.5 annually. Based on these projections, by the end of fiscal year 2002 (75 months) the District should have collected approximately $21.9 million in sales taxes. Based on actual collections in fiscal year 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,2000,2001 and projected collections for fiscal year 2002, total estimated collections as of September 30, 2002 would be approximately $23.4 million. ACCOMPLISHMENTS Since July 1996, many positive results have been realized in answer to the goals established by the District. · The department has responded to 87,532 calls for service in the first nine months of fiscal year 2002 as compared to 61,696 calls for service in the first nine months of fiscal year 1996, a 41.8% increase. · Total arrests in FY2001 were up from 1996 by 1,548, a 49% increase. · Total charges in FY2001 were up from 1996 by 5545, a 69% increase. · During calendar year 2000 crimes per 1,000 population decreased 6%. · Total violations issued were up by 54% from 1996 through 2001. · Average response times for priority 1 calls have decreased by 4 minutes and 17 seconds from 1996 to through June 30, 2002. · The Police Department implemented a seventh patrol district this year. RESOURCES ADDED TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO DATE Because of the Crime Control District, the City has been able to add resources for police services since 1996 in the following areas: 1. $10.7 million to pay for salaries and benefits for 45 new police personnel, including 27 police officers, two detectives, 16 support personnel, and an upgraded compensation plan for all sworn police personnel. - ii ""~·~'~'~_··____""_______~_M____ 2. Funding for a new $1.8 million state of the art Public Safety Computer System ($1.1 million funded by C.C.D.). 3. Approximately $300,000 for other capital projects such as renovations of the dispatch area and improvements to the Police Property and Evidence Project. 4. Funding in the amount of $1.06 million for 16 new vehicles and 12 refurbished vehicles. 5. Funding of $93,000 for radios and crime scene equipment. 2002-2003 PROPOSED BUDGET The 2002-2003 Crime Control and Prevention District budget provides for the continuation of the upgraded compensation plan and salaries and benefits, supplies, training, equipment maintenance for 45 police personnel including 27 police officers, two detectives and 16 support staff. Also included is $350,000 for the replacement and refurbishment of Police Department vehicles. No new programs are proposed for the 2002-2003 Crime Control and Prevention District Budget, but a change in the Auto Impound Program is being recommended in the General Fund allocation of the Police Department. FUTURE PLANS B!lL~tL- It is recommended that the CCD Transition Fund remain intact over the ten-year life of the District. The goal is to add to the fund so that a balance of approximately $4.6 million or two-thirds of projected operations is available at the end of the ten-year period. Plans are to continue the policy the City Council established last year which was that the Transition Fund not be used to supplement on-going operations, but may be borrowed from time to time to pay for one-time purchases of capital items. For example, new vehicles, equipment or minor renovations in facilities would qualify for loans from the transition fund, as we have suggested in the above proposal for 2002-2003. Every effort would be made to replenish or "pay back" the Transition Fund for these purchases so that the goal of $4.6 million might be realized. We believe that this reflects a sound business approach and prudent use of these funds. Because sales tax collections are lower than projected due to the economic downturn, the proposed 2002/2003 CCD budget includes a loan from the Transition Fund in the amount of $350,000, which will allow the Police Department to replace vehicles keeping current with the vehicle replacement plan that has been established. As this is a loan, the funds will be replenished in the near future so the funding goal is not jeopardized. iii SUMMARY Many accomplishments have been achieved with the addition of the half-cent sales tax for the Crime Control District. Improvements have been ,made in handling criminal and other police service increases. Positive impacts have been made in response times, and reductions of burglaries and thefts have resulted. A state of the art computer system has been acquired and installed to provide officers the ability to respond, conduct investigations and communications, and retrieve critical information in a more timely and efficient manner. A significant improvement in our compensation plan was provided through this funding that has not only helped retain quality police professionals, but also to attract quality personnel. The establishment of a Transitional Fund, projected at almost $4.0 million in 2002, will provide a sound financial basis in future planning. A ten-year plan has been established that includes provisions for the recently adopted salary plan, funds for vehicle replacement and funds for computer replacement over the next ten years. The projected balance of the transition fund at the end of ten years is approximately .$4.6 million. We expect sales tax numbers to remain flat in the coming year, and will monitor collections closely adjusting the CCD budget as appropriate. For the coming year, the following ongoing efforts to continue originally stated goals are recommended: · Comprehensive Evaluation of Crime Control District Mission, Accomplishments, Operations and Programs. · Planning for Future Needs. · Fleet Assessment. · Home Town Development Project - Study Impact on Policy and Service Delivery. We appreciate the opportunity that the voters have given us to continue this Crime Control District program. You have entrusted us to be good stewards of these funds, and use them in the most cost effective manner to accomplish the Goals of the City Council. We look forward to working with you in the coming years to make this the most successful program possible. Respectfully submitted, ~y:~ ~~ ~. ~Unningham City Manager iv FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 . SCHEDULE 20 - SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT ADOPTED REVISED PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY 1999/00 FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 REVENUES Sales Tax $4,093,454 $4,191,254 $4,220,619 $3,945,210 $4,443,227 Interest Income 217,888 232,835 166,023 150,000 118,000 Street Crimes Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0 Other Income 0 26,941 0 0 0 Grant Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Appropriation of Fund Balance 0 0 0 12,093 Loan from Transition Fund 0 0 306,667 433,152 360,754 TOTAL REVENUES $4,311,342 $4,451,030 $4,693,309 $4,540,455 $4,921,981 EXPENDITURES OperatinQ Administration $6,648 $6,656 $9,328 $9,328 $7,170 Administrative Services 494,139 432,819 471,406 473,413 491,554 Investigations 240,203 209,681 250,013 252,081 261,200 Uniform Patrol 1,277,328 1,481,877 1,611,593 1,525,780 1,623,786 Technical Services 177,184 164,589 202,923 204,881 221,499 Detention Services 151,642 187,192 249,881 252,313 260,261 Property Evidence 47,516 42,540 46,103 46,476 48,247 Communications 9,864 10,228 11,337 11 ,098 11,844 Transfer to Equipment Services 0 152,550 382,500 321,053 350,000 Sub-Total $2,404,524 $2,688,132 $3,235,084 $3,096,423 $3,275,561 Other & Reserves Indirect Costs $337,092 $247,212 $364,573 $364,573 $382,802 Police Dept. Salary Increases-General 807,552 857,151 983,953 983,953 1,037,086 Child Advocacy Center 10,130 10,205 15,755 15,755 15,995 Reserve for Transition 577,828 648,330 0 0 0 Reserve for Computer System 174,216 0 0 0 100,000 Special Investigation Loan 0 0 59,902 59,902 57,489 Other 0 0 7,756 7,756 0 Market Adjustment 0 0 26,286 0 53,048 Sub-Total $1,906,818 $1,762,898 $1,458,225 $1,431,939 $1,646,420 SUB-TOTAL EXPENDITURES $4,311,342 $4,451,030 $4,693,309 $4,528,362 $4,921,981 PlY Encumbrance Rollovers $12,093 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $4,311,342 $4,451,030 $4,693,309 $4,540,455 $4,921,981 BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 27 August 2, 2002 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of North Richland Hills North Richland Hills, Texas The Proposed Capital Projects Budget for Fiscal Year 2002/2003 identifies major projects and items not included directly in the Annual Operating Budget. The Capital Projects Budget provides for major long-life equipment used in daily operations, and funding for the construction and renovation of major facilities and infrastructure. Primary sources of funding for these projects are: General Obligation Bonds, Certificates of Obligation, Transfers from Operating Funds, Revenue Bonds, Permanent Street Maintenance Capital Funds, Park and Recreation half-cent Sales Tax Funds, Capital Reserve Funds, and Federal and State grants. The Proposed Capital Projects Budget for 2002/2003 totals $36,114,530. This budget contains new and continuing projects in all areas of City operations. Some projects were selected following City Council budget discussions, others were authorized by voters during past bond elections, and still others were identified by City departmental evaluation and examination of needs. The City Council has recognized the importance of dedicating funds on an annual basis to enhance the City's efforts for the major repair and preventive maintenance of City streets by authorizing the creation of a Permanent Street Maintenance Fund. With over 210 miles of streets and the aging of them, it is important to conduct preventive maintenance that will delay more costly street reconstruction and extend the life of the current street system. The 2002/2003 proposed level of funding is equal to the 2001/2002 revised amount of $600,000. These funds will allow us to improve the overall condition of approximately 50 streets to include complete resurfacing of 16 lane miles. The City Council also recognizes the importance of dedicating funds on an annual basis to improve City sidewalks. This project constructs new sidewalks in high pedestrian areas of the City. The 2002/2003 proposed level of funding for this project is $50,000, and the source of funding is the General Fund "pay-as-you-go" Capital Projects Reserve. The Reserve for Capital Projects was established by the City Council in 1998/1999 as a "pay-as-you-go" way to address smaller capital improvement needs. It has collected approximately $1.75 million since inception. The proposed 2002/2003 Reserve is $550,000. In order to protect the City's $24 million investment in facilities and $19 million investment in equipment, staff has updated the ten-year Equipment Replacement and Building Services Plan, which City Council approved in 1996/1997. Additionally, we are getting close to the end of the funds from the 1994 Bond Election Program. Therefore, Staff has also identified and prioritized capital improvement needs for the next 5 to 7 years. The Citizens' Capital Improvement Study Committee will review Staffs prioritized list of needs in coming months. The City Council has shown its commitment to this community by continuing to ensure the maintenance and appearance of our City facilities. I want to thank Council for their efforts to communicate to management their priorities for the capital budget. City staff will continue to monitor the condition of all our facilities and make recommendations based on needs and available resources in the Annual Capital Projects Budget. Respectfully submitted, ~y~ L~~vS l?unningham City Manager LJC/cwc ii Summary of Project Funding 2002/2003 Capital Improvement Program STREET & SIDEWALK PROJECTS G.O. Bonds, Existing Funds G.O. Bonds, Future Issuance ('94 Program) G.O. Bonds, Upcoming Bond Election Certificates of Obligation, Existing Funds Certificates of Obligation, Proposed Grant Funds Reserves Intergovernmental Other DRAINAGE PROJECTS G.O. Bonds, Existing Funds Certificates of Obligation, Existing Funds General Fund Drainage Utility Fund Information Services Fund Utility Operations for CIP UTILITY PROJECTS Certificates of Obligation, Existing Funds Utility Operations for CIP Information Services Fund PARKS & RECREATION PROJECTS Park Development Sales Tax Park Revenue Bonds, Existing Funds Certificates of Obligation, Existing Funds Grant Funds AQUATIC PARK PROJECTS Aquatic Park Expansion Reserve Aquatic Park Infrastructure Reserve Certificates of Obligation, Proposed Funding To Date $6,604,775 o o 8,660,331 o 9,711,624 3,552,207 852,384 706,000 >:p:r.o~~d< Estimated :::2002iió03.:: 2003/2004 ... . .... ... .. . . . ..... , . . $0 240,000 3,940,000 o o 1,734,345 650,000 1,130,500 o Remaining Amount Total Funds .......... . .........:..:.........:$0... · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . . . ..... . . . 'r.n' . .:.:.:. 1.;~6Q;Q\XI:. ........... .··.·.··0·· ....,.......... . ·.·.···:···::·········:··0.· ............... . . . . . . . :.:.:.:. 0..· ............. . )!;5.~;qo.o. · »)~Q9;qOQ.. ......... ·:J4~;OPQ··· ··················:···.·.{f·. $0 605,000 7,840,000 o 1,260,000 4,770,138 1,950,000 o o $6,604,775 2,225,000 11,780,000 8,660,331 1,260,000 18,775,107 7,952,207 2,328,884 706,000 · . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . .............. . ............,.. . .............. . ............... . $30,087,321 ·<.$ë;oß~;ooo $7,694,845 $16,425,138 $2,920,500 343,200 o 40,000 55,000 81,300 $3,440,000 $100,000 3,225,000 55,000 $3,380,000 $5,100,448 50,000 900,000 1,134,217 .. . . ...,.-.. . $0 .........Q.. ............ . .2;09Q;Q<X>< "200;000 . .<(). .·.·:·.0.·. .. . ... . .. . ... . ·····$·2· ·2' O· .o. ".0' ·00'" '.' .... . .. ..... ',',' j,' ,', ..... . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... . ........ . . ....... · . : : ..<.:'<..$Þ. ...... :~;.1·80;O(}b... .. .....>::<......:() ........... . ......... . .............. . .... S3,1:80;?ÖO:·: ....... .. ........ . . .. .. · . ,. .. ... . · . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . ·:.:$1.;~~~;.1<iO:' ...:.........·....·...9.· ·.·.·.:.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·0·.· <:::3.;å11;$2:5> ... . $7,184,665 ·>$5;+89;625.. $250,000 150,000 o ... .' .,. . ... ....... .... ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . ..:... ·$Q9;96Q·. .:··.·Z80;OPQ·. .:. ". ::.>:(). ........ ." ........" . $400,000 ··.>$310;000· 4 $3,280,000 $7,350,000 $17,042,548 0 0 50,000 0 0 900,000 2,673,443 0 7,685,185 $5,953,443 $7,350,000 $25,677,733 . . . . $0 2,200,000 o $2,200,000 $60,292,304 $0 $0 $2,920,500 0 0 343,200 0 0 2,000,000 0 0 240,000 0 0 55,000 0 0 81,300 $0 $0 $5,640,000 $0 3,750,000 o $100,000 12,355,000 55,000 $12,510,000 $3,750,000 $485,000 $325,000 $1,150,000 (250,000) 0 180,000 2,250,000 2,750,000 5,000,000 $2,485,000 $3,075,000 $6,330,000 MUNICIPAL FACILITY PROJECTS Permanent Building Maintenance Fund Certificates of Obligation, Existing Funds Reserve for Capital Improvements Tax Increment Financing Dist. #2 (C.O.'s) Park Development Sales Tax MAJOR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT PROGRAM Equipment Services Fund Information Services Reserve CIP PERSONNEL General CIP Personnel (Interest Earnings) Utility CIP Personnel (Interest Earnings) Utility Operations for Capital Projects Utility Operations for CIP & Canst. Pers. TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM G.O. Bonds, Existing Funds G.O. Bonds, Future Issuance ('94 Program) G.O. Bonds, Upcoming Bond Election Certificates of Obligation, Existing Funds Certificates of Obligation, Proposed Park Development Sales Tax Utility Operations for CIP Grant Funds Reserves Other Funding To Date $15,000 3,750,000 475,000 o o $4,240,000 $0 228,600 $228,600 $9,525,275 o o 13,753,531 o 5,100,448 3,306,300 10,845,841 4,820,807 1,608,384 :p.r.~p'~,~.c: Estimated :iooii2iió3} 2003/2004 ... . ... .. ... . .,. . ..... . . . :::: :$300;600::: :::::::::::::::::::::0::: ............. . :>:::250;0i:XF ··········56·0········ ::::1:lt:::::~:::~::: ............ . ......... . ... ",. : : :$2;000;000: .. . .... . · . .. . . . Remaining Amount Total funds $0 $0 $315,000 0 0 3,750,000 0 0 725,000 10,250,000 19,300,000 31,000,000 500,000 600,000 1,100,000 $10,750,000 $19,900,000 $36,890,000 . . .............. . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :~~~6;~(j(( .. . "'30'0"''' . <-:<Q . .. .vv:-: .. . .. . . . $234,651 70,000 177 ,208 674,262 $1,156,121 $0 240,000 3,940,000 o 2,250,000 3,780,000 3,051,470 4,407,788 885,000 11,685,151 $0 o $0 o $326,000 858,600 :::::::: $956;000::: . . ........... . ......... . .............. . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · ............. ............... . · , . . . . . . . . . . . . . $O:)#~,~~: o 70'00:0 o ..·\1~Ò~2: o ::}~4~;~~9: $0 · . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . ............ . ::::$:1:;1:14;34.1::: .. .... .....,..... . ........... . .......... .. ........ .. :::::::::.::::.::::::::$():.: ::::.:: {3s6;Qoo::: · . ::::::::::::::0: ............ . ·····················0···· :::::.:·:·:·:::::::::::·:ö::: · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . . . . '~"""¡.i\1\' ::::::: 1:!3:1 ~;: ~~:.: .:...:. ~,~Q~;'?~:~.:. <}A3~;~7~.: .·.·.·.5,816IQOO· . :::>:2;09t~i6::: $0 $0 $1,184,600 $761,786 210,000 575,299 2,188,968 $1,222,063 350,000 922,899 3,511,559 $3,736,053 $6,006,521 $0 605,000 7,840,000 o 4,010,000 7,950,000 6,514,267 4,770,138 2,275,000 20,271,786 $9,525,275 2,225,000 11,780,000 13,753,531 6,260,000 18,142,548 16,870,758 26,460,292 13,856,807 35,656,947 .... . : :$.4~;96Ö;5~: .::..: :$îi;094;972 :.:..: :$:ro.;239~4Ø9. ::.::. $54;2~6~191:.:::::.::: :$154;$31;158::: 5 Summary of Project Expenditures 2002/2003 Capital Improvement Program Proaram Project To Date ::<p:~~p'i).~~è(:: Estimated :::::~~º~:::: 2003/2004 ......... ....... ..".......... . ....' ......... .... ,... ",... ...- ,_....... Remaining Amount Drainage Projects $19,175,893 >$i)~t>91:;~:: $12,499,557 $17,525,000 101,000 Street & Sidewalk Projects Utility Projects 1,676,500 867,500 2,593,377 Parks & Recreation Projects Aquatic Park Projects 65,000 725,000 Municipal Facility Projects Major Capital Equipment Program 30,000 General CIP Personnel Utility CIP Personnel Utility Construction Personnel ........ . ......., . ............ . · . ::::::: :a~~ø~$9~:: ......... . ......... . . . . . . :....: '4:;~06:;5Ö~ ........ . .,...... , ::::::::9~Q1:~;72~:: · . . . . . . . .. ....... · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · .... . ::::::::::: 1:Qf);öt)Ö:: ........... . ........ . ............,. . ::<~,~~~;Qþ( . . ......... . ........ . ......... . ........ . ......... . 170,000 3,414,000 . . 6,391,627 2,485,000 4,405,000 o 234,651 247,208 674,262 ~ó.;.rCJþ.:Exp· 'endlture,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::S' ·:2'5' :~13':2'-M:::::::::$' ·3...·i:!>1· ·1·:.t:5:·'3if>:<:$3· Ø·........:10· '':< :~~ .~.'... ,',. ,", ,',. ,', ,',. ,'" ,.................................... ,""".., t.v. ...... .'1). ...,. . ...... . .,~4''',~ ...,.. .. U2;7Ø2;OS:3::: <$1:$4~531 ~1 Sa:· .. . ·~.~154·t60~: o . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . ... . :::::::.:: :22~;~2G:: ............... . o . . .. . :::.::::::::24(};~2.. .. . .. . .... . o ::::::::::: :648;329:: ........ . .. . 3 3,920,000 7,680,000 3,075,000 26,725,000 761,786 785,299 2,188,968 Total EXDenditures $60,292,304 5,640,000 12,510,000 25,677,733 6,330,000 36,890,000 o 1,184,600 1,222,063 1,272,899 3,511,559 Schedule 1 2002/2003 Street & Sidewalk Capital Projects Budget Summary Map Page bQ. No. Project To Date $1,130,000 145,000 5,500,000 250,000 230,000 7,106,893 160,000 100,000 300,000 769,000 ::: :~~()p~~e(j::: :::2002i20G3:: ......... . ... . ......... .. Estimated 2003/2004 Remaining Amount $0 0 0 0 1,000,000 0 0 100,000 8,860,000 0 Total $1,350,000 1,050,000 5,820,000 2,716,000 3,641,854 11,794,000 1,300,000 785,950 10,810,000 969,000 :!oiåi :CO(¡tb1uin~ :p.r.~t$.: .... . :$1:5;680;883 ::< ::'1..66;,54::: :Si;919~057: : Ü;96O;000:: $4ó;23~8.04: ......... . ........ . .... . . . .... . ... . ...... . .. . Permanent Street & Sidewalk Maintenance Projects 11. 32 Permanent Street Maintenance Pro' ects 12. 34 Permanent Sidewalk Maintenance Pro'ects .......... . ........... . .......... . . .... ..... . :: <:$.~Q;«!Q:: ::::::::::$Q$;«!Q:: ::::::::::::~~Q;«!Q:: ...... :1":510;000' .... . ..........'" . ,', " :<:<4ttë54: ........... . : : : : : : 2:,4.00;.000: : : : : : Ü.i4ó;.öOO: : ····250000· .. . .... .,.',', :::::::::: ø5ò;.Qció:: 2ei1i 00<i .. . ',',' I.',', $0 300,000 0 896,000 2,000,000 2,287,107 100,000 335,950 1,000,000 0 ..... ...... $600,000 50,000 :rot¡jI:Pe~ei)f~lnt~~ri&8:Pi~t$::::::::':': . ........ . ......... . ............. . :<:$3;180;000::: :::::::$8SO:,aoO:::: :::$65IMIOIL: :::$1;950;000 . . . . . . . . . ......... . ..."... . $0 300,000 25,000 o . . ......... . ...... . . $·1·,000;· ~ ';'''''''':4_'' 3 800 000 .....,.~. 'I . ...·...;415;000· 0 . . . f5O'.OOO· 0 ........ . $0 3,750,000 o o $6,060,000 350,000 ... . :.6~"1O:,oOO . $1,000,000 '.000,000 500,000 150,000 : :;:$~2s;oQ$:: :;: :$i.11$;~0:::;:" :$:3;$øo;~Ø:;: :::;: $,1i1$o;QO$: :::;:$1o-..650;~O:: :".ò~':N~~r.~~~:::·::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ......... . ......... . ......... . ... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . ......... . :r~~(rQt~~:~~:::::::::::::·::::::::::::::::::::::: ........ . ........ . . ..:...........................-:-:. .«-:$$:-: .. . ::r~:~FOJ.~ (:t)sfå::::.:·:. $0 o o 645,500 485,000 . . . . $720,000 540,000 605,000 o o $720,000 540,000 605,000 645,500 485,000 '::::::;: :::$0:::: :J.'¡:;1~Ò_:: .. :;:$t;á6$iOò$:::::: :<$t~t~.. ... . ... , ..... . .... . ... . .. :::::::::::::$;_~~75.813: ~:~:$1~:,{j_1~_54:::~::$~~.49'~5~::::: $;t;52S.OQÒ::~:::Søo;2íï,304:: . . ........ . . . . .. ... ......,.... . ......,... . .......... . I: Projects wholely or partially unfinanced . Grant Projects: CDBG -15 ISTEA - 4 & 6 Urban Street Program - 5 TEA-21 - 2, 9 & 14 TxDOT - 2, 19 & 20 8 Project To Date $0 6,136,275 468.500 8.660,331 392,207 3,060.000 100,000 0 7,337,107 200,000 1,900.000 274,517 32,000 820.384 0 706,000 0 0 0 ::::~r.9P.i¡i~i{: >~~~~9( Estimated 2003/2004 Remaining Amount $605,000 0 0 0 0 1,800,000 150.000 0 0 0 0 4.770,138 0 0 0 0 3750 000 . 4,090,000 1,260,000 Total $2,225,000 6,136,275 4&8,500 8,660,331 392,207 6,060,000 350,000 1,150,000 9,233,107 500,000 1,900,000 7,142,000 1,283,500 820,384 225,000 706,000 . ....... '..7'.*.000 , ~;;:'~~.ooo "'1,210,000 ..... ........ 'T' :":':":··s· ................:..:&-e......;.¡.;.'...............'...'......,'.'................................................,:.e..';"08' . 1· "3' 2· ·,··'····,'·:.e...:nS· 5' ·0' OQ. . ····'..···~1· "6' "4"'84'" 5· ······:.e'·e· ·4' 2· "'1' ·3·8·......'$· 6· .(J' ;28. . . 2;. :'¡i\.Ii" :::~~:,.I!t~~~:'!'!::r:~".~~::::::::::<:>:::::::::::::::::::<:>::::::::>::::::::::>:::<::::::::<::::'."oJV; ':,'. «:»"Y,V ; . «:>:..':, ... :<:>,..; ill,.: >:>. . ...._. 9 .......,. ..... ..... ......... ,....... ...... ....... ....... ............ . ........... . .........,..... ............... . $240,000 0 0 0 0 600.000 50,000 0 896,000 0 0 838,345 1,130,500 0 0 0 3.800 000 , 140,000 0 ::::::!::::;::~~::,:::. :- ........... . .......,... ............. .... ........ . ............ -, ..... .,....,.. ............ .. ..... ......... Schedule 2 2002/2003 Drainage Capital Projects Budget Summary Map Page 1.0. No. Project :::þ.,;Qþ'Ø$..~::: Estimated Remaining To Date :::2002f2o.~3::: 20.03/2004 Amount $1,000,000 40,000 50,000 0 9,000 27,500 550,000 · . . . . . . ::<:$100:000> ::::::: :31:Q;000:: ::::::: :(.'þfi;ØQO:: ::::::: :200;000:: :::::::::::::::::::::ö: ........... . · . . . '21'500: ..... . .......... .~'. . :::><3~;ØQQ:: ..... . ... . ... . .. . $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 0 0 31,000 0 0 Total $1,100,000 350,000 755,000 200,000 40,000 55,000 900,000 1~t~i :ë~Ì\ii~UA1Q :Þ.,;QJ~t~:::::::: <:. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: $1~$rØ;$ØQ: : :~1:;~$2;~6ô:::::::::: :::::::::::: :$Ò::::::::::::: :~1~ØØ:::::::::::::::: $~AØØ;ØO():: ........ . . . . . . . ..... . · . . . . . . . . . . $0 11::$2iQÒOiOO(}:11 .......... . .. '....... .',......... . r~t~I~~:~r.ø~¢~: .. . :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::$O>::::::$~;Ó~;~Q:::::::.. $0 II :::«$0<:::: :Total: Future: ~ojåcts:::::::::::::: .. . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rótiiU~ro'èct CóstS ..........1.......... .....,..... . .... . $0 I $2,00.0,000 .... . <: :::$1):::::: <$~{)OI);O )O:: ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . $0 II::' :>:>:>::$0::11 $170,000 I I $70,000 I ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . $240,000 ::>$0:: ::«::::$O::::::$1'(-O;i)( 0:>::::$70:,OOP:::.. :::::<$24();oi)( < . . . . .. . ... , .. . :': <.teiè;sotC <$3;692;000:: . . . ::$1t~;OOO::::::::$1:OÜioo::: :::::'5.640;000:: . . . . . . . .....,...... . $1,745,500 1,175,000 343,200 0 40,000 81,300 55,000 $0 0: 0 2,000;000. . 200~OOO' 0 0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1)t~r$ourc~ifQf:F~riêts:<... . ....... .. '.....".... . ........:::::::::::::.i~440;000::::::$2j200;OOO:::: ..... ........ .. . . . . . . . . . ... . :-:-:$0:.:-: $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $1,745,500 1,175,000 343,200 2,000,000 240,000 81,300 55,000 ... . ::$0 -::-::: :::'5.640;000: Map Page I.D. No. Schedule 3 .200212003 Utility Capital Projects Budget Summary 1. 67 2. 69 3. 71 4. 73 5. 74 6. 76 7. 77 8. 78 9. 80 10. 82 11. 84 12. 86 13. 88 14, 89 . . . . . , . . . :T:i)tåt. (:Qôtln\il~: Pråjeçts::: .......... . ...,....... . :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :S86tSOO: ............ . ... . ........... . ..............,. . r~tal: lIi.w :Þ.rpJe~t$: . . ....... . .....,. . :T:~iat. ~útúre: p:roje~ii¡·.:: . -. -..,.,.......... .................. . .... . .. . ................. . ....... . .......... . ......... . Project To Date $150,000 70,000 60,000 27,500 250,000 0 0 75.000 30,000 100,000 95,000 10,000 0 0 ::::¡:»i'~AA!!~: : jOö~~0ö3: ... . ... . . . ........ . :::::: :S350;OOQ ::::::::: :;3a~;99~: ':::::::::AO;OOO: :::::::::: :2:7:;500: .:.:.::: :850;000: :::::~~.QQQ:; ::::::::::: :50;OPO: ::::::::800;00U: :::::150;OOQ: ::::::::1~;90~: :::::300;000: :::::::::::::::::::::0: :::::::: :350;000: :::: ::300.<100: Estimated Remaining 2003/2004 Amount $700,000 370,000 0 0 100,000 350.000 50,000 100,000 50,000 100,000 355,000 20,000 350,000 300,000 Total $1,200,000 770,000 100,000 55,000 1,000,000 1,750,000 250,000 975,000 230,000 300,000 750,000 100,000 1,750,000 1,500,000 : $3;j~7;SO j:: $2;it4s;Oo.cF : :$3;220.;000. :$10.,730..:000. $0 0 0 0 0 1,050,000 150,000 0 0 0 0 70,000 1,050,000 900,000 . . ..... . ~I ............ . ::::::$0 :::::$Sf1:;¡)O~: . .$4t~;OOO . . ............. . ............ . ............. . ............ . ............. . ............ . ........... . ............ . 8.·:::::::::::::::::::$0: o :::::::::::·:::::::::0: ............ . O ·········....·········0· ........., . ........... . ............ . ........... . .......... . .........., . :::~..:::.... $0 o 150,000 ..... . $~ I :::::::$ }: .::: $93Ò',OOO.: $630,000 300,000 $300,000 300,000 100,000 $300,000 300,000 250,000 .......... . ::$0 > >$1:5.0;00.CI< >: $100;00IL ..::: $850..:000. > ........... . .. -"...... .. . .r~': p'r91'¢tC~$t$: .... , .......... . ........... . .......... . ........... . .......... . ....,...,., . .::::.....:...:.:. $$ør;sØQ:..·.:.: $.4,3óß;~ØQ:.:. : $3;~t4;l)q~ ::.: :~;9~å;ooå.:.:. .$1Ù'1~QQO::: ..,.,.,........,.,. . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............., . .......... . ....... . ,......... . ......... . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..,........... . Funds $100,000 :::::::::::::::::::$0: $0 I 3. 750.0~ I $100,000 55,000 .... . 0 55,000 3,225,000 :":3;~ßO;0()Q 2,200.000 12,355,000 ...,....... . :::::::::::.:::::::::::::::: $3;38'0;00$::::: $3;18$;000:':.: $2;m;0.0ci::: :::$:3;150;000. ::::: :$12;510.:000:: :r~al: $~,¢è~: ()'F:j;i~~: .......,.,... ....",.. ...,.......,........ , Schedule 4 2002/2003 Park and Recreation Development Fund Capital Projects Budget Summary Map Page 1.0. No. Continuing Projects Project To Date ::: Þ.~P'Qf¡¡j:C )i962L29~: . , . . . . . . . . . . . . .......,.... . ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... . 1. 104 AmundsonlMain Neiahborhood Park $41,000 2. 106 Brandonwood Neiahborhood Park 29,000 3. 108 Callowav Branch Trail Development 180,000 4. 110 Cottonbelt Trail Develooment 637.142 5. 112 Cotton belt Trail Suoolement 150,000 6. 114 Forest Glen Neiahborhood Park 48,000 7. 116 Industrial! Holidav Neiahborhood Park 41.000 8. 118 land Acauisition 650,000 9. 120 Little Bear Creek Community Park 0 10. 122 Little Bear Creek Neiahborhood Park ° 11. 124 Little Bear Creek Trail Development 260,000 12. 126 Miscellaneous Park Develooment (2003) ° 13. 127 Miscellaneous Park Structures (2003) 0 14. 128 Mullendare Neiohborhood Park 35,000 15. 130 North Hills Multi-Use Trail 40.000 16. 132 Snow Heiahts Neiahborhood Park 35,000 17. 134 South Electric Trail Develooment 30,000 18. 136 Soecial Proiects Desion ! Research (2003) 0 19. 137 Stonvbrooke Neiahborhood Park ° 20. 139 Suoolemental Funds 224,000 21. 140 Trail Sianaae and Route Maps Phase I 42,235 22. 141 Walker's Creek Trail & Bike Transit 110,000 :rø~ Çø~i1Ì!IJÌlIl!'rQJØ::: .......... . ::::::: :$309;000: ::::::::: :22~;OQQ: ':':"'>:5t5;000: ":1;Oa?;i!5à: ::..::....501;469: ::::::::: :365:000: ::::::::: :~Q¡M ØØ: :..·:1;600;000· .::::::: :45:000: .:.:.:. :250,000: ......:(691;7.7.6: ......... 'i2i2isooo' ...,....',. ; . ... 27000 ..:....t.; : ..::....::265;000: . . . . '$79 762' :-:-:-:-:- " ;.. . ::::::: :2615;000: ::::"::::::69;100: .:.::::::::: ~O;QQO: .:.:.:.:.:. :t5;000: "¡jQ00iJ ««<.: , : ':::::::::::82;7.66: ..>:....160·000: ....... .. ............ . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . Estimated 2003/2004 $0 0 233,120 0 0 0 0 0 345,000 50,000 448.225 0 0 0 174.382 0 650,900 0 285.000 50,000 0 1,835,000 Remaining Amount $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,160,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200,000 0 0 ..... . :::::::::::::::>:n;552;m: ::"::"$!I;~;r~!I:>:::"~;I!~~; S2'7":: .. $:1~.*:: ....$~M2'1;~:$:$> .. . ...... ... :rp~ N~:P;øjit<;ùi:::: . . . . . . . . . . ......... . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . ........... . ......... . ....... .. Future Projects 26. · Central West Area Neiahborhood Park 27. · Cross Timbers Park Develooment 28. - Girls Fast Pitch Softball Complex 29. · Holidav Heiohts Neiahborhood Park 30. - Miscellaneous Park Develooment IFuture) 31. · Miscellaneous Park Structures (Future) 32. · Norich Park 33. · Smithfield Neiohborhood Park 34. · Softball Fields 35. · Soecial Proiects Desian! Research (Future) :rø~f.!Ì~ÌI~.:~r~j~::.. . . . ...... . ....... . I $41'~1 . . . . . . . >$309;000: : :::150;000: :10;QQQ: .. . ... . . . ~~ ~~ .. ............ . ............ . ..... ~1:;ooo.. ..:.:... ·W$Q,øøø.·· .......:.. U$;Øøø:.:. .. . $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . . . . :"":>:":W"< .. ........ . <So: :0: :0: :0: <0: ">0: ·0: :0: :0: 0: $20,000 500,000 0 375.000 300.000 375,000 300,000 375.000 0 10.000 .. . '::$iJ::><$2;255;ØØØ: .... . " . . . .., ,. .. ::<:>:"$~::: $330,000 850,000 2,000,000 0 300,000 0 0 0 2,800,000 40.000 : ~;J2lI.*:::. Total $350,000 250,000 928,120 1,725,000 851,489 413,000 350,000 2,250,000 1,550,000 300,000 2,400,000 225,000 127,000 300,000 594,144 300,000 750,000 10,000 300,000 524,000 125.000 2.105,000 $350,000 150,000 75,000 . . :<$5'15;000> $350,000 1,350,000 2,000,000 375,000 800,000 375,000 300,000 375,000 2,800,000 50,000 :$8;~5il!l!C!> ......... . ...... -.,. .. :::$i;5$~~tt: $¡j;~1~;7ΕΎ$:::::$~~~~~üt:>::::$1~6i1~;(JØ~::A~5;Ø1Ü~~< t~~~~~~~~~~~::: . . .' .. .. ... . .........." ........,. ,...........,........ . . Grant Projects: ISTEA - 3. 4, 11, 15, 17 & 21 TEA-21 - 5 & 22 TPWD - 6 Sources of Funds Park Revenue Bonds Existino Funds Certiflcates of Obliaation 2000 Sales Tax Reserve for CIP ISTEA & TEA-21 Grant Funds TPWD Grant Funds' Project To Date $50,000 900,000 5,100,448 1,134,217 o ::::;:~~pôf.d ::: :jÓ~~~~3::: .. .... .... ... ..,'.. .... ... ..,'.... ,. ... :::::::::::::::::::$0: ::0: :::::: :t;3~2;tQO: :::::::á;St'fs2S: :::::<::~;ØØ9: . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ,-..... ...... Estimated 2003/2004 $0 o 3,280,000 2,673,443 o Remaining Amount ~ Im! $50,000 IlOO,000 17,042,548 7,322.185 383,000 ·J!··taJ· ·SO···..·····,· :f.... .~.. .. ..... . . .. .. ... .. .. . . . . . . .... . . . . . ·$7· ~84>' ;865' .....$. 5· ·1'89'" ·62' ·S· .....$. 5· .,' 5· 3· ·443' . .....$. 1"3· 0.. ." 0.'.. .$.2.., . ·1'1 . >.'~. . .:. . .'!FC8~~ ....!J:CI . . :>::::::::>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:.; :::::::;.; »»; ; ::»>... 5 ~ .:::> 5;.87..1 33:: . Funding of grant related projects is contingent upon approval of the grant. This is the first year grant revenue and expenditures have been included in the CIP Budget for all applicable Parks & Recreation projects. Schedule 5 2002/2003 Aquatic Park Capital Projects Budget Summary Map Page I.D. No. :~~!:~~t¡~~.:~~9j~:. .... . . . .......... . :rj).tä¡:~.W.:Þ.~~::::: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... .. . .. . .. . ........ . Future Projects · · Concessions/Gate Area · · Double Retro Rider · · Miscellaneous Construction (Future) · · RaDid River :T:ø~i:~~t~~.:~Jiå~:>::: ... .. . . . . . . . . . .. ..... ..... .,. . . . . . . . . . . ........ . :t~tar p.r.~j4tët: (:()Sls::: .... .. ... . . . . . . ............... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . : :r:ø~: ~ø~,q~$: qf :¡::µi;14$.: ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . ......... . Project To Date .. . $~ I $0 >:P.r~p'~~d::: Estimated :: :~Ò2i20~j:::: 2003/2004 ..... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . $21 Ô;OOO .. .. . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . :.::»:$20;000: .. . . ·4 0.. 0... . ........... , " ::>40¡000.: . . , . . . . . . ........ . . >$0<>::> Remaining Amount $~ II $~ I !2!!! $150,000 60,000 >$0:::: <$210,000 $0 B~O 2,000,000 360,000 ... . ..... .... $495,0(10. .:::. '$2;360,000 $20,000 2,500,000 400,000 $0· >$2,920,000 $675,000 1,000,000 150,000 1,250,000 $325,000 0 0 0 500,000 2,250,000 $750,000 1,000,000 200,000 1,250,000 $125.000: $3,075,000:: <$3,200,000 .,....,. . . . $3,015,000:: $6,330;0(I() $1,150,000 180,000 o 2,250,000 500,000 2,250,000 ......... -.. .... -........ . -.. ...... ....... . .. . $400~Ooo >$370,000 ::$2;485,000 < $3,075,001) < > $f);330,OOO .............. . ............. . ... ,........... ............. . ~ ~'««<$Ø:' O ····'··················0· ... ........ .... ........ . o <:>::::::::::>:<:>0: o /:::::::::::::::::::: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $0 .... · .$0 .<: ~ ~ '$65,00(1:: : $75,000 o 50,000 o .. . ..., -.... .,.......... . .,..,.... -.... . -.... -.. -. $65,00(1 < > >$705;0(10: >$2,4$5,000 $250,000 150,000 0 0 0 0 $90;000 30;000 ........ . ~!)O;ooø ::::::::<:>:::::<:>0: ............ . :::::::::::::::::::::::0: :::::::::/::::/:0: $485,000 0 (250,000) 2,250,000 0 0 c::::J: projects whoIely or partially unfinanced 1 A loan will be made from the Aquatic Pari< Infrastructure Reserve in 200212003 to begin the Multi-Level Interactive Project. The loan will be paid back in full the following year, subsequent to the issuance of Certificates of Obligation. This will be done through a reimbursement resolution and will allow the City to achieve savings by delaying the issuance of debt. Schedule 6 2002/2003 Municipal Facility Projects Budget Summary Map Page I.D. No. Project To Date § :::: p.r.~p.~~~ <: ::: :20~2i2003:::: ....... .... , , .,.. ... Estimated 2003/2004 Remaining Amount §§ . . . . . . . . . " , $0 <::: <$3:1:5;000:::: , , ,:::::: <:: $0::: :t~tåi :pêi1i1åiÌ4Þnf :l\tåiRte.i1~n~ p.r.ôjåc~::::::::: " , .. .. .. .... .... . $0 o 725,000 :rOtilJ 'Ftnðo¢t4 p.r~ject$': ' ,', ..... . ... '.. , , $2,405,000 2,000,000 o Total $15,000 80,000 160,000 50,000 10,000 " , :'::::::::: :$0:::::::: :::$3:15;000::: $6,825,000 19,900,000 o $10,200,000 21,900,000 4,475,000 , , ,::: <$t2~;OOO: <: < :$4;120;OOIJ <: <: :$4.;4Ó5;ÓOO:::$26;t2~;OOO <, $36;51~;ooó :::::::::: :$i2~;OoO: ::::: :$~;o.35;OOO:: :::':: :~405;OOÔ:::::: :$2tÚ2SJJOO:::, : $3ê;890;OOO::: ........ . , , , , ........ . .... . ..... . t~t~l: :p:r.øj~~t¢Q:$t$.::::::::: ... . ... . , , ". .... ..... . ......... . $15,000 3,750,000 475,000 o o rc)t~t. :~ci~rc~: øF.(Jn(f$: ........... . .. .......... ......... . , , , , '$15'000: "". . ..'...... .. ;. . :: :: : :: : >:(~Q;QQO: : :::::::::160;000:: :::::::::::~p¡OOQ: :-:::::::::1:0;000:: .... . .....,... . ......... . . . . . . :::::: $9:70;000:: :::::::::0:: .. ... =0 00", :«V~f.V ~. JoI," ........ . ............ . :::::: :$~OO¡OOø: ::::::::::::::::::::::0: : <: :2~O;ØQO:: ::::l;450;oop: ::::::::::1): $0 o o 10,250,000 500,000 .... . $0 o o 19,300,000 600,000 $315,000 3,750,000 725,000 31,000,000 1,100,000 , ':: <:: $4;i4O:~Ooo: : :$2;000;000:: <: $1G;150;ÒOO: : :::S:19;éoi),{¡OQ:: :$3&;89.0;000: , , . . . . . . " , ........ . '" ......... Schedule 7 2002/2003 Major Capital Equipment Progra"1 Budget Summary Map Page 1.0. No. Project :::: ~Q:P~.~V: Estimated To Date <~9~~t: 200312004 $0 0 0 0 0 30,000 0 0 ..... ...... ... ....... .... ... .... .... ..,._, ... ........... .... '... ...... ... ........... ........ ...... ........ ...... ::::::::: $12;000.: ::>::::::::61~OO: ::::::::::>67.000: :::: <::: :::S1~( 00.: ::<:»::~ß9P: ::::»:1:98J¡O(J: ::<:::>t32;OOo.: .., ~OOØ:' :->:-:-:. .:. .,' $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Remaining Amount $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total $72,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 53,000 228,600 132,000 498,000 :rotat :M.äJ()": ¢äP. ~a( :EqutP.m."~t:::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::' :::::::::::::: $30;000.::: ' ': :${1:~GOe:::: ::::::::::::::::::: :So.:::::::::::::: :::::::::: :se:::::::: :$1:;184;600:: 228,6~~ I " . :T~tå~ :$o~ré~::o.f::~~n~: :::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::: ......... . ....'... ..... , : : :::::':::$228;600<:<: '::::$956~Ô¡{<:<'<:::::}::::::se: $~ II $~ I $326,000 858,600 .... . ::::::::: :$0:::::::: :S'¡:;'&.4;6ôQ:: Map Page I.D. No. CIP Personnel Schedule 8 2002/2003 CIP Personnel Budget Summary - - General CIP Personnel - - Utilitv CIP Personnel - - Utilitv Construction Personnel Project To Date . .... ..... ..... ......... ...... ......... ...... ......... ...... . ........, ..... ..,........... . ..... ...."..-. ............. " ..... .......... ....... -....... ....... .... ,... ::::p:~~p'~~~:::: Estimated ::::200212003:::: 2003/2004 §o ::::>:: ',25~6Z6:: o :««:24~K392:: o ::::::::::$.4:ð;:~29:: ,.... '......... .............. . ............ . t~t:¢.~~<p'~($~~~I::C.Q~t~(:::>:«::::> "':,::, ' , ......... . $234.651 247.208 674.262 Remaining Amount $761.786 785.299 2.188.968 Total $1,222,063 1,272,899 3,511,559 <, > > > > > > > $, 0' < <...:':' ,$' '1" <1.' '1' '4;' <;3" '4' .'-;r-'< < <', < ,$" '1< <1<5" '8< '1' '2' '1< < <', <': $,' '3' >7.' '36" > <0' '53"'" > > > > >$" '8' <00"" '6'" '5' .'2" '1':' .",..... ..... " ...... ..... .. . .. ... ... .:->:-:.:-:-:-', . '<:::>'. ,. ..... :-:-:::-;.....:,::.. ", . :-:::::-:-: ,. ',.' . :-'::::-:-. . .,. . '. . ,', ~ ::::::: :$.~2~~~~:: :::::::::::: )':O;Dp:Q:: :::::::::::17:0~92:: , , , , , 648' 329 ' . . . .. .. . ..'.'..... ..;. " .... .. " , ....... .. $234.651 70.000 177,208 674.262 $761.786 210,000 575.299 2.188.968 $1,222,063 350,000 922,899 3,511,559 :r.~~j: ~~~f~,~: :ø( F:~~~~::::::::::::::,:,:,:,.,:,::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::: :$0: .::.::: :$1 ~11~~t: :: :::::: $~:;~:~$;1~i.. .::.:: :$3~1~;0$3:: :::::::: :$$;O(j~;~a1:.. ........ . Schedule 9 2001/2002 Budget Revisions Budget Summary Map Page I.D. !i2:. Project To Date Street & Sidewalk p~ects ~N. Tarrant Pk . (Davis to Whitley) II :T:ØtäI :$tr~~:~ :$~d~w~ ~:~r.øJ~~t$::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::..::::·: Adopted 2001/2002 $0 II Revision 2001/2002 $0 I k<~7~~;O~~: .,......... . $0':::: : .. ......... "$()":::>$"~$;QÖO ...,'.... ..... $0 II >$0:: :r~l:präiri~gé.:Þr.òJê~~::::::::::::::::: : ... ....,... ..... ............. :r~~:p.~~~ :~: ~~~r~åtfon P.rc)j~~ts::: ........... . .......... . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . :T~1~1:~~~~~~:~~:~~~J~~:::::::::< .. . . . . . . . . . . .......... . ...... .... ......... . :Tc)tåi: ;.aåjof ¡;qûrprn~~i E.xp'~difui1i~::: ... ···>·.·.$0» .. . :<>:>$0:::::;:::$:300;000: ::::::::S1:;S19;525>:>::::$à;9S:5;aoo .. . :r()t~i: pr.~~Ät: ¢()~t$. ..... . . . ."........... . ............... . ............. '.. ... .. ... . $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t9tårsources:~f:F.t:in~s:>. . .. . ... .'»$0 ... , .. . ..,.... . Remaining Amount Total $725,000 I $1,450,000 . . ........ . . .$72.$,ØOO>;:: <$1,450,000 ..... . ... . $0 I k':$52~;OOQ:1 I ..., -.....,' ........ . ............. . .... ......... . > >$0 :::: < $S29,ÒOO .. . .. $0": '$529;000: $~ II .......... . .. . · . ............ . ., .. .....,.. 300,O~~ I »(:~:~~) .... . $300,000 300,000 $0 I $529,000 $350,000 300,000 $0 .....,....... . .'...",..... , $300,000::> . :($250,000« '$600,000 ....... $650,000 . . $~ II $0::>: >::::$0.<... $0 II ....>:$0 $0 0 0 300,000 0 0 0 0 .. . . . . , . . . . . . . .....,..,. . .......... . .. . $2,250,000 360,000 $2,500,000 400,000 $2;610,00(» >$2,900,000 , . .,...... . $25,525 >.. >$0 $0 I $25,525 $25;525 $00 I :::: $250;000:: . :::"::40;000:: ,.. . ...... . $2$0,000. ... . , . ...... . · , . . , . $0 I ¡:)':~25;52~1 I . ,............. .. . ,............. . .......... . . . . . ':$25:'525 <.:.:-:-: .f : :.:.:::: :ro~;a:.:!~: ::::::::::::::::::::::::0: .,........... , ::::::::: $ø;9Ø<r ::::::::::~ø;9ØO: . . . '3t9 371 . ...... . . ':-:-...... , .,-: :::::::::725;000: :":::::::225;OOCr .... ... · . $0 0 2,000,000 300,000 610,000 0 0 0 . . . ......... $5;554.;525. : $25,525 709,629 2,000,000 650,000 900,000 319,371 725,000 225,000 ::: :$~OQ;ØQ~:::: "$2;3A4:;~~S: ::::j2;Ø10;Oo()::::: $~;~$~~ r';':' CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department Administration Council Meeting Date: August 19. 2002 SubjectCAPP Electric Supply Contract - 2003 Agenda Number: GN 2002-102 Resolution No. 2002-069 The purpose of this report is to recommend adoption by the Mayor and City Council of the attached resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign an electric supply contract for 2003 (and possibly 2004) pursuant to recommendation of the board of directors of Cities Aggregation Power Project (CAPP), of which the City of North Richland Hills is a member. At its July meeting, the CAPP Board of Directors, including Greg Vick, authorized negotiations for a 2003 electric power supply contract to comménce with the current Retail Electric Provider (REP) serving CAPP's load in 2002. Specifically, the CAPP REP has been informed that upon the REP fulfilling two conditions prior to October 11, 2002, its current contract with CAPP members will be extended. First, the REP must substantially solve all billing problems and second, provide a delivered commodity price below the current commodity price. If those two conditions are not met, CAPP will release a request for proposal on October 14, 2002 to providers who are believed to be able to serve CAPP's load. Regardless of whether the CAPP Board endorses the current ora different provider for 2003, CAÞP member cities will need to take immediate action to accept or reject the __ contract. Electricity prices tend to track prices for natural gas which can be volatile, and therefore, REPs maintain that any given offer will only be open fOr a 24 hour period. The attached resolution is a necessary step in positioning the City to capture the price that CAPP is able to achieve from its negotiations with REPs. The attached resolution was approved for distribution to members by the CAPP Board at its August 8,2002 meeting. The approved resolution should be returned to Mary Bunkley with the Arlington City Attorney's office before September 30,2002. While the current CAPP REP has had some billing problems, the conclusion of CAPP's consultants and counsel is that all REPs are experiencing similar problems. On the other hand, discussions with non-CAPP member cities leads to the conclusion that CAPP has ah extremely favorable contract (i.e., risk and penalty avoidance, simplicity) from the perspective of cities. Additionally, the CAPP REP has committed to an account-by- account verification for CAPP members that the Board's advisors believe is unique in the competitive marketplace. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other -q~tC~tt Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Finance Director '~~~atum P::¡np 1 nf ? .^ CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Recommendation The City's staff recommends that the Mayor and City Council approve Resolution 2002- 069, authorizing the City Manager or his designee to ratify the 2003 contract between CAPP and its approved REP and approve a power supply agreement for a period of 12 to 24 months. '-- CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM P~n". ., nf ., RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF , TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AN ELECTRIC SUPPLY AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO THE CONTRACT TO BE SIGNED BY CITIES AGGREGATION POWER PROJECT, INe. FOR DELIVERIES OF ELECTRICITY EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1,2003 WHEREAS, the City of , Texas (City) is a member of Cities Aggregation Power Project, Inc. (CAPP), a nonprofit political subdivision corporation dedicated to securing electric power for its more than 80 members in the competitive retail market; and WHEREAS, CAPP negotiated favorable contract terms and a reasonable commodity price for delivered electricity in 2002 for its members; and WHEREAS, CAPP anticipates preserving current contract terms and achieving slight improvement in current commodity prices in a contract for 2003; and WHEREAS, CAPP believes that the pricing opportunity window for favorable 2003 deliveries will be short-lived and that CAPP members must be able to commit contractually to prices within a 24-hour period in order to lock-in favorable prices; and WHEREAS, experience during 2001-2002 has demonstrated that Retail Electric Providers demand immediate response to an offer; and WHEREAS, the deregulated electric market is complex, likely to penalize those unaware of its constraints and likely to reward those who can improve the size and shape of a particular load, the City benefits from jointly shared experience and collective purchasing power arranged through CAPP; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City to contract for a supply of electricity in 2003 or at least partially revert to price to beat rates (PTB); and WHEREAS, CAPP's current delivered energy prices provide savings when measured against PTB, and PTB rates likely will be increased before the end of the year. 1813\OO\mac\oth020805gmg BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEXAS: I. That the City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to sign an electric power agreement pursuant to the contract approved and recommended by the CAPP Board of Directors within 24 hours of said approval and recommendation. The contract may be for a 12 to 24 month time frame. II. A copy of the resolution shall be sent to Mary Bunkley with the City Attorney's office in Arlington before September 30,2002. PRESENTED AND PASSED on this day of , 2002, by a vote of ayes and nays at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of , Texas. Mayor ATTEST: 1813\OO\mac\oth020805gmg - . 'ooi CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS '- Department: Parks and Recreation CounCil Meeting Date: 8/26/2002 Subject: Approval of Master Development Plans for Seven Neighborhood Park Sites as Part of the Neighborhood Park Initiative Project Agenda Number: GN 2002-103 The Park and Recreation Board conducted public meetings on June 17th and August 5th to solicit citizen input for the proposed development of the seven neighborhood parks as part of the Neighborhood Park Initiative Project. Proposed development plans for the following parks were presented: Amundson/Main Brandonwood Forest Glen East Foster Viflage Holiday/I ndustrial Mullendore Snow Héights An opportunity was provided for the pubfic to ask questions and offer suggestions to staff, the consultant and the Park and Recreation Board. After a thorough review and discussion of the input received during these public meetings, the Master Development Plans were prepared. These plans address our citizen's comments and suggestions received from the two public meetings in the following ways: Holiday /Industrial Park Site · Proposes improvements to the east-west drainage ditch immediately behind residences back yards to include taking a portion of the draiinage underground and re- grading the remaining portion of the channel to create a visually appealing and maintainable drainage facility. All Seven Park Sites · Incorporates the use of recycled products in park benches and trash receptacles. Forest Glen East · Proposed plan, in accordance with TPWD grant requirements, includes the preservation of approximately 15 acres determined to be environmentally significant. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds Avai a e Budget Director ~~ ~.~~ Department Head Signature Cv Page 1 of 2 " CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS "- School Sites · The plans for each school site preserve, or enhance if funding allows, the existing perimeter fences around the campuses. Brandonwood and Holiday /Industrial Park Sites · The design specifications for the proposed ponds would not allow mosquitoes to breed by eliminating the conditions necessary for larvae tp survive. The Park and Recreation Board, at their August 5th meeting, approved the development plans for each park and unanimously voted to forward their recommendation to City Council for approval. These development plans reflect the ultimate development planned for each park site. The bidding documents for construction of eåch park will include alternates based on available funds. Amenities included in the plans for each park include playgrounds, picnic pavilions, hike and bike trails, practice backstops, open spaces, park signage, landscape and irrigation. The design and construction of these neighborhood parks is in ac;:cordance with the 2000 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan, which documents our identified citizen needs through citizen surveys, youth surveys, executive committee surveys, and Park Board and City Council input. The highest ranked needs are playgrounds, picnic pavilions, trails and open spaces - all of which comprise the primary elements of a neighborhood park. This project also complies with City Council Goal #5 "enhancing the quality of life with quality parks, open space and trails." It also can be referenced in City Council Goal #2 in "raising the standards for landscaping and establishing community pride and identity." Upon approval of the Master Development Plans for each park, s~ff and the consultant will work quickly to complete the plans and specifications to issue. bids. Recommendation: To approve the master development plansfof the seven neighborhood park sites which include Amundson/Main, Brandonwood, Forest Glen East, Foster Village, Holiday/Industrial, Mullendore and Snow Heights as part of the Neighborhood Park Initiative Project. I CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 2 of 2 ., .......-, .......-, ---, Announcements and Information August 26, 2002 Announcements - COUNCILMAN WHITSON Residents can recycle phone books with their regular recycling service or they can bring them to the Library parking lot. There is a Trinity Waste Services dumpster in the parking lot to recycle phone books. It will be there through September 15th. The library is located at 6720 NE Loop 820. The City of North Richland Hills is proud to host the event, NRH Remembers, as a tribute to the heroes from September 11 th. The event will take place on September 10th at 7:30 p.m. at Birdville Fine Arts/Athletic Complex. The Texas Boys Choir will be singing patriotic songs, a special guest from the US Army will be present, we will be honoring local Police and Fire, along with other patriotic tributes during this memorable evening. For further information, call 817-427-6600. The City of North Richland Hills Municipal Offices will be closed on Monday, September 2nd for the Labor Day Holiday. Trash service will be provided. Information COUNCILMAN TURNAGE AUQust 31 Critter Connection North Hills Mall 10:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. 817-427-6570