Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1999-02-08 Agendas CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS PRE-COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 8, 1999 — 5:30 P.M. For the Meeting conducted at the North Richland Hills City Hall Pre-Council Chambers, 7301 Northeast Loop 820 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 1 Discuss Items from Regular February 8, 1999 Agenda (5 Minutes) 2. IR 99-015 Familiarization with Sign Review Committee Procedures (5 Minutes) 3. IR 99-018 Discuss Meeting Dates for March Council Meetings (5 Minutes) 4. IR 99-017 Clarification of Board/Commission Attendance Policy (5 Minutes) I 5. IR 99-019 Proposed Phasing of Sign & Landscaping Regulations (15 Minutes) 6 IR 99-016 Review Process and Timetable for Proposed Tree Ordinance (15 Minutes) i_.._ 7. Other Informational Items (5 Minutes) I : *Executive Session (25 Minutes) —The Council may enter into closed executive session to discuss the following. A Personnel Matters Under Government Code -,TtD - " , §551 074. 1. Council Appointed Positions Fr y ca-cat—, S, Hits 2. Mayor, Council and Boards 9, , O, Adjournment-6'50 p.m 'Closed due to subject matter as provided by the Open Meetings Law. If an action is contemplated, it will be taken in open session. A I J1 Nil ['c N, J J Wit CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Legal Office To. City Manager From City Attorney Subj Pre-Council Agenda— Item 8-A, February 8, 1999 Date: February 5, 1999 The item pertains to a charge against the Mayor by a member of the council It has been scheduled as an executive session item. The Mayor has objected. Therefore, it cannot be heard as an executive session item In my opinion the item was properly placed on the agenda, but it cannot survive the objection and remain on the executive session agenda t` Rex McEntire P.O. Box 820609*North Richland Hills, Texas a 76182-0609 7301 Northeast Loop 820*817-581-5501 * FAX 817-581-5516 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRURY 8, 1999 — 7:00 P.M. For the Regular 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 581-5502 two working days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 1 Call to Order 2 Invocation 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Removal of Item(s) from the Consent Agenda Page 2 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 5 Approval of Consent Agenda Items a ) Minutes of the City Council Work Session January 12, 1999 b.) Minutes of the Pre-Council Meeting January 25, 1999 c ) Minutes of the City Council Meeting January 25, 1999 GN 99-07 d ) Calling City Council Election — Resolution No 99-08 GN 99-08 e ) Designation of Deputy Court Clerks — Resolution No 99-09 PU 99-04 f ) Award Contract to Supply Microcomputers to Omtex Systems, Inc. — Resolution No. 99-07 PAY 99-01 g.) Approve Final Pay Estimate No. 3 in the Amount of$72,911.27 to All-Tex Paving, Inc for Conn Drive and Cloyce Court (23rd Year CDBG Project) 6. SRC 99-01 Public Hearing to Consider the Request of Josef Lubczyk for a Variance from the Sign Regulations on Lot 3, Block 2, College Circle Addition (Located at 5935 Davis Boulevard) 7 PZ 98-55 Public Hearing to Consider the Request of Marshall Merritt for a Special Use Permit to Allow a Convenience Store, Car Wash, and Restaurant on Lot 5, Block 1, Walker Branch Addition (Located on the Northwest Corner of Grapevine Highway and Harwood Road) — Ordinance No. 2361 • Page 3 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 8 GN 99-09 2591 (1998/99) Year Community Development Block Grant Program — Public Hearing 9. GN 99-10 25'" (1998/99) Year Community Development Block Grant Program — Resolution No 99-06 10.GN 99-11 Consideration of Voluntary Time-of-Use Rates Proposed by TU Electric — Ordinance No 2365 11 GN 99-12 Moratorium on Signs and Landscaping Permits — Ordinance No.2366 12 (a) Citizens Presentation (b) Information and Reports 13 Adjournment PG 5TF Vayo-1,cotH 5', el G-e-i c,- .) A o • February 5, 1999 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ITEM ADDED TO THE FEBRUARY 8, 1999 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FOR THE MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. AT THE NORTH RICHLAND HILLS CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7301 NORTHEAST LOOP 820 11a Resolution No 99-10 Expressing Councils Desires Concerning Conduct City Secretary u_a.im 5. I9g9 5' 6p c. Sy G-L-t • INFORMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL No. IR 99-015 , Date February 8, 1999 Subject. Familiarization with Sign Review Committee Procedures In September 1998 the City Council removed the sign regulations from the Zoning Ordinance One of the ramifications of this action was that the Zoning Board of Adjustment no longer considers variances from the sign regulations. Legally, as per the due process requirement, there must be a body that can hear and decide appeals for regulations As part of the new sign ordinance, the City Council is now designated as the Sign Review Commission. Please refer to the attached excerpt from the Sign Ordinance When the City Council created the Sign Review Commission with the adoption of the new sign regulations it outlined the decision and voting procedure. Any variance request that comes before the Sign Review Commission requires 4 affirmative votes for approval Additionally, there is no other Board or Commission in the City that has the authority to consider and adjudicate requests for variances from the Sign Regulations. The Sign Review Commission, by ordinance, is authorized to grant variances in specific cases if the variance is 1) not contrary to the public interest, and 2) due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship The 2 requirements above are almost identical to language in State Law regarding the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Decisions of ZBA's in Texas are often contested in court. As a result there is much case law that attempts to clarify what is meant as a hardship. Over the years there has been many varying decisions on what a hardship is. However, the most important precedents established by the Courts indicate that a mere financial hardship does not constitute a hardship and that a true hardship is inherent in the property. The Courts has stated that hardship is not legitimate if it is self-imposed or an act of convenience Respectful! aviroor Steve Norwood Managing Director of Development Services a ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS 1 xc,EZP-r fgot-1 GQx_ r s► 6Al OR_Jo iR14&Jce 1. Any searchlight shall be located on private property of the premises and not on any public right-of-way. The searchlight shall be positioned so as to project all beams vertically, but not less than a minimum angle of thirty(30)degrees from grade level. 2. The maximum fight Intensity generated by searchlights on any premises shall not exceed a total of one thousand six hundred(1600) million foot candlepower. No more than four(4)beams of light may be projected from any premises. 3. All searchlights must be designed and maintained so as to prevent beam rays of light from being directed at any portion of the traveled ways or adjoining property. No fight shall be of such Intensity or brilliance to cause glare to or Impair the vision of the driver of any vehicle. 4. No searchlight may be operated between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. D. Inflatable Signs and Balloons: Inflatable Signs and Balloons. Including lighter-than-air balloons connected with a tether, shall be allowed only in conjunction with the Grand Opening Signage provision contained In these regulations. Inflatable Signs and Balloons may be used provided the following regulations are satisfied: 1. Not more than one Inflatable Sign or Balloon shall be allowed on any premises. 2. Inflatable Signs and Balloons when placed on a budding may not exceed twenty-five(25)feet In height above the roof of the building and shall not obstruct visibility necessary for safe traffic maneuvering. 3. Inflatable Signs and Balloons when placed on the ground may not exceed twenty-five(25)feet in height above the ground level and shall not obstruct visibility necessary for safe traffic maneuvering. 4. Inflatable Signs and Balloons shall maintain a set back from any side or rear property fine a minimum distance equal to the height of the balloon. 5. Inflatable Signs and Balloons shall maintain five(5)feet of clearance from any overhead electrical wire. 6. Inflatable Signs and Balloons shall be kept in good repair and remain securely attached in such a manner to withstand wind loads. E Pennants Pennants shall be allowed only in conjunction with the Grand Opening Signage provisions contained in these regulations. Pennants may be used provided the following regulations are satisfied: 1. All Pennants shall maintain at least fifteen (15)feet of clearance over any vehicle maneuvering area or fire lane. 2 All Pennants shall maintain five(5)feet of clearance from any overhead electrical wire. 3 All Pennants shall be kept in good repair and remain securely attached in such a manner to withstand wind loads. 4. Pennants shall not be attached to any utility or traffic control device pole located within a right-of-way or project into a street right-of-way. 37. Sign Review Board A Creation. There is hereby created a Sign Review Board. For the purpose of this Ordinance the North Richland Hills City Council shall serve as the Sign Review Board. B. Meetings and Quorum: Four members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for the conduct of business. The members of the Board shall regularly attend meetings and public hearings of the Board and shall serve without compensation. Minutes shall be kept showing the vote of each member on each question or the Ord No MO 24 absence or failure of each member to vote. Such proceedings shall be a public record and shall be retained for at least five years C. Jurisdiction The Sign Review Board shall have the right to inspect premises where required in the discharge of their responsibilities under this ordinance.The Sign Review Board, in specific cases, may authorize or order the following: 1. Interpretation: To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged there is error on any order, requirement, decision or interpretation of this ordinance by the Building Official. In reaching Its decision, the Board shall establish firm guidelines for future administrative actions on like matters. 2. Permits for Nonconformities: To authorize a building permit for the reconstruction, extension, or enlargement of a non-conforming sign. 3. Discontinuance of nonconformities: To require discontinuance of nonconforming sign under the authority provided in the Texas Local Government Code 4. Variances To authorize upon appeal, in specific cases, such variance from the terms of this Ordinance as 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. D. Interpretation Request or Appeal: A request for interpretation of regulations or an appeal for variance from a certain provision of this ordinance may be taken by any person aggrieved or by any officer, department,or Board of the City affected by a decision of the City Enforcement Officer, Such appeal shall be taken within fifteen(15)days time after the decision has been rendered,by filing with the Enforcement Officer a notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereof. The Enforcement Officer shall transmit to the Board all papers constituting the record upon which the action being appealed was taken E Application Before any request for an interpretation or a variance from this Ordinance will be heard by the Sign Review Board, application shall be made and duly filed by the property owner or authorized agent upon the forms prescribed by the City of North Richland Hills. Such application shall included, but is not limited to, the following: 1. the name, address, and phone numbers of the property; 2 the name, address, and phone numbers of the owner's agent, If applicable; 3. the legal description of the property; 4. a brief description of the variance sought; 5. the required number of copies of a current boundary survey, plat, or plot plan of the property. The applicant must provide proof of ownership of the property,or a letter from the owner of the property granting the applicant permission to request the variance F Fees- Every application for a variance shall be accompanied by a filing fee as follows- Residential$100.00 and Non-residential$175.00. G Stay of Proceedings An appeal shall stay all proceedings of the action appealed from unless the City Enforcement Officer, after the notice of appeal has been filed,certifies in wnting to the Board that a stay would, in the opinion of the City Enforcement Officer, cause imminent peril to life or property In such case, proceedings shall only be stayed by a restraining order granted by the Board or by a court of record. H. Form of Appeal or Application- An appeal or application shall be in such form and contain such information as the Board may require under its Rules of Procedure. It shall be accompanied by the required fee An incomplete appeal or application shall be deemed only to give notice of intent to appeal or apply to the Board and shall not be reviewed or scheduled for hearings until brought to completion Ord No 2341 25 I. Notice of Hearing: Official written notice of public hearing on every application for a variance or for an interpretation of regulations applying solely to an individual property shall be sent to all owners of real property lying within two hundred feet of any property on which the variance is requested. The notice of hearing shall be given to each taxpayer as the ownership appears on the last approved city tax roll by depositing such notice, properly addressed and postage paid, in the United States Post Office, not less than ten days before the date set for a hearing before the Sign Review Board. Notice of hearing shall also be given by publication in the official newspaper of the city at least ten days before the date before the date set for a hearing before the Sign Review Board. Such notice shall state the time and place of such hearing,and the nature of the subject to be considered. J. Hearing: 1. Upon the hearing, the applicant shall appear In person or by attorney or authorized agent Evidence supporting the granting or denial of an appeal shall be submitted only through the City Enforcement Officer or to the Board in public meeting. 2. Any appeal or application may be withdrawn upon written notice to the City Enforcement Officer. 3. The Board shall make its decision on any application within forty-five days from the time the Initial hearing is held or the application will be deemed to have been denied. K. Decision and Voting: 1. Every decision of the Board shall be based upon findings of fact and every finding of fact shall be supported in the record of proceedings. The Board may act only in matters as specifically authorized by theses regulations and these regulations shall be construed as limitations on the power of the Board to act 2. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to empower the Board to change the terms of these regulations,or to effect changes in the zoning districts. The powers of the Board shall be so applied that the terms of these regulations will be strictly enforced. 3. The affirmative vote of four members shall be necessary to reverse, on appeal, any order, requirement, decision or determination of the City Enforcement Officer,to approve any variance that the Board is empowered to grant; or to authorize the continuance or discontinuance of a non-conforming use, structure, or lot. 4. A member shall disqualify himself from voting whenever he has a personal or monetary interest in the property under appeal, or will be directly affected by the decision of the Board. 5. A member may disqualify himself from voting whenever any applicant, or his agent, has sought to influence the members vote on the appeal other than in the public hearing. 6. The decision of the Board shall be final l Approval of Request: 1. In approving any request, the Board may designate such conditions including time limits, if appropriate, in connection therewith in order to secure substantially the objectives of the regulation or provision to which such vanance is granted and to provide adequately for the maintenance of the integrity and character of the zone in which such permit is granted. 2 When necessary the Board may require guarantees, in such form as it deems proper, to insure that conditions designated in connection therewith are being or will be complied with. 3 Upon approval of an application for a variance appeal, the applicant shall apply for occupancy or construction permits within sixty days after the Board's decision unless a greater time is requested in the application and is Ord No 2341 26 authorized by the Board. My approval may be granted one emergency extension of sixty days on written request filed with the Board before expiration of the original approval. Failure of the applicant to apply for occupancy of construction permits within the authorized time period shall void the right to secure such permits except upon the filing of a new application or appeal. M. Denial of Request No appeal or application that has been denied shall be further considered by the Board, unless the Board affirmatively finds: 1. That new plans materially change the nature of the request or 2. The permitted development of other nearby property in the same zone has been substantially altered or changed by a ruling of the Board so as to support an allegation of changed conditions. II. Repealer Provision That, upon approval, this ordinance superscedes and takes prescedance over any other sign regulation of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas. III. Violations A. If the City Enforcement Officer shall find any of the provisions of this Ordinance being violated, he shall, when necessary, give notice to the person responsible to cease such violations forthwith. 8. Written notice may be delivered in person or by mail to a violator or to any person in charge of property where a violation is occurring. Verbal notice may be given to a violator in person by the City Enforcement Officer or his deputy. Either notice shall be effective. C In their interpretation and application,the provisions of this Ordinance shall be held to be the minimum requirements adopted for the promotion of public health, safety, morals and general welfare. D Whenever the requirements of this Ordinance are at variance with the requirements of any other lawfully adopted rules, regulations or ordinances, the requirements that are most restrictive or that impose higher standards as determined by the City Enforcement Officer shall govern. IV. Penalty Clause Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon final conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not to exceed two hundred dollars for each offense. Each day such violation continues to exist shall constitute a separate offense. V. Severability Clause That it is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the section, 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 invalid or unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases,clauses, sentences, paragraphs or sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such invalid or unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. Ord No 2341 27 VI. Effective Date This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THIS 28?-11 A/OF S PT;T• BER. 1998. cal. so yor Charles Scoma City of North -ichland Hills, Texas ATTEST: eaafaa: aa-- City Secretary City of North Richland Hills, Texas APPROVED AS T CONTENT:: Departmercwiqea APPROVED AS TO FO'M AND LEG • •.: t / Attorney for the City Ord No 2341 28 INFORMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL No. IR 99-018 Date February 8, 1999 Subject Meeting Dates for March Council Meetings The NLC Conference that the Council will be attending will conflict with the March 8 City Council Meeting. It is staffs recommendation that the March 8 City Council Meeting be moved to March 15 and the March 22 meeting be moved to March 29 The Planning Department has not advertised any public notices for zoning or platting cases coming before the Council in March Both of the regular meetings in March can be moved without causing any difficulties Respectfully submitted, Patricia Hutson City Secretary a ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL No. IR 99-017 ` Date February 4. 1999 Subject. Clarification of Board/Commission Attendance Policy Councilwoman Lyman requested this item be placed on the Pre-Council Agenda. She would like to clarify the attendance policy for the Board and Commission Members The attendance policy was established by Ordinance No 2304, Section 13 (copy attached). There are some questions regarding the notification of a Board Member who has missed 25 percent of the meetings and the removal process Respectfully submitted, Patricia Hutson City Secretary a ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO 2304 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that a directive is needed to provide for the appointment process, review process, removal process and training for members of all Boards, Commissions and Committees of the City NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS that 1 The following subject matters are exempt from the operation of this Ordinance a Eligibility for appointment to the Planning and Zoning Commission Eligibility for appointment to the Civil Service Commission b Method of appointment to Planning and Zoning Commission. Method of appointment to Civil Service Commission c Method of removal from Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment and Civil Service Commission d. Method of conducting business of the Board of Adjustment, Civil Service Commission and Planning and Zoning Commission 2. The word "Board" as used herein means "Board," °Commission," or"Committee" of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas 3 Each Board shall consist of members who will serve in numbered places on each Board The City Counal member whose place-number coincides with the numbered place on each Board shall have the right to nominate a person to serve in that place on each Board The actual appointment will be subject to the approval of the City Council 4 It is directed that terms of office for each Board shall begin on July 1 of the first year of the appointment and shall end on June 30 of the last year of the appointment A member shall serve until his successor is duly appointed and qualified 1 5 The City Council directs that a citizens' pool be created from applications received by the City Secretary The City Secretary shall create this pool by soliciting and receiving applications from the public The City Secretary is authorized to advertise in the news media, Citicable television and in any reasonable manner calculated to spawn interest by citizens in serving on City Boards 6 The City Secretary will make available to potential applicants information sheets on each Board showing the reason for the Board's existence, nature of the duties and other pertinent information which may be available to a person in selecting a Board upon which to serve The City Secretary shall also make available to potential applicants an application form in the general form of Exhibit "A", attached to this Ordinance. 7 The City Secretary will date stamp each application as received and the application shall remain on file for a period of one year and shall be made available to City Council members to consider during that one-year period 8. In February of each year, the City Secretary shall send a letter to each council member letting that council member know which of his nominees have expiring terms on June 30 of that year. The City Secretary shall send to the serving member of the board any letter, which may be directed by a council member who is responsible for a nomination to that particular place on a Board. If so directed, the City Secretary shall send a letter asking if a Board member wishes to be re-appointed and if that member wishes to update his application 9 In February of each year, the City Secretary will provide each council member with a worksheet showing his serving nominations and the date that each person's service is due to expire The worksheet will further show the original appointment date, last re-appointment date and attendance records for the past eight months. 10 Each council member shall send his nominations for each board to the City Secretary prior to the first day of July of each year. The City Council will act upon the nominations and appoint board members at the first meeting in July of each year, or a soon thereafter as 2 • practicable No appointee shall be related to the appointing council member within the second degree of affinity or within the third degree of consanguinity The preceding sentence will not affect any person now serving on a board so long as that person serves on the same board 11 The City Secretary will send each member a certificate of appointment The City Secretary shall further send each applicant who was not appointed an appropriate letter of appreciation 12 The terms of office for each Board member shall be for two years The Council member who nominated the appointee may remove his appointee at any time 13 The staff person providing support to that particular board shall keep attendance records at all meetings The staff person will forward the attendance reports to the City Secretary on or before the last day of each month The City Secretary will prepare a report for the City Council showing attendance records for each board and each member thereof This report shall be made on September 15, December 15 and May 15 of each year. A member who has missed fifty percent (50%) of the Board's meetings from July 1 through May 15 shall automatically be dropped from membership on the board The attendance reports referred to in this paragraph shall be made available to the City Council and a copy furnished upon request Attendance at all regular meetings, special meetings and workshops shall be recorded and used to calculate attendance percentages 14 Boards of the City shall conduct its business in compliance with the Open Meetings Act, the Open Records Act and the oath and statement requirements of state law for statutory boards Each Board will elect officers pursuant to its own rules Any change in officers shall be reported to the City Secretary by the staff person charged with providing support for that particular board 15 Minutes shall be kept of each board meeting The staff person, providing support to that Board, and the officers of the Board are responsible for providing the City Secretary with a signed, approved copy of each set of minutes The City Secretary shall keep a permanent file of the original minutes Copies of the minutes of each meeting, showing attendance and absences shall be forwarded to the City Council by the City Secretary 3 16 Immediately following the appointment process in July of each year, the staff person providing support for each Board is charged with the duty to familiarize each board member with the functions of that Board Following the July appointment process, the first meeting of each Board shall accommodate an orientation period, which shall be set aside for the purpose of helping members become more knowledgeable about his particular Board and rts functions Those persons serving upon the Board of Adjustment and the Planning and Zoning Commission will be (required/encouraged) to attend a prescribed training program, which is designed to educate members in the functions of those boards The City shall bear the expense of this training for board members The training program shall be designated by the City Manager and approved by the City Council 17 The City Secretary is charged with the responsibility to keep a current Board Notebook containing names, addresses and telephone numbers of board members The staff support person for each Board shall be responsible to provide the City Secretary with information, with changes with respect to each board member The City Secretary shall retain a permanent copy of each Notebook and shall place a copy of each annual or semiannual Notebook in the City Historical files PASSED and APPROVED this 11th day of May, 1998. APPROVED. OL% '�- Charles Scoma, ayor ATTEST. geta cefig Patricia Hutson, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FOR;, •ND LEGALITY. de Re 9"cEntire, Attorney or e City 4 INFORMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL No. IR 99-019 Date February 8, 1999 Subject Proposed Phasing of Sign & Landscaping Regulations As outlined in IR 99-012, dated January 25, 1999, staff offered an approach for consideration to move forward with review and recommendations on the Proposed Sign and Landscape Ordinances. The process would categorize the recommendations in each area into two basic phases. The first phase would focus on sections of the recommendations that seem to have the most impact on land that has not previously been developed. The second phase would focus on issues related to redevelopment and previously developed areas of the City. This approach would allow staff to concentrate their efforts primarily on undeveloped property. This seems to be the areas that the Ad Hoc Committee, the Boards and Commissions and the City Council have indicated they have the greatest concern with. Based on concurrence from Council, staff will proceed with review and recommendations back to Council that would include more detailed explanations of each recommendation, any relevant comments from the reviewing boards or commissions, a statement of the current regulations in each area and a staff recommendation, where appropriate We further would appreciate Council's agreement, disagreement. etc. of the recommendations to be considered in Phase I. We have attached a survey to this IR that we would request Council complete and return by Pre-Council time Monday, February 8, 1999. Based on your collective ratings, we can get an idea of relative importance of each item With all of this input from these bodies, our staff will evaluate the impact of the proposed regulations on development, suggest changes where deemed necessary, and provide recommendations for an upcoming worksession. The staff recommendation language may vary from the Ad Hoc committee language due to modifications to merge the language into an ordinance and as a result of the evaluation process to determine feasibility, practicality, and impact. The following phases are recommended. The numbers in each of these correspond to those of the Land Use Ad Hoc Committee recommendations in their January 12, 1999 report. SIGN RECOMMENDATIONS PHASE ONE- New Construction in All Areas 1. Sign Structure and Design Blend with Buildings 2. Pole Signs Prohibited Outside Freeway Overlay 5. Sign Maintenance and Removal 6 Banner Sign Permitting and Restrictions 7. Consistency for Multi-sign Developments 9. Landscaping for Sign Base 10. Fewer and Lower Profile Signs per Lot am ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS • PHASE TWO- Remaining Recommendations for god & 3rd Quarter Review 3 Restrictions on Portable and Vehicle Signs 4. Phase-out of Non-Conforming Signs 8 Encourage Alternative Type Signs 11 . Vigorous Enforcement of Sign Regulations LANDSCAPE RECOMMENDATIONS PHASE ONE- New Construction in All Areas 2. Parking Lot Landscaping Buffer and Design 3. Buffers — Between Zones and Adjacent to Roadways 4. Landscape Maintenance 7 Utility/ Service Area Screening 9. Irrigation Regulations PHASE TWO- Remaining Recommendations for 2nd & 3rd Quarter Review 1 . Streetscape Program 5. Revision of Approved Plant List 6. Chain Link and Wood Fence Restrictions & Requirements 8 Tree Preservation 10. Tree Planting Program 11 . Citywide Green Space Planning 12. Landscape and Maintenance Enforcement The placement of recommendations outlined above can certainly be rearranged to either phase based on direction from the Council. By focusing on a limited number of lime critical" recommendations, staff can provide more detail on each recommendation The information on recommendations that would impact mostly new construction in all areas could be prepared and presented to Council within 30 days for detailed discussion and consideration at a Council worksession. With Council consensus, a public hearing date and possible implementation date could be established at that worksession Most problems we have been dealing with in the current Sign and Landscaping Ordinances will be identified and corrected during Phase One Any remaining issues will be addressed in Phase Two Some examples of corrections during Phase One should include. • Clarifying the requirement of landscaping requirements in "street yard"; Zoning Ordinance definition can create unreasonable burden on property owner/developer. • Clarify "maintenance" responsibility for existing landscaping, • Include additional notification and abatement procedures for non-conforming landscaping; • Correct conflict on driveway visibility language related to signs; • Clarify sign language regarding "...average surrounding ground area...."; • Additional language regarding damage to signs and abatement process for signs. Z As you are aware, we are recruiting for a Director of Planning and have just received notice that the City Planner is resigning to accept a Planning Director position in another state. This makes it very difficult to staff the Land Use Ad Hoc Committee. Staffing of at least one of these positions is crucial to supplying sufficient staff support to the Committee. Therefore, it is our plan to advise this committee of our need to delay further meetings with them until we can get at least one of the two vacant positions filled We will be ready to review this phasing schedule with Council Monday and again, will appreciate your completion of the attached survey Respectfully submitted, Larry J. Cunningham City Manager LJC/Id North Richland Hills Landscape Policies and Standards Survey In working with the staff team and consultants we have developed a survey that we hope will facilitate the Council's discussion and decisions regarding these issues, as well as provide direction for staff. The method used to prepare survey is as follows. 1. Staff conducted a review of both the "existing sign and landscape ordinances". Both ordinances need some modifications that do not change the intent, but improve the wording in order to clarify the intent and to make those provisions easier to understand, interpret, and enforce. When we do prepare a new ordinance for your review and approval we will indicate where these changes have been made. These changes along with those that the Council selects from the LUAHC's recommendations will hopefully provide us with a much better ordinance than the current ordinances. 2. In preparing this survey we have reviewed and taken into consideration the "recommendations" submitted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Beautification Committee, and the Parks and Recreation Board. While we have left the issues in the order of priority established by the LUAHC, we have taken the prioritization one step further. We have divided the issues into two Phases. A. Phase I - issues that need "Immediate Attention". Some of these regulations apply primarily to "New Development Projects", while others apply to properties that have already been developed. B. Phase 2 - issues that can be addressed within the next several months. They apply to "new" as well as "existing properties". The attached Survey is designed to measure three variables 1) The degree to which you "agree" or "disagree" with the proposed recommendations; 2) The degree to which you feel that implementation should be done "immediately" or "later"; 3) An opportunity whether you agree or not to make "suggested changes" to the recommendations. Attached to this memo you will find the surveys for the Landscape and the Sign Ordinances. The numbers correspond to the original document that you were given summarizing these recommendations. You may want to refer back to that document since the survey is a condensed version of that document. Please circle your preference in each category Sign Recommendations Survey PHASE ONE - NEW CONSTRUCTION IN ALL AREAS 1. Sign structures and design should blend with the architecture of the primary building and be constructed of materials that will ensure long term durability and attractiveness. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes a Masonry to match the principle building, or brick or stone. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes b. No wood signs-except temporary Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes c Painted or anodized surfaces. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 2. Pole signs should be prohibited outside of the Freeway Overlay Zone. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes --- 5. Signs should be well maintained, and obsolete signs and messages should be removed promptly. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 6. Banner signs should be allowed only for a limited time. They may be used to advertise the opening of a new business and they may be used to advertise a special event. They should not be used more than 30 days at a time, nor should they be used more than twice in any one year. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes Page 1 7. Where there are multiple signs in a development, they should be consistent in design and materials, and utilize the materials of the primary structure. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Irnolemenl Later Suggested Cnanges - _ -- — Master Signage Plan Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes Common Signage Plan. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes Provisions of the Common Signage Plan Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes- 9. All detached signs should be located in a landscaped setting. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes- -- 10. The number and size of signs per lot and business should be restricted. Properties with multiple business should use a multi-tenant sign, and the number and size of building and window signs should be restricted. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes Page 2 PHASE TWO - REMAINING RECOMMENDATIONS TO BE ADDRESSED 2ND AND 3RD QUARTER 1999 - ALL OF CITY 3. Portable Signs and vehicles with large advertising signs(either temporarily or permanently attached)parked adjacent to the roadways should be prohibited. a. No vehicle or trailer with a sign parked within 100 feet of a roadway right- of-way unless: Stror.gly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes b Portable Signs are prohibited except as may be approved by the City Council for a nonprofit organization up to 50 s.f in size Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes— - - - -- - - 4. Non-Conforming signs should be phased out over time in order to have a positive impact on the attractiveness of the City and it's major roadways. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 8. Alternatives to typical sign design should be encouraged. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 11. Sign regulations should be vigorously enforced. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes -- - - - Page 3 Landscaping Recommendations Survey Phase One - New Development on All Properties in All Areas Suggested Review Time — Begin Now 2. Parking lots should be landscaped by screening parking from public rights-of-way and by breaking up large expanses of paving with trees and shrubs. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes --- a Landscape Zone. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes -- b Trees Planted in Head-in Parking Areas of the Landscape Zone. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes:_ c Parking Lot Landscape Requirements: 1 Small Parking Areas Less than 350 Spaces. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes:_ -- 2 Large Parking Areas More than 350 spaces Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes: d Parking in the Landscape Zones and Open Space Frontages- 1 Shrubs 2 Masonry Wall 3 Berm Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes ----- e. Parking Islands Each Side of Driveways Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes_I. Parking Lot Plant Material Sizes Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes. --- g. Parking lot islands are defined as: Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes. _ -- - 3. Buffer standards for both commercial uses along streets and non-single family uses adjacent to single family zoned properties, should be strengthened with increased setbacks and landscaping. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes: 1 Single family from Multi-family Uses Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes - _ - - -- - 2. Single family/Multi-family from all other Uses Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes Page 2 3 Residential Subdivisions adjacent to Major Roadways Strongly Aq•ap Agree Disagree Strongly D5agrpe Implement ASAP Implemer t Later Suggest,d Changes 4 All Non-Residential Uses adjacent to Public Streets Strongly Agree Agree D• agree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 5. Landscaping should be maintained in a healthy and vigorous growing condition. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 6. Utilities and services areas should be screened from public rights-of-way. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 7. Irrigation should be provided for all required landscaping on non- single family properties. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes _ Page 3 Phase Two - Redevelopment and Improvements to Existing Lots with Buildings Suggested Review Time of 7" and 3rd Quarter 1999 1. Develop and implement a streetscape program for North Richland Hills' major streets, highways and city portals, including such items as street trees and a landscape program, street lighting, traffic signals, intersection treatments and burying overhead utilities. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 5. The City's approved plant list should be revised to focus on hardy native and adaptive plant material as well as drought tolerant plant material. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 6. There should be no exposed chain link fence adjacent to roadways, and wooden fences should be constructed using metal supports in order to reduce the need for structural maintenance. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 8. Mature trees should be preserved or, when development necessitates removal, they should be replaced. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes 10. Establish a Citywide tree planting program that will ensure the greening"of North Richland Hills. a. Tree Planting Master Plan Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes - b. Minimum total of 6 caliper Inches of trees located on each residential lot. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes c. Non-single family lots, not less than 15% of the lot shall be landscaped. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Implement ASAP Implement Later Suggested Changes Page 4 11. Develop a plan to ensure that green space such as parks and trails are located throughout the City. Strongly Agave Agree Di agree Strongly Dsa 3i.-e lrnpiement ASAP Implement Later S Jgaesed Changes 12. Enforce landscaping and maintenance standards and requirements. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Deagree implement ASAP Implemeet Later Suggested Changes - — - - - Page 5 INFORMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL No. IR 99-016 Date February 8, 1999 Subject Review Process and TimeTable for Proposed Tree Ordinance In light of the Wednesday, February 3 action of a property owner in the Northern part of the City to begin removal of trees from his property and the anticipated reaction and interest of citizens regarding this, Mayor Scoma suggested that it might be appropriate for Council to discuss the process and timetable for reviewing and considering the tree ordinance as recommended by the Land Use Ad Hoc Committee. We have placed this item on the Pre- Council agenda for purposes of discussing this timetable and process for review of the proposed ordinance. Staff has been concentrating on the Ad Hoc Committee recommendations for signage and landscaping, and we have not been thoroughly reviewing the proposed tree ordinance. Again, the purpose of this item is to provide an opportunity for Council to discuss this and also any direction you may wish to provide. Respectfully submitted, Larry J. /unningham City Manager LJC/Id a ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, HELD IN THE RECREATION ASSEMBLY ROOM, 6720 NORTHEAST LOOP 820, NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, - JANUARY 12, 1999 — 6:30 P.M. Present Charles Scoma Mayor Lyle E Welch Councilman Russell Mitchell Councilman Frank Metts, Jr. Councilman JoAnn Johnson Councilwoman Don Phifer Mayor Pro Tern Matt Milano Councilman Cheryl Cowen Lyman Councilwoman Staff Larry Cunningham City Manager Randy Shiflet Deputy City Manager Ron Ragland Assistant City Manager Patricia Hutson City Secretary Land Use Ad Hoc Committee Members Park and Recreation Board Members Beautification Commission Members Planning and Zoning Commission Members Mayor Scoma called the work session to order January 12, 1999 at 6:30 p.m. The members of the Land Use Ad Hoc Committee, the Park and Recreation Board, Beautification Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission were recognized. The Mayor advised the members of the Park and Recreation Board, Beautification Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission that they needed to forward their Board's recommendations and comments on the presentation by the Land Use Ad Hoc Committee to staff by January 26. The Council will be holding a work session on February 2 to review and study all of the recommendations and Council will begin considering recommendations at the February 8 Council meeting Mr. Robert O'Reilly, Chair of the Land Use Ad Hoc Committee, introduced the Signs and Landscaping presentation by the Committee. Mr. Joe Tolbert, Land Use Ad Hoc Committee Member, reviewed the Council's goal for quality development and planning through build-out and presented the committee's mission statement and objectives. Mr. Tolbert reviewed the process used by the Committee to arrive at the standards and policies they were recommending to the Council, and the problems they defined with the current landscaping and sign standards. City Council Work Session Minutes January 12, 1999 Page 2 Mr Gary Anderson, Co-Chair of the Land Use Ad Hoc Committee, presented the sor Committee's recommendations for sign standards 1 Sign structures and design should blend with the architect of the primary building and be constructed of materials that will ensure long term durability and attractiveness 2 Pole signs should be prohibited outside of the Freeway Zone. 3 Portable signs and vehicles with large advertising signs (either temporarily or permanently attached) parked adjacent to the roadways should be prohibited. 4 Non-conforming signs should be phased out over time in order to have a positive impact on the attractiveness of the City and its major roadways. 5. Signs should be well maintained, and obsolete signs and messages should be removed promptly 6. Banner signs should be allowed only for a limited time They may be used to advertise a special event. They should not be used for more than 30 days at a time, nor should they be used more than twice in any one year. 7 Where there are multiple signs in a development, they should be consistent in design and materials, and utilize the materials of the primary structure 8. Alternatives to typical sign design should be encouraged. 9. All detached signs should be located in a landscaped setting. 10 The number and size of signs per lot and business should be restricted. Properties with multiple businesses should use a multi-tenant sign, and the number and size of the building and window signs should be restricted. 11. Sign regulations should be vigorously enforced. Mr. Randy Brock, Land Use Ad Hoc Committee Member, presented the Committee's recommendations for Landscape Policies and Standards. 1 Develop and implement a streetscape program for North Richland Hills' major streets, highways and city portals, including such items as street trees and a landscape program, street lighting, traffic signals, intersection treatments and burying overhead utilities. 2. Parking lots should be landscaped by screening parking from public right-of-way and by breaking up large expanses of paving with trees and shrubs. City Council Work Session Minutes January 12 1999 Page 3 3 Buffer standards for both commercial uses along streets and non-single family uses adjacent to single family zoned properties, should be strengthened with increased setbacks and landscaping 4. Landscaping should be maintained in a healthy and vigorous growing condition. 5 The City's approved plant list should be revised to focus on hardy naive and adaptive plant material as well as drought tolerant plant material 6 There should be no exposed chain link fence adjacent to roadways, and wooden fences should be constructed using metal supports in order to reduce the need for structural maintenance 7 Utilities and service areas should be screened from public right-of-way 8 Mature trees should be preserved or, when development necessitates removal, they should be replaced. 9 Irrigation should be provided for all required landscaping on non-single family properties 10. Establish a Citywide tree planting program that will ensure "the greening" of North Richland Hills 11. Develop a plan to ensure that green space such as parks and trails are located throughout the City 12. Enforce landscaping and maintenance standards and requirements. Mr. John Barfield and Mr. Doug Long, developers, discussed the problems associated with preserving trees during development. Questions from the Council and the Park and Recreation Board, Beautification Commission and Planning and Zoning Commission were addressed. Mayor Scoma adjourned the meeting at 8:02 p m. Charles Scoma - Mayor ATTEST: Patricia Hutson - City Secretary 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 — JANUARY 25, 1999 — 6:00 P.M. Present Charles Scoma Mayor Don Phifer Mayor Pro Tem Lyle E. Welch Councilman Russell Mitchell Councilman Frank Metts, Jr. Councilman Jo Ann Johnson Councilwoman Matt Milano Councilman Cheryl Cowen Lyman Councilwoman Larry Cunningham City Manager Randy Shiflet Deputy City Manager Patricia Hutson City Secretary Alicia Richardson Assistant City Secretary Rex McEntire Attorney Marty Wieder Economic Development Director Greg Dickens Public Works Director Terry Kinzie Information Services Director Larry Koonce Finance Director Donna Huerta Director of Communications Steve Norwood Director of Development Services James Saint Assistant to the City Manager Absent. Ron Ragland Assistant City Manager ITEM DISCUSSION ASSIGNMENT CALL TO ORDER Mayor Scoma called the meeting to order at 6 01 p.m. DISCUSS ITEMS Agenda Item 6h — PU 99-01 —There was a question NAN FROM REGULAR from the Council as to the completion date of Phase JANUARY 25, 1999 I of the 100-Acre Park The Council was advised AGENDA that the completion date was approximately 9 months. Agenda Item 10 — GN 99-04—There was a question regarding whether the proposed improvements would be completed by season opening. Staff advised that the recommended improvements for the 1999 season would be completed before the opening of the water park for the season. Pre-Council Minutes • January 25, 1999 Page 2 ITEM J DISCUSSION ASSIGNMENT IR 99-010 — The Council agreed to the tentative schedule for the LARRY K. DISCUSS 1999 sale and delivery of the bond funds. Those Council BOND SALE ! Members interested in attending the rating agency meetings on April 8 and 9 are to notify the Mayor. IR 99-012 — The City Manager discussed the timetable and NAN PROCESS AND process for the Council to review the TIME TABLE FOR recommendations of the Land Use Ad Hoc REVIEW AND Committee. He advised that Staff felt that some of IMPLEMENTATION the recommendations of the Land Use Ad Hoc FOR PROPOSED Committee would need to be modified. The City SIGN AND Manager explained a possible schedule of phasing LANDSCAPING in changes to the landscaping and signage RECOMMEND- regulations. He reviewed the estimated timeline for ATIONS some projects underway and projects that possibly could be permitted by March. He explained that landscaping and building codes become effective at the time the building permit is taken out. Any development that is permitted before the new regulations are put into place will fall under the current landscaping and sign ordinances. There were concerns expressed by some of the Council Members that adequate time was not being given to receive input from the community and for the Council and Staff to review all of the recommendations There was also concern on the impact the new regulations would have on the present businesses. The Mayor advised that the Council would be holding a work session on February 2 at 6:00 p.m. to give staff direction for proposed ordinances and depending on the direction given to Staff by the Council, the implementation process will most probably be staged. He explained that the purpose of the work session is to identify the weak areas of the recommendations, and to pull together the recommendations made by the Land Use Ad Hoc Committee, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Beautification Commission and the Parks Board. IR 99-009 DISCUSS Councilwoman Lyman advised the Council that she LARRY C. PICTURES OF requested this item be placed on the agenda PROPERTIES WITH because of a letter she and Councilwoman Johnson VIOLATIONS IN received from a citizen whose property was one of THE PUBLIC the pictures displayed at a previous Council meeting. - MEETINGS Councilwoman Lyman felt the City needed to be more sensitive in the future to the citizens and Pre-Council Minutes January 25, 1999 Page 3 ITEM DISCUSSION ASSIGNMENT IR 99-009 DISCUSS businesses in the City. Councilwoman Johnson felt PICTURES OF pictures should be shown to the Council but not PROPERTIES WITH displayed on the Cable TV and that she did not want VIOLATIONS IN pictures shown on Cable TV unless Council has THE PUBLIC seen it first The Council discussed screening out MEETINGS names of companies in the future Councilman (continued) Metts was in favor of showing pictures of properties located in the city only after notifying the property owners Councilman Milano questioned whether it would be possible to gray out the irrelevant areas I The general feeling was that some of the Council Members did not want to display pictures of properties with violations in public meetings without notifying the property owner IR 99-008 Councilman Milano advised he requested this item NAN CLARIFICATION be placed on the agenda for discussion because he OF DIRECTION ON felt the Staff was proceeding in a direction different SIGNBOARD than what Council discussed. He was of the understanding that Staff was working on securing subleases Councilman Milano did not want Staff to move ahead with a contract with BISD until the subleasing option was concrete. Councilman Milano was advised that Staff was working with BISD to work out the terms of the agreement before the City could explore subleasing possibilities. The Staff will not proceed with this venture until details of agreement have been worked out with BISD and upon Council approval. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Scoma announced at 6.54 p.m. that the Council would adjourn to Executive Session to discuss pending litigation and personnel as authorized by the Government Code Sections 551 071 and 551.052 Charles Scoma — Mayor ATTEST: Patricia Hutson — 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 —JANUARY 25, 1999 - 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Scoma called the meeting to order January 25, 1999 at 7.10 p.m ROLL CALL Present Charles Scoma Mayor Don Phifer Mayor Pro Tern Lyle E. Welch Councilman Russell Mitchell Councilman Frank Metts, Jr Councilman Matt Milano Councilman Cheryl Cowen Lyman Councilwoman Jo Ann Johnson Councilwoman Staff Larry Cunningham City Manager Randy Shiflet Deputy City Manager Patricia Hutson City Secretary Greg Dickens City Engineer Rex McEntire Attorney Absent- Ron Ragland Assistant City Manager 2. INVOCATION Invocation given by Snow Heights Elementary Leadership Team, Polar Pride Patrol. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Leadership Team from Snow Heights Elementary led the pledge of allegiance 4. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 5. REMOVAL OF ITEM(S) FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA City Council Minutes January 25, 1999 Page 2 None 6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEM(S) APPROVED A. OFFER ON TRACT 17 OF ABSTRACT 1606, W.W. WALLACE SURVEY; RESOLUTION NO. 99-05 B. AWARD OF BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PHASE 1 OF THE 100 ACRE CITY PARK C. AWARD OF BID FOR THE MACKEY CREEK DIVERSION CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS TO PKG CONTRACTING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,260,922.00 D. AWARD OF BID TO WALT WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $680,982.26 FOR BLANEY AVENUE PAVING IMPROVEMENTS E. VACATE THE DEDICATION OF A PORTION OF THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF CARDINAL LANE AND SIMMONS DRIVE —ORDINANCE NO. 2364 Mayor Pro Tern Phifer moved, seconded by Councilwoman Lyman, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion to approve carried 7-0 7. PZ 98-59 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF ALL COMMERCIAL PROJECTS THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN 200 FEET OF RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY THAT IS INDICATED TO BE RESIDENTIAL ON THE APPROVED COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN. ORDINANCE NO. 2362 APPROVED Mr. Steve Norwood, Managing Director of Development Services, presented the proposed Ordinance. Mayor Scoma opened the public hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak to come forward There being no one wishing to speak Mayor Scoma closed the public hearing. City Council Minutes January 25, 1999 Page 3 Councilman Milano moved, seconded by Councilwoman Lyman to approve PZ 98-59. Ordinance No 2362 Motion to approve carried 7-0 8. PS 98-55 CONSIDER REQUEST OF MARVIN SMITH FOR A FINAL PLAT OF LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 2, DOUGLAS ESTATES, PHASE II. (LOCATED IN THE 7500 BLOCK DOUGLAS LANE) APPROVED Mr Steve Norwood presented PS 98-55. Mr Marvin Smith, applicant, was present to answer questions from the Council Councilwoman Johnson moved, seconded by Councilman Metts to approve PS 98-55 subject to engineer's comments. Motion to approve carried 7-0. 9. PS 98-65 CONSIDER REQUEST OF KENT HOLCOMB FOR A FINAL PLAT OF LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 1, TOWN CENTER ADDITION. (LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF CARDINAL LANE AND SIMMONS DRIVE) APPROVED Mr. Mike Curtis, CIP Coordinator, gave a summarization of PS 98-65 and covered issues pertaining to off-site easements, parking easements, and improvements to Cardinal Lane and Simmons Drive Councilman Mitchell understands that Blue Ice will be selling alcoholic beverages and it is located across the street from BISD high school, and he wanted to know if Blue Ice is in compliance with the City's alcoholic ordinance Mr. Kent Holcomb, 7291 Glenview Drive, spoke on behalf of the owner. Mr.Holcomb addressed Councilman Mitchell's question regarding alcoholic sales in stating that the distance from the Blue Line Ice property, which is their eastern boundary is approximately 304 feet from the Birdville School District boundary on the east side of Simmons Drive. Craig Hutchins, 5208 Airport Freeway, Suite 210, Fort Worth, owner/representative for the Blue Line Ice Complex, stated that they are not at this point set up to sell alcoholic beverages. Their facility will contain lease space for a restaurant and the restaurant might sell alcohol Blue Line does not City Council Minutes January 25, 1999 Page 4 intend to sell alcohol in the ice-skating facility and alcohol will not be sold as general concessions Mayor Pro Tern Phifer moved, seconded by Councilman Metts to approve PS 98-65 Motion carried 7-0. 10. GN 99-04 NRH20 1998 SEASON REPORT AND 1999-2000 RECOMMENDATIONS APPROVED Mr Chris Swartz, NRH2O Aquatic Manager, presented a slide presentation to Council highlighting the report and recommendations Mayor Pro Tern Phifer moved, seconded by Councilwoman Lyman to approve GN 99-04. Motion to approve carried 7-0 11. PW 99-04 APPROVE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF TRACT 8, JOHNS ADDITION APPROVED Mr. Greg Dickens presented Staffs recommendation for PW 99-04. Mr Dicken's mentioned the recommendation was an alternative and does not meet the City's criteria Mr. Brian Arnold, Attorney, 217 W. Main, Grand Prairie, spoke on behalf of Mr. Hall, owner of the property. Councilwoman Lyman moved, seconded by Councilman Metts to approve PW 99-04 Motion to approve carried 4-3, Mayor Pro Tern Phifer, Councilwomen Johnson and Lyman and Councilman Metts voting for and Councilmen Welch, Mitchell, and Milano voting in opposition City Council Minutes January 25 1999 Page 5 12. CITIZENS PRESENTATION None (8) INFORMATION AND REPORTS Mr Cunningham gave a quick review of organizational changes 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Scoma adjourned the meeting at 8.50 p m Charles Scoma - Mayor ATTEST. Patricia Hutson - City Secretary CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department City Secretary Council Meeting Date 2/8/99 subject Calling City Council Election - Resolution No 99-08 Agenda Number GN 99-07 The attached resolution calls for a City election to be held on May 1, 1999 for the election of Council Persons to Places 1, 3, 5, and 7 for two-year terms of office The resolution calls for the election to be conducted in accordance with the Texas Election Laws. It establishes the voting locations, provides for the appointment of Election Officials, and provides for early voting procedures. In accordance with State law, filing will begin on February 15, 1999 and end on March 17, 1999, and early voting will begin April 14, 1999 and end April 27, 1999 The City Secretary is authorized to procure voting machines for the election and to contract with the Tarrant County Elections Administrator for early voting services The City will hold its election jointly with the Birdville Independent School District as we have done the past several years Recommendation To approve Resolution No 99-08. Finance Review Source of Funds Account Number Bonds (GO/Rev ) _ Sufficient Funds Avauaoie Operating Budget Other Finance Director Department Head Signature ity Manager Si. ature RESOLUTION NO 99-08 BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, by the City Council of the City of North Richland Hills that a City election be called for the election of Council Persons to Places 1, 3, 5 and 7 for two year terms and that the City hold its election Jointly with Birdville Independent School District in accordance with Section 271.002, Texas Election Code Section 1. That said election be held on the 1st day of May, 1999, A.D., between the hours of seven o'clock a m. and seven o'clock p m Section 2 Qualified persons may file as candidates by filing with the City Secretary between the hours of eight am and five p m , Monday through Friday, beginning February 15, 1999, and ending on March 17, 1999 Each application for a place on the ballot shall be accompanied by a filing fee of $150.00 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 qualified voters of the City with at least one hundred fifty signatures Forms for the petition shall be furnished to potential candidates by the City Secretary. Section 3. The location of polling places for this Joint election are designated pursuant to Section 271.003 of the 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 PRECINCTS VOTING LOCATION Precinct One (includes County voting City Hall, 7301 Northeast Loop 820 precincts 3214, 3324, 3333, 3041, 3364, 3350 & 3366) Precinct Two (includes County voting Dan Echols Senior Adult Center precincts 3215, 3140, 3325, 3326, 3289 (City Hall Annex), 6801 Glenview Drive 3424, & 3425) Precinct Three (includes County voting Bursey Road Senior Adult Center, 7301 Bursey Road precincts 3209, 3063, 3049, 3177, 3367, 3387, 3507 & 3527) Section 4. The following Election Officials are appointed to serve at the polling places Precinct One Presiding Judge Gerry Cozby Alternate Presiding Judge/Clerk Bill Weihs Precinct Two. Presiding Judge Neta Mason Alternate Presiding Judge/Clerk Kay Littrell Precinct Three. Presiding Judge Kathy Graves Alternate Presiding Judge/Clerk Evelyne Miller Section 5 Each Presiding Judge shall appoint not less than two nor more than six qualified clerks to serve and assist in holding said election, provided that if the Presiding Judge herein appointed actually serves, the Alternate Presiding Judge shall be one of the clerks Section 6 Early voting will be held on weekdays beginning on April 14, 1999 at 8 00 a m and ending on April 27, 1999 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 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 Section 7 In accordance with Section 87 004 of the Texas Election Code, the Presiding Judge at City Hall and at least two (2) election clerks shall also serve as the Early Voting Ballot Board to count the ballots received in Early Voting by Personal Appearance and Early Voting by Mail Section 8 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 Section 9. 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 May 1, 1999, and voting machines are hereby adopted as the method of voting at such election Section 10. This resolution will be construed along with Resolution No 96-11, passed on February 12, 1996, so as to give effect to both resolutions. PASSED AND APPROVED this 8th day of February, 1999. APPROVED' Mayor ATTEST. City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY- Attorney for the City Resolution No 99-08 Page 2 R15U1 I I I I11N NO '+r;-11 JOINT ELEC i 'CN AGREEMENT p{LFEA.`, the p!rd.ilie I. ;,,_f ;i .S i Hi¢•r,ct and tax i- r• -t N R Lh-ilarid Hills Texas desire to (shay, int , P-r ns puis.ant to if e lap dial -ira Texas Election Code including the condo-I et Halt early voting and to provide for the shaiinq of expenses and WHEREAS Section 271 002 of the 7ecas Election Code provides for lout elections upon the passage of a resolution by each of the governing bodes participating therein reciting the terms of the agreement including the method for allocating expenses for the election NOt^t THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TRUSTEES (Jr THE BIRDVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Texa= Section 1 The Birdville Independent School District and the City of North Richland Hills shall hold a Joint election on the first Saturday of May for the purpose of electing Trustees to the BISD Board of Trustees and members of the North Richland Hills City Council It is further agreed that such election shall be conducted by the City of North Richland Hills at such polling place as the City of North Richland Hills shall designate, utilizing the election officers appointed by the City of North Richland Hills and that early voting shall be conducted by the North Richland Hills City Secretary at such location as the City of North Richland Hills shall name Section 2 Voting machines shall be utilized for the election itself and separate ballots may be utilized containing all the offices and propositions to be voted on at each polling place, provided that no voter shall be given a ballot or permitted to utilize a machine capable of casting a vote for any office or proposition on which the voter is ineligible to vote Returns may be made on forms which are individual or combined, and the officer designated by law to be the custodian of the records for the City of North Richland Hills shall be designated as the custodian of the combined records Section 3 The expenses of the election shall be borne in proportion to percentage of the City of North Richland Hills within the BISD and BISD agrees to indemnify the City of North Richland Hills for 'he cost of any recount or election contest required for officers or propositions to be voted on for BISD Section 4 This Agreement will continue in force until repealed by official action and notification by either party In the event that either the City of North R.ehland lie Li, BISD dues n't haze ac=ed for aro electios rsofause i t uncontested rates that party may withdra.v irorrr dlr.:, agreerr~'n it affidrf e,pr.rtion .if the last tilinu deadl,ne b\ granting .once to toe hthc. :iff irn ten days of that date AND IT IS SO RESOLVED Passed by the Birdville Independent School District on this .�Y9 -day of /t,_t.zia .. 99€ b a vote of 4- to <, By -L1� a'� 4'It4/1 �A L I/ President BISD eo d of Trustees Attest "��� � 7'2-L <-C Secretary Passed this 12th day of February, 1996, by a vote of 7 to 0 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ., •.. �.. �L l� �� Mayor / ATTEST dt //n Secretary Approved as to Form and Legality - L ` " � ; Attorney for City t CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department Administration Counci'L Meeting Date 02/08/99 i I Subject Designation of Deputy Court Clerks - Resolution #99-09 Agenda Number GN 99-08 When the Municipal Court Clerk, Jim Wilkins, is absent from work or otherwise away from the Municipal Court building it is necessary to designate representatives within his office to act in his behalf in signing and approving official documents of the Court. Individuals must be officially designated as deputy court clerks in order to have the full force and effect of acting in behalf of the Court Clerk in handling matters related to Court records. It will be necessary from time to time to add and remove individuals who would be acting as deputy court clerks At this time, however, we are requesting Council approval to designate Debbie Durko the recently named Assistant Court Administrator as one of the deputy court clerks as well as Beverly Montague, Warrant Technician and Mike Chenault, City Marshal to act and assist in the Court Clerks absence or under his direction. Recommendation: To approve Resolution #99-09. Finance Review Source of Funas: Account Number Bonds (GO/Rev) Sufficient Funds Available Operating Budget Other Finance Director �''''c=. �r� L C1 �t tiu 4: K.— Department Head Signature amity Manager Signal/ire l Page 1 of RESOLUTION 499-09 WHEREAS. It is essential for the efficient operations of the North Richland Hills Municipal Court to have adequate designated individuals to assist with handling of official records in the absence or under the authorization of the Municipal Court Clerk: and WHEREAS, the North Richland Hills City Charter provides the designation of Deputy Court Clerks; and WHEREAS, from time to time it is necessary to designate one or more individuals as Deputy Court Clerks to assist the Municipal Court in the caring out of the official duties of the Municipal Court office; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DESIGNATES THE FOLLOWING DEPTY COURT CLERKS: 1 . Debbie Durko, Assistant Court Administrator 2. Beverly Montague, Warrant Technician 3. Mike Chenault, City Marshal PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL on this, the 8th day of February 1999. APPROVED Charles Scoma, Mayor Scoma ATTEST: City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY Attorney for the City CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department Finance / Information Services Council Meeting Date: 2/8/99 Subject: Award Contract to Supply Microcomputers to Omtex Agenda Number: PU 99-04 Systems, Inc. - Resolution No. 99-07 In the 1998/99 approved budget, Council appropriated funds for the purchase of microcomputer equipment. Request for Proposals were solicited for a contract to supply microcomputers, software and related hardware. The specifications requested proposals for a two-year contract with the option to extend for one additional year. A total of 13 bids were received, however, only six bids met the minimum specifications. Attached is a spreadsheet with the results. In 1995 Council approved the plan that recommended the City standardize on microcomputer and related equipment. After extensive research the Information Services Department chose Gateway computers. The Gateway computers have been very reliable, the service has been excellent and the prices are very competitive. Omtex Systems provides Gateway computers and submitted the low bid meeting specifications This company has been awarded the contract the last two years. They have provided excellent service, made deliveries on time and always passed on price reductions to the City as they occur. Omtex Systems provide monthly reports that document market reductions in price and it is included in the contract that these reductions are passed to the City. Staff will closely monitor these reports to insure the City receives all price reductions Approximately 50 desktop and 5 laptop computers will be purchased this budget year. Recommendation. To award the contract to supply microcomputers, software and related hardware to Omtex Systems for two years with the option to extend for one additional year and pass Resolution No. 99-07 authorizing the City Manager to execute the contract. Finance Review Source of Funds Account Number 520-7012-712 75-25 Bonds (GO/Rev ) Sufficient Funds Avanaoie Operating Budget X ' Other Finance Director D artment d Signature JCity Manager Sign/attire Paoe 1 of COMPUTER CONTRACT PROPOSAL#98-839 COMPANY DESKTOP LAPTOP 1. Omtex Systems $2,304.00 $2,400.00 2. Texas Computer Hub $2,324.00 $2,540.00 3. Customized Computers $2,340 50 $2,406.50 4. Gateway $2,355.00 $2,616.00 5. WBD Enterprises $2,564.30 $3,241.88 6. A 8 A Technology $4,905.98 $2,880.91 The following bids did not meet minimum specifications or were rejected for incompatibility reasons: 7 Computer Etc Inc. $1,675.99 $2,740.99 8 Monarch Systems $1,739.00 $2,544.00 9 Dyna Computers $1,768.00 No Bid 10. Data Solutons $2,54125 No Bid 11 Ultra Computers $2,633.45 No Bid 12 Tangent Computers $2,686.00 $3,289 00 13 COMP USA $2,876.00 $3,487.00 RESOLUTION NO. 99-07 _ BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, that 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the contract with OMTEX SYSTEMS, INC. for the contract to supply microcomputers, software and related hardware, as the act and deed of the City. PASSED AND APPROVED this 8th day of February 1999. APPROVED: Charles Scoma Mayor ATTEST: Patricia Hutson, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Rex McEntire, Attorney for the City APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Larry Koonce, Director of Finance CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Public Works Department Council Meeting Date: 2/08/99 Subject: Approve Final Pay Estimate No. 3 in the Amount of Agenda Number: PAY 99-01 $72,911.27 To All-Tex Paving, Inc. for Conn Drive and Cloyce Court (23`u Year CDBG Project) The City Council passed Resolution No. 97-06 on January 13, 1997 which identified Conn Drive and Cloyce Court Paving Improvements as the 23rd Year Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) project for the City of North Richland Hills. On February 9, 1998 (PW 98-05) Council recommended the bid be awarded to All-Tex Paving, Inc. for $218,821.60 Final payment in the amount of $72,911.27 to the contractor will make the total paid for the project is $228,119.09, including Change Order No. 1. The reason for the additional change order cost of$9,297.49 is a result of the removing three large trees, repairing sprinkler systems, and constructing the sidewalk adjacent to the curb. Change Order No. 1 will be ratified by Tarrant County to reconcile the final "as-built" quantities. The construction budget for this project was $278,300, as identified in the 1997/98 Capital Projects Budget. The difference between the budget and the final project cost is a savings of$50,180.91. Tarrant County will apply the savings to future North Richland Hills CDBG projects. The contractor substantially completed this project before the contract completion date of September 21, 1998. The project is now totally complete with all final adjustments having been made. Recommendation To recommend Tarrant County approve the final payment to All-Tex Paving, Inc in the amount of $72,911 27. Finance Review Source of Funds: Account Number CDBG Funds Bonds (GO/Rev) Sufficient Funds Avenue Operating Budget _ Other v- 7/ finance Director �i o` j.a mi n ead Signature ' Manager Signat e Page 1 of lJ KNOWLTON-EGLISH-FLOWERS, INC. Il • CONSULTING ENGINEERS Ni Fort Worch-Dallas January 18, 1999 Mr. Don Day, C.D.B.G Program Coordinator Tarrant County, C.D. Division 1509B South University Drive, Suite 276 Fort Worth,Texas 76017 Re: 30-345,TARRANT COUNTY(NRH), 23RD YEAR CDBG PROJECT, STREET IMPROVEMENTS,CONN & CLOYCE DRIVES, FINAL ESTIMATE AND RECOMMENDATION OF ACCEPTANCE For your appropriate action,we enclose original copies of: • Change Order No. 1: the document reconciles final"as-built"quantities, and • Contractor's Estimate No. 3 (Final): the form represents the Contractor's request for final payment for completed construction. The final item on the City's October 2, 1998,"punch list"was completed to the City's satisfaction on January 14, 1999. Accordingly,we recommend that you accept the project and issue final payment in the amount of$72,911.27 to the Contractor,All-Tex Paving, Inc.,2462 Walnut Ridge,Dallas,Texas 75229. Please call if you any questions in this regard. in,)Lizt id. e......--&.... Donald H. Canton, P.E. DHC/final Enclosures xc: Mr. Mr. Gregory W. Dickens, P.E., Public Works Director(with enclosures) Mr. Mike Curtis, P.E., Capital Projects Coordinator(with enclosures) 41. 1-1115 COPY FOR Mr. Scott Walker, Construction Inspector(with enclosures) 1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550•BEDFORD,TEXAS 76021-5826•817/283-6211 •METRO 817/267-3367•FAX 817/354-4389 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department Planning & Inspections Council Meeting Date: 2/08/99 Subject Public Hearing to Consider the Request of Josef Lubczyk Agenda Number: SRC 99-01 For a variance from the Sign Regulations on Lot 3, Block 2, College Circle Addition (Located at 5935 Davis. Blvd.) In September 1998 the City Council voted to remove the Sign Regulations from the Zoning Ordinance and establish them as a stand-alone ordinance. This removal meant that requests for variances from the regulations no longer are adjudicated by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. All cases pertaining to variances from the sign regulations are now directed to the City Council for determination. Josef Lubczyk has constructed a sign on top of an exisiting monument sign at 5935 Davis Blvd, better known as Loeffler's European Automobiles. The current monument sign regulations indicate that the maximum height permitted is 6 feet. Mr. Lubczyk constructed an addition to this sign that is approximately 5 feet taller than the monument sign. The total height for the sign is now approximately 14 feet. Mr Lubczyk constructed the additional sign without obtaining a permit from Building Inspections. If he had applied for a permit, it would have been denied because it violates the current regulations. Code Enforcement officers discovered the illegal construction and advised the property owner that a variance from the existing regulations must be sought. An illustration of the sign constructed is provided by the applicant and is attached for your information and review Please refer to Exhibit "A". Exhibit "B" is the approximate location of the sign on the property. Both of these exhibits were prepared by the applicant. All property owners within 200 feet have been notified in accordance with State Law. To date, staff has not received any comments. RECOMMENDATION: To deny SRC 99-01 because there is no inherent characteristic of the property that creates a hardship. Additionally, a mere financial hardship does not constitute grounds for variance approval. Finance Review Source of Funds. Acct. Number Bonds (GO/Rev) Sufficient Funds Available Operating Budget Othe i Flow oa `. d skisAass w. Departm-nt Head Signature City anager CITY COUNCIL ACTION Page 1 of CITY OF N €3 RTH RICHLAND HILLS Planning &Inspection Services December 28, 1998 To Christopher Baker On December 23, 1998 it was noticed that an addition to the monument sign at 5935 Davis Blvd had been made. Tim Horvath sent a notification letter to the property owner that a permit must be approved for the addition or the addition would have to be removed A permit was applied for and turned down on this date The reason the permit was not approved is because the addition exceeds the maximum allowable height of six feet and the contractor is not registered with the City. I informed Ed Clingman that a variance could be sought through the City Council. I gave him the proper application and informed him that it must be turned in within fifteen days I�Fe?&jJ L2YLl A ; Darren Williams P.O. Box 820609•North Richland Hills,Texas •76182-0609 USA 7301 Northeast Loop 820•817-581-5514•FAX 817-656-7538 /�s f -.--rrrrrr/, ,° II - � i II I ° ,. Agenda i, �- �' g n Item: h _ % SRC 99 U )7 ,.... ,[ -4,, R-- 'I 02 l ill —I sa C-2 11e1 --� "I I 1s.a L __ , ;;_[ li .." "7 i (,) PD-b- . r cr CE /�� I� Y\tl L / 1 -1 • R-7-MF ca _ . 1834'� .. :093 _ -:,... n _ 7 0,1000 _xonocp aCl' — 1N/UOay/ [......*, I � cz III, C- ,, _ /_ .• - � , �- r/� i`11 P D 9 1„' ._—_i: . ,em , - I f : . , inifk—An)T1Ilcs p'y I t l . t. � J ^ 1 - S p • -. . ` 1. 1 , t s Ea" g <OR. �ccF- ' J ` e4 1 r /\ o N . I Exh'sbI+} A . ILLu,-rz a, nvN OF 6i ! / Provtdtd by 4pIkANT . oo • • • • -41filialkask • 41) Ike, • • • h1(ntJ i N ••NV '� i 4 am . . w r� :;••n"- .• / /` . s c,(v.•1.1-; • �.N-•jr .•..•.:• 0 , I�, / , ••,•• ;n•mere / Exhb's+ • Z N in 0 0Jwa° U Q�OJO Gi mUQQ 9�<v rJ � w ^ o Z F- N � i. W Z o~ w l N JI d N}l�H City of North Richland Hills jjy`V`, i■` ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 7301 NeLeopeao • I APPLICATION FORA HEARING North Richland Hills.Texas (Pica..pvYa type at M1r�[ef) ON VARIANCE FROM SIGN REGULATIONS 817-581-5500 'ART 1. APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of applicant . LOEFFLER'S EUROPEAN AUTOMOBILES, INC, Street address of applicant: 5935 Davis Blvd. City/ State/Zip Code of applicant Telephone number of applicant N. Richland Hills, TX 76180 817-514-8000 Are you the owner of the property' Are you the owners agent' Note:If you are not the owner of the property,you must attach a letter xi yes 7 no yes n no from the property owner giving you permission to submit this application. PART 2. PROPERTY INFORMATION Legal Description of Property where vanance is being requested. College Circle Shopping Center Addition, Blk 2, Lot 3 Street address at location where vanance is bong requested. 5935 Davis Blvd. , N. Richland Hills, TX 76180 ' r PART 3. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST B U.I+ or,z... Check the appmpnate application type VW�� T1 Interpretation Request n Zoning Variance Request fl Nonconforming Use or Structure X Sign Variance Current zoning classification 'Building permit application submitted .� LTNote: A map or plat plan of the property and drawings of the proposed yes �� no construction must be submitted with this application Describe the valiance request.in de!aml Requef_t j t-Yariance be t-ssyedto a1jov a sign structure_ having 14 feet of overall height as opposed tothe maximum allowed of 6 feet. The existing Monument �Sign is BT-67 "above grade. A permit for this sign was issued If/ XRH. An ,Iddr tion-ta t1 0-tCr,.af_b t c 4 g (See-sketch-attached to Sign vomit Application. ) is re es ed e2)advertise the ability to serve the public as a I hereby certify that I am,or that I represent,the legal owner of the properly described above and do hereby submit this request for a variance for consideration by the Zoning Board of Ad/ustment. Dale /7/? Imo/I Print Name j; _ Z / , -__ r�i Signature T/ O PART 4. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY / Date of Board of Adjustment Public Heanng Taxes,Liens and Assessments Paid? Case Number 0 Yes ` 1 No C ` get VI Variance Approved Date of Final Action. Fees' ' ' Yes t.1 No Rest Condmons of Apra,al esltlanllal i1TS.g0 ----------_______ __-- This request will not be scheduled forheenng until the application fee is paid Signature of Chairman Zoning Board of Adjustment Application 5 CO-a10 (11991 an operating BOSCH Service Center. Bosch is the manufacturer of many European car systems and components. Appointment as a Service Center allows us to honor , warranties as do dealers for these products. This appointment was obtained at, significant expense and investment in tools and training. The sign is quite attractive, and is in an area not pointed with glaring sign prolifferation. The monument sign in this location is more attractive than would be a pole sign of 25 feet or under in height, which would be allowed. -�� ZoF CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Planning & Inspections Council Meeting Date: 2/08/99 Subject: Public Hearing to Consider the Request Marshall Merrit Agenda Number: PZ 98-55 For Special Use Permit for a Convenience Store, Car Wash, And Restaurant on Lot 5, Block 1, Walker Branch Addition (Located in the Northwest Corner of Harwood Road and Grapevine Highway) Ordinance No. 2361 Mr. Merritt is the applicant seeking to gain a special use permit to allow a convenience store, car wash, and restaurant at the corner of Harwood Road and Grapevine Highway. The property contains approximately 1.16-acres and is zoned C1-Commercial. A SUP is required because of the car wash proposed. The attached zoning exhibit provides further information regarding the zoning of surrounding properties. The issues associated with this Special Use Permit request are as follows: Curb Cut: The applicant is proposing a "right in" curb cut on Harwood Road. This proposal is not in compliance with the approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The curb cut is located 107 feet from an existing mutual access with City Garage on the western edge of the property line. Current development regulations indicate that 300 feet of distance between curb cuts is required. The Planning and Zoning Commission denied the curb cut on Harwood Road because it is too close to an existing curb cut (City Garage) and there was concern regarding the safety and impact a curb cut so close to the intersection of Grapevine Highway and Harwood would have on existing traffic flow. Curb Cut During Platting: There has been some confusion regarding whether or not a curb cut was approved with the platting of the property in January 1997. The applicant is of the opinion that a right in and right out curb cut was approved with the plat for this property. The Planning Department has reviewed the cover sheets for the plat and listened to the audiotapes of the meeting. It appears from the documentation that the following scenario occurred: 1) The applicant proposed curb cuts on Harwood and Grapevine Highway at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting; 2) The PZ denied the curb cuts; 3) The Plat went before the City Council and the Council approved a curb cut on Grapevine Highway (where the Taco Bell exists now) but did not specifically address the cut on Harwood. Finance Review Source of Funds. Acct. Number Bonds (GO/Rev) Sufficient Funds Available Operating Budget Other 1 vvwdw.n> I Arkaa-A 44 Department a dd Signature City Ma ager CITY COUNCIL ACTION • M Page 1 of - Curb Cut Design: The applicant is requesting a right in cut on Harwood, which is contrary to the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The applicant has designed the right in cut such that if the Council reverses the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission the Public Works Dept. will accept the design. Landscaping: The applicant has provided landscaping information on the site plan. However, the table provided does not specifically indicate the numbers of trees. There is a statement on the site plan that indicates conformance with the Landscaping Ordinance. Signage: The applicant is proposing 2 signs for the property. A bi-pole sign that is 25 ft. tall and 100 square feet at the corner of Harwood and SH 26. A monument sign that is 6 feet tall with 118 square feet is proposed along Harwood. The proposal meets the current sign regulations. Lighting: The applicant is proposing several wall pack lights on the outside of the building that are 250 watts each. The applicant is also proposing a 400-watt metal light pole for the property. Guard Rail: A portion of the property is adjacent to a drainage culvert that is over 7 feet deep. A guardrail is proposed for this culvert that is proposed to be constructed on unfinished steel pipe. A detail of this is on the site plan. Sidewalks: The applicant has been advised of and will meet the sidewalk requirement. Hours of Operation: The applicant has indicated that the facility will operate on a 24 hour basis. Exterior Construction Materials: The applicant is proposing to use split face CMU as the masonry unit for the facility. Refuse: The applicant is proposing dumpster screening that matches the masonry of the building. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS All property owners within 200 feet of this request have been notified in accordance with State Law. To date no adverse comments have been received. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this request that the January 14, 1999 meeting and approved the SUP but DENIED the proposed curb cut on Harwood. To approve the SUP in accordance with the Planning and Zoning Recommendation and require conformance with the Landscaping and Sign Ordinances at the time of building permit application. Staff also supports the "right in" being proposed by the developer CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS 7. PZ 98-55 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF MARSHALL MERRITT FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A CAR WASH AND GASOLINE SALES AT A PROPOSED CONVENIENCE STORE ON LOT 5, BLOCK 1, WALKER BRANCH ADDITION. (LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GRAPEVINE HIGHWAY & HARWOOD ROAD) ORDINANCE NO. 2361 APPROVED Mr. Norwood stated that this is a SUP request for a car wash and gasoline sales at a proposed convenience store. The property was platted about a year ago. There are several issues regarding curb cuts and driveway spacing. He explained that a matter of interpretation on the right-in / right-out exists. One currently exists on Grapevine Highway for the Taco Bell. He explained that staff has met with the applicant trying to work out a compromise and this has resulted in the request for a right-in only for this property. Chairman Davis opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward. Mr. Jackie Fluett, Washington & Associates, and Marshall Merritt, applicant, presented this request. Mr. Merritt explained that Mr. Fluett could answer any questions regarding the previous platting of this property. For clarification, Mr. Fluett gave an outline of the approval obtained on this platting request, as he recalled. He stated a comment letter had been received from staff regarding 4 lots of Walker Branch Addition. In these comments were the submittal of a site plan that reflected curb cuts and approvals of these, along with curb radii, etc. Subsequently, he recalled the architect submitting a site plan, which showed full blown driveways, that were not acceptable to staff. Revised drawings reflecting right-in/right-outs were submitted, as recommended by staff, and nothing was ever worked out with staff. The case moved forward to the P&Z, who denied additional curb cuts. The curb cuts for this property that were approved were shared access. City Council approved the site plan and plat submitted. From that Mr. Fluett assumed the curb cuts reflected on the site plan and plat were approved and they just needed to get a design on curb cuts that staff would approve. Mr. Davis asked if the night that City Council approved this plat, could Mr. Fluett remember if that site plan showed right-in / right-out curb cuts? Mr. Fluett stated yes, as far as he could remember it showed right-in / right-out curb cuts. Just like is existing on the Taco Bell today. Page 7 1/15/99 P&2 Minutes Mr. Davis stated that this is a SUP request and site plan approval is required; and, planning staff is recommending no additional curb cuts be allowed on Harwood Road. Mr. Fluett stated that they have an alternative proposed and the engineering department has agreed to this, should the P&Z allow an additional curb cut. This is a proposed right-in only. Responding to a question, Mr. Fluett stated that this was originally proposed to eliminate gas delivery trucks from having to go across anyone else's property. Seeing no additional proponents, and no opponents, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Lueck believes that the Commission has 2 obligations; to ensure the highest and best use of the property and to ensure safety for the citizens. The safety issue by far, in his opinion, exceeds the first issue. He believes any curb cut at this location is going to be unsatisfactory—and since staff is opposed to additional curb cuts, the Commission has their answer, in his opinion. He stated he would vote for approval, without any curb cuts. Mr. Barfield stated that with the opening of the apartments just east of this site, any additional curb cuts on this street will be a tremendous strain on traffic, even a right-in only. Mr. Davis asked Mr. Fluett if any consideration had been given to the entrance of this property from eastbound Harwood traffic. Mr. Fluett stated that traffic coming from Davis, east on Harwood would use the shared driveway with City Garage. Mr. Barfield asked if anyone had given any thought to increasing the size of the shared access with City Garage. Mr. Fluett stated that drive had been built at the maximum width allowed and the major concern is getting traffic off of Harwood into his site. Mr. Blue stated that the configuration of the intersection itself and the way it slants, access is extremely cut down and in his opinion, a traffic hazard. Mr. Wood stated that the only traffic that could use the right-in is west bound traffic. The goal is to get the traffic off of Harwood and into this site, whether it is through the shared access with City Garage or into the convenience store, as Page 8 1 /15/99 P&Z Minutes quickly as possible, to avoid traffic backing up. If the right-in only is eliminated, traffic has to go up to the next curb cut, stop and do a 90 degree turn in, or at least slow down significantly—which will slow up traffic significantly more. A right-in only will clear traffic off Harwood Road faster than the alternative. Mr. Lueck stated that his concern is not Harwood Road, but traffic coming off Grapevine Highway. Mr. Wood stated traffic coming south on Grapevine Highway, turning onto Harwood Road and coming into this intersection would get off the road faster with the right-in only. Mr. Lueck stated that they see the same problem, but don't agree on the same solution. After much discussion, Chairman Davis stated he would entertain a motion on PZ 98-55. Mr. Lueck, seconded by Mr. Blue, moved to approve PZ 98-55 with no additional curb cuts and the site plan is revised to reflect it. The motion carried with a vote of 4 — 3. Messrs. Lueck, Barfield, Blue & Bowen were in favor of this motion. Messrs. Wood, Davis & Laubacher were opposed. Mr. Wood asked that the record reflect the three opposing votes were not against the use of the SUP request, only against no additional curb cuts. Page 9 1 /15/99 P&Z Minutes CC MINUTES FROM PLATTING CASE cry Council Minutes January 27,1997 Page 7 17. I PS 97-0d- REQUEST OF GUION GREGG II, INVESTMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF LOT 4R, 5 & 6, WALKER'S BRANCH ADDITION (THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF HARWOOD ROAD AND GRAPEVINE HWY.) APPROVED • Councilman Wood advised he was abstaining from discussion and vote because of conflict of interest. Councilwoman Johnson moved, seconded by Councilman Phifer, to approve PS 97-02 with the addition of right-in, right-out curb cuts to the plat. Motion carried 5-0; Councilman Wood abstaining. 18. PS 97-03 - R ST OF CNL RETAIL DEVELOPM- •R THE AMENDED PL • LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 1, VE • DDITION (THIS PROP S LOCATED AT THE IN TION OF DA VD. AND GRAPEVI .) APPROVED GN 97.10 - D • A z AMUELS - RES• •7-08 GN 97.11 - AUTHORIZIN -U= FOR A TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIF' NT FO TY PARK - •OLUTION •9 APPROVE' *21. GN 97-1, • RUCTURING TEEN AFTE-, •L PROGRAM T DE UPGRADING PART-TIME k NATOR 0 FULL TIME YOUTH AT RISK SP T APPROVED *22. P • 03 - AWARD BID FOR CARPET FOR THE RECR CENTER APPROVED ORDINANCE 2361 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 1874, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, TO AUTHORIZE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A CONVENIENCE STORE, CAR WASH, AND RESTAURANT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, after appropriate notice and public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas, has forwarded a recommendation to the City Council for amendment of Ordinance No. 1874 by changing said Zoning Ordinance as set forth herein; now therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: 1. THAT, in case number PZ 98-55, a Special Use Permit be hereby authorized for a convienence store, car wash, and restaurant on the property described as follows: Lot 5, Block 1, Walker Branch Addition. 2. THAT, the development of the property shall be in accordance with the site plan attached to this Ordinance as "Exhibit A" 3. THAT, the landscaping and signage for the site shall at the minimum meet City regulations at the time of building permit application. 4. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. That it is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the section, 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 invalid or unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs or sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such invalid or unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. Ordinance No.2361 Page 1 5. SAVINGS CLAUSE. That Ordinance Number 1874, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect, save and except as amended by this Ordinance. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THIS 14th DAY OF JANUARY 1999. Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission Secretary, Planning and Zoning Commission PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THIS 8th DAY OF FEBRUARY 1999. Mayor Charles Scoma City of North Richland Hills, Texas ATTEST City Secretary City of North Richland Hills, Texas APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Department Head APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Attorney for the City Ordinance No 2361 Page 2 IN a �� _ __ ■ _-CI _ EFL,: �a�_ @:P�,. /2/7/ /SITE :. __ , X ,, ., M /I i?RWOOD RD Nur m=mom II - , el� riIA ,E j LL�111O///I i t tt_ III, p rat‘" ,--‘4, . �f ■ : 41 \\... e tW;•14%, 112rM ,___J [ ___I __ __ ii ,) t A ■ B • • IT;EU.LESS lib -1 \Q• Vi - — r,- fEDFJVD-PUS i$S. I •' <• 1 BED,FIORD-f I s 7 F 40 NNC: GER LINE OR—Q. �, 1 .:I .1 3 , ipa - / -,—a. Inn 1111 a W f ug t o a�}�-) firizWZman Cs. O C-'-11� . _- - O I J I ri •\ met Its; < 7 ir-Gel __ 1111-- - al n PZ # 98-55 Agenda Item _ PZ 98 . 55 ZONING EXHIBIT 19 » 11111® 000000 ti Jaly . ., ,, , \MN\> ,1111 W. c.i 14111 A o 1369 fit/IR-3 v5 �r v �. °I ,lnxnlNRp Y Yq // -R-3 -� 1 T . /// NUICT111.n`i'�t II .t ■ JF.N'ml. , . .44,Pirl --- _Li 1332 IN jai . 4 .. _ 1- { GQ. �: �a xf' H a Y 111-4° \Ai O� I at .. 1 HARWOOD GRAPEVINE, LTD. 5307 E. MOCKINGBIRD LANE, SUITE 1007 DALLAS, TEXAS 75206 214-824-6565 214-824-6693 FAX December 10, 1998 Mr. Christopher D. Baker City of North Richland Hills P.O. Box 820609 North Richland Hills, Texas 76182-0609 Re: PZ 98-55, Special Use Permit at Harwood and Grapevine Highway Dear Mr. Baker: Per you letter dated December 8, 1998, we have reviewed your comments and have made all of the suggested changes. Below I will address each proposed change and what corrective action has been made. The numerical order will be the same as your letter dated December 8`h. 2. Public street access: Request to indicate distance between the two curb cuts. Change made. 3. Vehicular traffic and parking: Request to show parking calculations. Change made. 5. Hours of operation: Change made. 6. Activities or uses permitted on site: Agree with suggested uses. 8. Landscaping: Change made to include that we have met or exceeded all landscaping requirements. 13 Exterior Lighting: Request to show height and type of free standing light poles. Change made. 14. Exterior construction materials. Changed to indicate "split face stone". This is not cinder block. A sample will be brought to the P&Z meeting. 17. Refuse and waste storage: Request to show masonry screen wall will be same as building. Change made. A copy of your letter dated December 8, 1998 is included. Thank you for your input and consideration. Sincerely,y re Marshall Merritt President, Merritt Capital, Inc., General Partner for Harwood Grapevine, Ltd. (M ! SOUTHERN co Ben Corp and KFC INC. A Franchisee of Taco East er and KFC Corp 101 East Cherokee Jacksonville, Texas 75766 TACO Telephone (9031 506-1524 BELL Fax 1903) 586-9644 December 1, 1998 City of North Richland Hills Planning and Zoning Dept. 7301 NE Loop 820 North Richland Hills, TX 76180 Re Lot 5,Block 1, Walker Branch Addition To Whom It May Concern: In response to your notice letter dated November 24, 1998, Southern Multifoods, Inc. has no objection to Lot 5,Block 1,Walker Branch Addition being developed as a Convenience Store with Gas and Car Wash, If you have any further questions feel free to contact me at(903) 586-1524 ext. 19. Sincerer, enneth Durrett 11/18/1996 09:39 2145221628 PAGE 81 GUION GREGG, III INVESTMENTS November 18, 1998 City of North Richland Hills 7301 N.E. Loop 820 North Richland Hills,TX Gentlemen: This letter shall confirm that I am the owner of Lot 5, Block 1, Walkers Branch Addition to the City of North Richland Hills. This property is under contract of sale to Marshall Merritt or Assigns and they are authorized by me to apply for a Special Use Permit and any other necessary permits to develop the parcel. Sincerely, -arbejtfi Guion Gregg, III Its 3838 Oak Lawn Ave, Suite 1416 • Dallas, Texas 75219 214-526-7001 • FAX 214-522-1828 y City of Nora Richland Hills NItH APPLICATION FORA 301 NE Loco d20 SPECIAL USE PERMIT North Richland(PM.;Art o y..ad i..oemerl a and Hdls, Texas 317.531-5530 PART 1. APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of applicant/agent Harwood Grapevine, Ltd. Street address of applicant/agent 5307 E. Mockingbird Ln. , Ste. 1001 City/ State/Zip Code of applicant/agent. Telephone number of applicant/agent Dallas, Texas 75206 214-824-6565 PART 2, PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION Name of property owner Guion Gregg, III Street address of properly owner 3838 Oak Lawn Ave. , Ste. 1416 City/ State/Zip Code of property owner Telephone number of property owner Dallas, Texas 75219 214-526-7001 Note. Attach letter or affidavit from property owner if different from applicant/agent PART 3. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Current zoning classification' Proposed use of the property C-1 C-Store, Gasoline sales, Car wash O•scnbe the nature of the proposed activity and any particular Charactensbcs related to the use of the property: We desire to build a convenience store with eight fueling dispensers. Also to be included is a brushless laser car wash. Site plan at:ached which conforms with the requirements included in this packet Affidavit attached from property owner A applicant rant owner Yes I I No rat Yes (=j No I hereby cend that I am. or represent. the legal owner of the property described above and Co hereby submit this request for approval ora Special Use Permit to the Planning and Zoning Commission for Consideration Dale 11 -17-98 `—/y/�./�q Print Name Marshall Merritt -'�y� // lY Signature. ' kLde PART 4. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of Planning L Zoning Commission Public Hearing Tares Paid' Case H 4 umber G 63 Yes r, No Date of City Council Public Heanng Liens Paid' Fee U ni Yes No $300.00 Special Use Permit Approved Assessments Paid' T T Yes I No 1-1 Yes No Conditions of Approval This application will not he scheduled for public hearing unfit the application lee is received SPECIAL USE PERMIT CD - 414 (2/96) PARSONS Baron-Asohman Associates Inc • A Unit of Parsons Transportation Group. Inc 2630 West Freeway•Suite 132•Fart Worth•Texas•76102 USA•(817)877-5803•(817)877-3214 fax TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Marshall Merritt ........ Harwood Grapevine, Ltd S6 OT r \I , f CC: lackey Fluitt, P.E. fi' * ill� Washington & Associates of ROBERT W.IENKINS 0.4 40915 '4�j FROM: C. Brian Shamburger 40a•, y ca 4'Q Robert W. Jenkins, P E 11 Sy: E.!SiER • i- �yl'x /. z/5/94 ....... DATE: February 5, 1999 SUBJECT: Site Access Evaluation for Walkers Branch Addition in North Richland Hills, Texas Parsons Transportation Group Inc has completed its review of the proposed site access for the Walkers Branch Addition in North Richland Hills, Texas The proposed commercial site is located in the northwest corner of the intersection of SH 26 and Harwood Road. A convenience store and fast food restaurant uses are planned for the development. Our review focused on the safety and operational impacts of the site access planned along Harwood Road Two access driveways are planned for this site along Harwood Drive(see Figure 1) Driveways A and B are spaced approximately 100 feet apart. Driveway A will serve as a shared entrance for both the convenience store and the existing City Garage service station to the west. Driveway B will serve as one-way entrance for right-turn traffic into the site. The angled design of Driveway B should preclude left-turn entrance movements Safety is always a key concern when designing and locating commercial driveways It has been estimated that about 12% of accidents on major urban routes are related to commercial driveways (ITE, Guidelines for Major Urbwi Street Design) It is therefore important that every precaution be taken to ensure that adequate safety is provided. A concern with directional or one-way driveways is that the potential exists for wrong way movements(i.e., exiting movements) Through proper signing and design, much of this problem can be avoided. Two (2)DO NOT ENTER signs (Texas Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, R5-1) should be conspicuously placed at the trailing end of the driveway facing the site interior. The signs should be placed on the right and left-hand sides of the driveway. A single pavement marking arrow could be placed in the throat of the driveway to further emphasize the proposed one-way operation • - U) z cn \ \"\ cn ° w CC uw o H LL � a_J L Q 6 _vi / '� a N U \ O 3 0 O cc w / 0 � I S I \ O z L/l cc i' `tl ■ a_ to bn z I ° a I ' l CC0 p z O l a a c Q � . 1- 0 LL 0• pt 1 a p �? i 0 —' p Q } g I F I l ¢ m I H Q - = z in I 0 II I N Q ° ' a z n0 Marshall Merritt February 5, 1999 Page 3 In addition to signing, there are several design features present that will limit the possibility of a wrong way movement. As shown on Figure 1,the current design of Driveway B includes an overlap (2.3 feet)in the leading and trailing noses of the driveway. As motorists approach the entrance from the interior of the property, it becomes difficult for them to see a clear opening to Harwood Road, which should cause them to seek an alternate exit. Furthermore, the angle of the driveway will make a right-turn onto Harwood nearly impossible Driveway B is located approximately 100 feet from the near side curb return of SH 26. It is important that the site traffic using this driveway not negatively impact the operations along Harwood Road. The low departure angle (35 degrees) and large radius(100-foot) design of Driveway B will allow entering traffic to turn right at a higher than normal speed, which will create less of a disruption to westbound Harwood through traffic. If Driveway B was not provided, vehicles would be required to turn right at Driveway A at a much lower speed. It should also be noted that the lower angle and one-way operation are generally encouraged for driveways to facilitate truck movements The presence of Driveway B indirectly improves the operations at Driveway A. With the majority of site traffic turning right upstream, potential conflicts and delay values for left-turns into the site will be lower Conclusions and Recommendations Based on our review of the proposed site access for the Walkers Branch Addition, the following conclusions and recommendations can be made • The proposed access drives along Harwood Road will adequately serve entering and exiting site traffic, • Allowing entering right-turns at Driveway B will improve the operations at Driveway A, • DO NOT ENTER signs (TMUTCD, R5-1) should be installed on the trailing end of Driveway B facing the site interior, and • Driveway B should be constructed according to the design shown on Figure 1 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department Administration Council Meeting Date 02/08/99 GN 99-09 s.o,ect 25Th Year Community Development Block Grant Agenda Number Program - Public Hearing In 1996, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) informed the City that it is eligible to receive direct entitlement of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding This designation gives the City a specific amount of funds, rather than having to compete with other cities' projects. The 1996/97 fiscal year was the first year of direct entitlement. On June 24, 1996, the City Council accepted the entitlement designation and entered into a contract with Tarrant County for the administration of the City's CDBG program. For the upcoming 25`" program year, City staff has developed a CDBG Program in accordance with HUD Guidelines, which the City Council is asked to consider in a following resolution. A public hearing is required by HUD so that the City can receive comments on the proposed 251h (1998/99) CDBG program year The purpose of the hearing is to receive public input on the project. It is suggested that for the upcoming entitlement, the funds be used for the projects listed below This project is in accordance with the five-year plan adopted by Council in 1996. Project Estimated Cost 1 Maryanna Way $140,000 2. Nancy Lane $165,300 Total $305,300 Recommendation: To conduct the required public hearing and receive public comments. Finance Review Source of Funds Account Number Bonds (GO/Rev ) Sufficient Funds Available Operating Budget Other Finance Director Department Head Signature / dy Manager Signature Page 1 of CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department Administration Council Meeting Date 02/08/99 Subject 25th (1998(99) Year Community Development Block Agenda Number GN 99-10 Grant Program - Resolution #99-06 Following the public hearing from the previous agenda item, it is necessary for Council to take action regarding projects they wish to be included in the 251" (1998/1999) year CDBG entitlement program. The attached resolution transmits the City's proposed 251h year (1998/1999) CDBG program. The proposed program consist of two street reconstruction projects: Project Estimated Cost 1 Maryanna Way $140,000 2 Nancy Lane $165,300 Total $305,300 In addition, the resolution contains the remainder of a tentative 5-year CDBG program schedule. The city's portion of funding from the CDBG program will be $292,800. The remaining $12,500 will come from leftover CDBG funds or from the 1994 bond program Recommendation: To approve Resolution #99-06 Finance Review Source of Funds Account Number CDBG FUNDS Bands (GO/Rev ) Sufficient Funds Available Operating Budget {/, Other (?0,411.4) I"'r n Finance Director iil� Q donee ti Department Hea• Signature ' ity Manager S nature Page 1 of RESOLUTION #99-06 WHEREAS, the City of North Richland Hills will receive direct entitlement of Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG) for the 25" (1998/1999) CDBG program year; and WHEREAS, the attached schedule represents the City s requested program of projects for the 25th (1998/1999) CDBG program year, and WHEREAS, the attached schedule also represents the remainder of the City's tentative 5-year program for use of CDBG funds, and WHEREAS, the City would like to begin work on these projects as soon as possible; Prolect Estimated Cost 1 . Maryanna Way $140,000 2 Nancy Lane $165,300 Total $305,300 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, THAT 1. The attached schedule represents the City's requested CDBG program for the 25th funding year, 1998/1999, and 2. The attached schedule also represents the remaining 3 years of the city's tentative 5-year CDBG program. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL on this, the 8th day of February 1999 Approved: Charles Scoma, Mayor Scoma ATTEST City Secretary APPRVOED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY Attorney for the City • • !x ; ° # # # ! ■ `# a # cm lit ) to k k P. iti I ! # \ $ k co I 0) a #©) - I) cc g . § - 0.) a) [/- � . - - � , �§» % k{ r@ )[! [� {t ° 7; )) }_ \ k /i o \ - —ea ±§ a ca \ § , � 4 \c/ \ \ {f \ t 262 2 /\ } \ up ; ! ! 0 ? CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department Administration Council Meeting Date 02/08/99 Subject Consideration of Volunteering Time-of-Use Rates Proposed Agenda Number GN 99-11 By TU Electric — Ordinance No 2365 On January 15.1999, Texas Electric Utilities Company ( TU Electric) filed with the City Of North Richland Hills a Statement of Intent and Application requesting approval of"three time-of-use-rate options" These rate options would be available to residential, commercial and industrial customers within the city limits These rates are strictly voluntary at the customers choice Materially identical time-of-use-rates are pending approval at the Public Utility Commission of Texas under Commission Docket No. 17942 In your packet you will find the proposed rates as well as supporting information contained in a copy of the direct testimony of Stephen J. Houle, attached to the Statement of Intent and Application as Exhibit A TU Electric is also requesting approval of these rates in the 173 cities of its service area that retain original jurisdiction. Last year the PUC gave interim approval to these rates, which lowers prices for electricity during periods of low demand. Since the PUC put these rates into effect in the 197 cities governed by the PUC, as well as in unincorporated areas, there are between 150 and 200 customers using these rates Oil companies, churches, and school districts represent about 90 percent of the customers currently using the rates. TU Electric has developed these alternative rates in response to customers requests for rates offering opportunities to control their electric costs. Analysis of the Company's hourly loads revealed that hourly loads could be divided into four groups with similar characteristics During each of the four groups, or pricing periods, all electric use is priced with respect to the historical demand for energy and TU Electric's associated costs to provide electric service during the corresponding months Utilizing a single price for all energy used in each of the pricing periods provides for rates with attractive pricing that are easy to understand The proposed rate has four pricing periods that depend on the month and time of day Customers who are able to shift their on-peak energy use to pre-determined off-peak times within those pricing periods are charged less Under the time-in-use rates, prices for residential and business customers receiving electricity at the secondary distribution voltages vary from 1.09 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) every day in April, October, and November, when demand is low, to 13.42 cents per kWh for electricity used from 2 p.m. to 8 p m. weekends during the months of June, July, and August. Finance Review Source of Funds Account Number Bonds(GO/Rev ) _ Sufficient Funds Available Operating Budget t/ Other ��'�✓`�c� Finance Director �i t C- 4/11 .2aJ t st/wwr Via: D:.admit Head Si. ature J City Manag r ignature Page 1 of 2 L CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS I � TU Electric hopes cities will approve the proposed rates in time for customers to sign up and make the necessary changes in their processes and operations in time to achieve peak load reductions this coming summer peak season Linda Allen, District Manager, will be present to make a brief presentation and answer any questions you may have regarding this request Staff has reviewed this request and will be working with Linda Allen to see if there are any areas that the City can use to take advantage of these rates Linda has already indicated that she is working with BISD to examine possible opportunities to use these rates to lower their costs Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No 2365 and the request of TU Electric to begin implementation of the proposed "time-in-use' rates Page 2 of 2 CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM L ORDINANCE NO 2365 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING RATE SCHEDULES FOR TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE THEREFORE, PROVIDING CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH SUCH RATE SCHEDULES MAY BE CHANGED, MODIFIED, AMENDED OR WITHDRAWN, FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE IS PASSED IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS TEXAS. SECTION 1. On January 15, 1999, Texas Utilities Electric Company (hereinafter referred to as ATU Electric @) filed with the Governing Body of this municipality a Statement of Intent and Application to implement within the corporate limits of this municipality proposed new rate schedules that provide additional rate options for its customers, which options are entirely voluntary on the part of the customer, namely its proposed Rate GTU-M - General Service Time-of Use-Municipality, proposed Rate RTU1- M - Residential Time-of-Use Service-Municipality, and proposed Rate GTUC-M - General Service Time-of-Use Voluntary Curtailable-Municipality (said three proposed new rate schedules hereinafter collectively referred to as the ATime-of-Use Rate Schedules @) SECTION 2. The Time-of-Use Rate Schedules are hereby approved, and TU Electric is authorized to render service and to collect charges as specified in the Time-of- Use Rate Schedules from its customers electing to receive electric service under said Time-of-Use Rate Schedules within the corporate limits of this municipality until such time as said rate schedules may be changed, modified, amended or withdrawn with the approval of the Governing Body of this municipality. SECTION 3. The Time-of-Use Rate Schedules herein approved shall be effective from and after the final passage and approval of this Ordinance SECTION 4 The filing of said Time-of-Use Rate Schedules shall constitute notice to the consumers of electricity within this municipality of the availability and application of such Time-of-Use Rate Schedules SECTION 5. Nothing in this Ordinance contained shall be construed now or hereafter as limiting or modifying in any manner the right and power of the Governing Body of this municipality under the law to regulate the rates, operations, and services of TU Electric. SECTION 6. It is hereby officially found and determined that the meeting at which this Ordinance is passed is open to the public and as required by law and that public notice of the time, place, and purpose of said meeting was given as required. PASSED AND APPROVED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas. this day of 1999 APPROVED Mayor ATTEST. City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Rex McEntire, Attorney for the City TU Electric TIME-OF-USE RATE SUMMARY CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS (January, 1999) This document outlines the voluntary time-of-use rate options proposed for approval in North Richland Hills. The idea for these rates came from TU Electric customers. We worked with several of our customers in designing these rates, which will allow customers who have the ability to shift some of their electric usage away from our peak periods to save money on their electric bills TU Electric has already requested approval of these rates at the Public Utility Commission and they are in effect on an interim basis in the areas in which the Commission exercises original jurisdiction. We're expecting the Commission's final approval of these rates in the next couple of months. We'd like to also begin offering our customers in North Richland Hills the benefits of these time-of-use rate options. Since these rates are purely optional on the part of the customer, only those customers who would expect to be able to save money on their electric bills will likely take advantage of these options. Why would TU offer ways for a customer to pay less for electricity? Simply, if customers take advantage of these rates (and save money on their bills) those customers will place less demand on our system during our peak hours. This, in turn, means that TU won't have to buy as much power to serve peak load requirements, which allows us to save money overall. Those savings not only benefit TU Electric, but also benefit all of our customers. TU Electric Time-oil Ise Rate Summary Pate 2 of ti These time-of-use rates price electricity according to the hour of the day and the month of the year. There are four different pricing periods (Chart1), with the lowest price being during the periods when demand for electricity is the lowest, and, consequently, the cost to produce electricity is also the lowest. As you'd expect, the highest price is applicable during those afternoon and early evening hours of our hot summer weekdays, when TU's cost of electricity is at its highest. Those customers who can shift significant portions of their electric usage away from those higher- priced periods can save money. These time-of-use rates allow customers flexibility in controlling their energy costs. The three time-of-use rates being proposed are 1 . Rate GTU-M (General Service Time-of-Use - Municipality), which is applicable to customers that are otherwise eligible for service under the Company's existing general service rates (i.e., GS, GP and HV); 2. Rate RTU1-M (Residential Time-of-Use Service - Municipality), which is applicable to residential customers who are otherwise eligible for service under existing Rate R or Rate RTU; and 3. Rate GTUC-M (General Service Time-of-Use Voluntary Curtailable - Municipality), which is applicable to those general service customers eligible for Rate GTU-M that are willing to voluntarily curtail their loads when the peak demand on the system is 95% or more of the estimated peak demand and during times of short supply conditions. TU Electric Time-of-Use Rate Summary Page 3 of6 The time-of-use options are a "win-win" for all of our customers and for all of our communities that rely on businesses for jobs and investment (Chart 2) By having this opportunity to experience cost savings and operating efficiencies through better management of their power needs, businesses will be able to remain more competitive. This in turn results in the potential for greater economic development opportunities for our communities and more value for the customers' energy dollar. TU would like to begin achieving peak load savings for this coming summer. But to do so, we need your approval of these additional rate options, so we can begin contacting our customers and exploring with them how they can take steps to shift electric loads away from our peak periods and, thereby, save money on their electric bills. T = = O yTS t Q t = O O L L N V L = C m O < O O O. G • < < a E w E a S 13 m• < < or a N 41 a Z z p N i L - - G N N a a in o o E e+i N tel cd y i , c E 06 w 9 �� O Y N O a N O O N CO0 y - - Z I - ` m IX a E E m E E a a co a ° na m ° E in "Cn a a O v Yl v < < < ^-, OL co W v z z z E a 7 a Ct N d ui U — C -a el a 9 c E m •` .to u z z E C1 a. a a m E CA ce ° m° 0 Q N O C $ < < < < a 0 $ z z z z a I., O m E T a Q y < < < m 'm s Z z Z E a 3 N 6 g n a C E r m g' E ro m ' j• E O v, 2 - R >, 2 c or • d < Oz CO - < r = F -t z K co Cl) a) N F+ o v) = '6 >' N it H H I r E Qc c LL a >t ) > + w W L rn O d O m Z a)LL I c c W. c L CO O •v o O L I.. .L i+ W c a c 4) 0 .) m *a m = ( E U. m a o +7% L c O U al m W .a E 2 d ,o .X o Cl) 0 d CD 'ia y = I— cu N = c> 1a w o c L 0 (j (9 W W 2 TUElectric 6- Lone Star Gas ♦ e . a c V v ' i i , i r s C o m p a n t e s 1 .,,A, A Men t intoner Senve District Vanager on numb mmner January 15. 1999 To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of North Richland Hills Enclosed for tiling please find a Statement of Intent and Application of Texas Utilities Electric Company This filing requests approval of three time-of-use rate options that would be mailable to residential. commercial and industrial customers within the city limits. These rates are strictly voluntary at the customer's choice Materially identical time-of-use rates are pending approval at the Public Utility Commission of Texas in that Commission's Docket No 17942. The proposed rates themselves, as well as supporting data underlying the proposed rates, are set forth in the direct testimony of Stephen 1 Houle, attached to the Statement of Intent and Application as Exhibit A. Should you have any questions concerning this filing, please give me a call. Very truly yours, Linda K. Allen Receipt Acknowledge By: Name - 4 i Title -/ Date. / /. if PO B. 11 Fon worth test. 'h 01JW'0 January 15, 1999 TU ELECTRIC PROPOSES NEW TIME-OF-USE RATES TU Electric requested today that all cities exercising onginal Jurisdiction over its rates approve three optional time-of-use rates for residential and business customers within their city limits. Last year the Public Utility Commission gave interim approval to the rates. which lower prices for electricity during periods of low demand. Since the PUC put them into effect in 197 cities governed by the PUC and in unincorporated areas, about 200 customers have signed up. These time-of-use rates, which are purely voluntary on the part of the individual customer, appeal to a diverse group of customers. About 20 percent of the customers now on the rates are churches and school districts. The remainder range from pipeline companies and heavy manufacturers to a tanning parlor and video rental chain. The rate has four pricing periods that depend on the month and time of day. Customers who are able to shift their on-peak energy use to pre-determined off-peak times within those pricing periods are charged less. Under the time-of-use rates, prices for residential and business customers receiving electricity at secondary distribution voltages vary from 1.09 cents per kilowatt-hour every day in April, October, and November, when demand is low, to 13.42 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity used from 2 p.m. to 8 p m weekdays during the months of June, July, and August. Businesses are also eligible for a voluntary curtailable rate and an aggregate billing option. TU Electric developed these time-of-use rates after many hours of consultations with customers who were looking for ways to better manage their electric usage. The time-of- use rates are a "win-win situation" in that they allow customers who can shift significant portions of their electric loads away from the company's peak periods to save money on their electric bills -- and by doing so allow TU Electric to incur less costs in buying power to meet its customers' peak demands, which saves money for all customers. The company hopes cities will approve the rates in time for customers to sign up and make the necessary changes in their processes and operations in time to achieve peak load reductions this coming summer peak season. BEFORE THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF § TIME-OF-USE RATE OPTIONS FOR § DOCKET NO. TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY § STATEMENT OF INTENT AND APPLICATION TO THE HONORABLE SAID GOVERNING BODY COMES NOW Texas Utilities Electric Company ("TU Electric") and files this its Statement of Intent and Application to implement proposed Rate GTU-M - General Service Time-of-Use-Municipality, Rate RTU1-M - Residential Time-of-Use-Municipality, and Rate GTUC-M - General Service Time-of-Use Voluntary Curtailable-Municipality, respectfully showing the following In an effort to provide additional rate options that will not only benefit participating customers but will also benefit non-participating customers, TU Electric has held discussions with several of its customers and has developed optional time-of-use rates that would be available to TU Electric's residential, commercial, and industrial customers on a voluntary basis at the customers choice. These time-of-use rate options will allow participating customers to plan and manage their electrical energy usage to shift their loads from TU Electric's peak periods to TU Electric's off-peak periods, thereby saving on their electric bills and, at the same time, allowing TU Electric to acquire less resources to meet the peak loads of all of its customers, which will benefit both participating customers and non-participating customers as well The optional time-of-use rates for which approval is sought are (a) Rate GTU-M - General Service Time-of-Use-Municipality, which would be available to any TU Electric customer, regardless of the voltage at which the individual customer takes electric service, and which would typically include all customers receiving firm electric service under one of TU Electric's existing general service rates, Rate GS - General Service Secondary, Rate GP - General Service Primary, and Rate HV - High Voltage Service, (b) Rate RTU1-M - Residential Time-of-Use Service-Municipality, which would -t- be available to any TU Electric residential customer who would otherwise take electric service under one of TU Electric's residential rates, including Rate R - Residential Service and Rate RTU - Residential Time-of-Use Service, and (c) Rate GTUC-M - General Service Time-of-Use Voluntary Curtailable- Municipality, which would be available to any TU Electric customer, regardless of the voltage at which the individual customer takes electric service, and which would typically include customers that could interrupt or significantly reduce their usage dunng peak periods similar to customers receiving interruptible electric service under TU Electric's Rider I - Interruptible Service. Materially identical time-of-use rates are pending approval at the Public Utility Commission of Texas in that Commission's Docket No. 17942. These proposed time-of-use rate options each provide for four different pricing levels with eight distinct time-of-use periods The proposed rates themselves, as well as supporting data underlying the proposed rates, are set forth in the direct testimony of Stephen J. Houle, attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part hereof for all purposes Proposed Rate GTU-M - General Service Time-of- Use-Municipality is attached to Mr. Houle's said testimony as Exhibit SJH-1; proposed Rate RTU1-M - Residential Time-of-Use Service-Municipality is attached to that testimony as Exhibit SJH-2; and proposed Rate GTUC-M - General Service Voluntary Curtailable- Municipality is attached to that testimony as Exhibit SJH-3. II. TU Electric's authorized representatives are- Stephen J. Houle Rates Manager Texas Utilities Electric Company Energy Plaza 1601 Bryan Street, Suite 32-002 Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone (214) 812-4821 and J. Dan Bohannan Worsham, Forsythe & Wooldridge, L.L.P -2- 1601 Bryan Street. 30th Floor Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone. (214) 979-3000 General inquiries concerning this Statement of Intent and Application should be directed to Mr Houle at the above-stated address and telephone number All pleadings, motions orders, and other documents filed in this proceeding should be served upon Mr Bohannan at the above-stated address III. This City has jurisdiction over TU Electric and the subject matter hereof by virtue of Sections 33 001, 36.001, 36 003, and 36.101-36.111 of the Texas Utilities Code ("PURA"). IV. TU Electric's business address and telephone number are Texas Utilities Electric Company Energy Plaza 1601 Bryan Street Dallas, Dallas County, Texas 75201 Telephone: (214) 812-4600 V In accordance with the provisions of PURA § 36.102, TU Electric proposes that these proposed rates be implemented effective on February 19, 1999 (which is 35 days after the filing hereof), the proposed effective date, or as soon thereafter as permitted by law. VI. While each of the proposed time-of-use rate options is wholly optional at the customer's choice, these rates are, considered together, available to all of TU Electric's retail customers. Thus, all of TU Electric's retail customers and classes of retail customers within the corporate limits of this City will be affected if this Application is granted. VII. Notice of the filing of this Application is being published in newspapers of general circulation in each county in which the proposed optional time-of-use rates are proposed to be implemented and is being delivered to all affected customers, all in accordance with PURA § 36 103. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, TU Electric respectfully prays that this -3- Application be in all things granted that the proposed Rate GTU-M - General Service Time-of-Use-Municipality, Rate RTU1-M - Residential Time-of-Use Service-Municipality, and Rate GTUC-M - General Service Time-of-Use Voluntary Curtailable-Municipality be approved as filed, and that rt be granted such other and additional rebel to which it is justly entitled Respectfully submitted, WORSHAM, FORSYTHE & WOOLDRIDGE, LL P J. Dan Bohannan State Bar No. 02563000 1601 Bryan Street, 30th Floor Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone. (21 ) 979-3000 Fax: (214) 880- 011 By. ira1f i/ / A i' E S FOR TEXAS UTILI IES LECTRIC COMPANY -4- EXHIBIT A DIRECT TESTIMONY OF STEPHEN J. HOULE FOR TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY JANUARY 1999 DIRECT TESTIMONY OF STEPHEN J. HOULE WITNESS FOR TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. POSITION AND QUALIFICATIONS 2 II. PURPOSE OF TESTIMONY 2 III. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED RATES 3 IV. DEVELOPMENT OF TIME-OF-USE PRICING PERIODS 5 V. COST BASES & RATE DESIGN 9 VI. SPECIAL PROVISIONS OF PROPOSED RATES 13 Exhibits Exhibit SJH-1 - Proposed Rate GTU-M - General Service Time-of-Use - Municipality Exhibit SJH-2 - Proposed Rate RTU1-M - Residential Time-of-Use Service - Municipality Exhibit SJH-3 - Proposed Rate GTUC-M - General Service Time-of-Use Voluntary Curtailable - Municipality Exhibit SJH-4 • Proposed Time-of-Use Rates Pricing Periods Exhibit SJH-5 - TU Electric System Load Exhibit SJH-6 - System Monthly Peak Demands Exhibit SJH-7 - Rates RTU1-M, GTU-M, and GTUC-M - Calculation of Facilities Charges Exhibit SJH-8 - Rates RTU1-M, GTU-M, and GTUC-M - Price Determination for Pricing Periods 1-4 -1- Houle - Direct DIRECT TESTIMONY OF STEPHEN J. HOULE I. POSITION AND QUALIFICATIONS Q PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS 3 A My name is Stephen J Houle My business address is Energy Plaza, 1601 Bryan 4 Street, Dallas, Texas 75201 5 Q WHAT IS YOUR POSITION WITH TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY? 6 A I hold the position of Rates Manager. 7 a PLEASE OUTLINE YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND AND PROFESSIONAL a QUALIFICATIONS. 9 A I graduated from the University of Notre Dame in May 1977, with a Bachelor of 10 Science degree in Electrical Engineenng. In December 1979, I received the degree 11 of Master of Business Administration from the University of Dallas. I was employed 12 by Dallas Power & Light Company in June 1977. I worked in the Distnbution Design Division of the Engineering Department from June 1977 through December 1979, 14 the Regulatory Services Department from January through December 1980, and the 15 Rate Department from January 1981 through December 1983. In January 1984, 16 I was named Supervisor, Rate Design for Texas Utilities Electric Company (TU 17 Electric). In March 1987, I was named Supervisor - Rate and Cost Analysis. In 18 October 1990, I was named to my current position of Rates Manager. 19 II. PURPOSE OF TESTIMONY 20 Q WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR TESTIMONY IN THIS PROCEEDING? 21 A. The purpose of my testimony in this proceeding is to support three new Time-of-Use 22 rates that TU Electric is proposing in order to provide its customers with additional 23 pricing options. These rates will offer enhanced Time-of-Use pricing to all of TU 24 Electric's Residential and General Service customers, providing these customers 25 increased flexibility to control their operating costs and may encourage innovative 26 Demand Side Management (DSM) activities by these customers. The Company 2- Houle • Direct 1 has pending before the Public Utility Commission of Texas, as Docket No 17942. an application for approval of materially identical rates to be applicable m those 3 portions of the Company's service area over which that Commission exercises 4 original jurisdiction 5 III. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED RATES 6 Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE THE THREE RATES YOU ARE PROPOSING 7 A Rate GTU-M, General Service Time-of-Use - Municipality, is applicable to 8 customers that are otherwise eligible for service under the Company's general 9 service rates (i e., Rates GS, GP, and HV) and is attached as my Exhibit SJH-1. 10 Rate RTU1-M, Residential Time-of-Use Service - Municipality, is applicable to 11 residential customers who are otherwise eligible for service under Rate R or Rate 12 RTU, and is attached as my Exhibit SJH-2. Rate GTUC-M - General Service Time- 13 of-Use Voluntary Curtailable - Municipality -- is applicable to those general service 14 customers eligible for Rate GTU-M that are willing to voluntarily curtail their loads 15 during times of system peak or short supply conditions. Rate GTUC-M is limited to 1,000 MW of total contracted load for the Company's 1999 peak load season and 17 to 2,000 MW for the 2000 peak load season, on a first-come-first-served basis until 18 the total contracted load (r e., the total of all Contract kW) reaches these maximums. 19 Rate GTUC-M is attached as my Exhibit SJH-3. Each of the proposed rates is 20 comprised of a customer charge, a facilities charge, a time-dependent energy 21 charge, a fuel charge, and a purchased power charge. 22 O. WHAT ARE THE OBJECTIVES OF THE THREE PROPOSED RATES? 23 A. The objectives of the proposed rates are to. (1) provide customers with additional 24 flexibility regarding pricing options; (2) encourage customers to engage in effective 25 demand side management activities; and (3) reflect TU Electnc's cost of service. 26 Q HOW DO THE PROPOSED RATES PROVIDE CUSTOMERS WITH ADDITIONAL 27 PRICING FLEXIBILITY? 28 A The proposed rates provide four pricing levels with eight distinct time-of-use periods 29 that offer an additional pricing option for a wide spectrum of residential, commercial, 3- Houle - Direct and industrial customers Customers with minimal on-peak usage and customers 2 with the wherewithal to reduce on-peak load and/or shift load from on-peak to off- 3 peak periods can manage their cost of electric service under these rates 4 O HOW DO THE PROPOSED RATES ENCOURAGE CUSTOMERS TO ENGAGE IN 5 EFFECTIVE DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES' 6 A The proposed rates encourage demand side management (DSM) activities by 7 means of the price signals inherent in the rates. Consumption during the a Company's relatively few on-peak hours is discouraged by high energy prices. 9 Conversely, low off-peak pricing gives customers the incentive necessary to engage 10 in load shifting from on-peak to off-peak periods Customers who can reduce their 11 loads during the on-peak hours specified in these rates and/or who can shift their 12 loads from the on-peak hours to the off-peak hours can achieve considerable 13 savings as a result of their actions The Company's non-participating customers will 14 also benefit from these DSM measures that reduce the need for additional, and 15 costly, generating resources strictly to serve on-peak loads. O. HOW DO THE PROPOSED RATES REFLECT TU ELECTRIC'S COST OF 17 SERVICE? 18 A The energy pncing provisions of these rates are designed to recover the Company's 19 annual production revenue requirement as set forth in the Company's last general 20 rate case, Docket No 11735 Similarly, the proposed rates also include cost-based 21 customer charges as well as a facilities charge designed to recover the costs of the 22 Company's transmission and distribution facilities. As a result, these rates are 23 designed to be revenue neutral. 24 O HOW DO THESE PROPOSED NEW RATES DIFFER FROM THE COMPANY'S 25 EXISTING TIME DIFFERENTIATED RATES' 26 A TU Electric's existing time-of-day option contained in Rates GS, GP, and HV, is a 27 demand-based time-of-day option that provides for a reduction in the demand billing 28 for off-peak demand. The proposed time-of-use rates replace the demand charge 29 pricing provisions with an energy-based pncing schedule that is applicable to a set -4- Houle - Direct of pre-determined pricing periods This energy-based pricing provides the customer with additional flexibility in pursuing demand side management activities and in 3 controlling costs For residential customers, Rate RTU1-M offers an expanded 4 menu of time-of-use energy pnces in addition to the on-peak/off-peak energy prices s offered under existing Residential Time-of-Use, Rate RTU 6 The proposed rates also include a facilities charge that recovers the system 7 costs associated with transmission and distribution facilities. In the existing rates, 8 these facilities costs are rolled into the energy charges for those customers with 9 non-demand billing and are contained in the demand charge (along with production 10 costs) in rates with demand billing 11 IV. DEVELOPMENT OF TIME-OF-USE PRICING PERIODS 12 0 PLEASE DESCRIBE THE TIME-OF-USE PRICING PERIODS INCLUDED IN THE 13 PROPOSED RATES 14 A. The proposed tariffs contain an identical table that classifies each weekday and - - weekend hour into one of four pricing periods, denoted as Pricing Periods 1-4 le An enlarged version of this table is included as Exhibit SJH-4. 17 Q HOW WERE THESE TIME-OF-USE PERIODS DETERMINED? 18 A The analyses described below identified four distinctive load groups based on the 19 relationship of both the average hourly load and the maximum hourly load to the 20 annual system peak demand. A summary of the system load data that were used 21 to determine these time-of-use pricing penods are shown in Exhibits SJH-5 and 22 SJH-6. 23 Q. HOW DID YOU DETERMINE WHICH HOURS TO INCLUDE IN EACH PRICING 24 PERIOD? 25 A. The classification of each hour was based on an assessment of three primary 26 factors: (1) the average load for each hour in a given month as a percentage of the 27 Company's annual system peak; (2) the maximum load for each hour in a given 28 month as a percentage of the Company's system peak demand, and (3) simplifying n9 the application of Rates GTU-M, RTU1-M, and GTUC-M to the maximum extent 5_ Houle • Direct possible Q HOW WERE THE AVERAGE HOURLY LOADS USED TO DEVELOP THE 3 PRICING PERIODS IN THE PROPOSED RATES", 4 A The Company's average hourly load (as a percentage of the annual peak load) was 5 analyzed for each month in the three-year period ending in December 1996, to 6 determine the hourly variation of the load and the average hourly load compared to 7 the annual peak load The main conclusions that can be drawn from a review of 8 Exhibit SJH-5 are as follows g (1) The average hourly loads in the months of December - February 10 exhibit both a morning and an afternoon peak, with a maximum 11 average weekday load of about 60% of the Company's peak load 12 (2) The average hourly loads in the months of March and November 13 exhibit a load pattern with relatively minor morning and evening peaks 14 of about 55% of the annual peak. 15 (3) The average hourly loads in the months of April and October exhibit 6 a load pattern with a fairly constant average weekday load of about 17 55% of the peak. 18 (4) The average hourly loads in the months of May and September, for 19 both weekdays and weekends, exhibit a load pattern that is very 20 similar to the Company's traditional summer load pattern, but at lower 21 percentages of the Company's peak load (about 70% to 75% of the 22 annual peak). 23 (5) The average hourly loads in the months of June - August exhibit the 24 Company's familiar summer load pattern characterized by a rapid 25 increase in load beginning at 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m , peaking at 26 5.00 p.m., and gradually decreasing, but remaining at relatively high 27 levels, throughout the remainder of the day. The average peak 28 weekday load dunng June - August is about 85% to 90% of the 29 annual peak load, and the average peak weekend load is about 75% -6- Houle - Direct 1 to 80% of the annual peak 2 Q DOES THE AVERAGE HOURLY LOAD DATA FOR EACH MONTH PROVIDE A 3 SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR DETERMINING WHICH HOURS SHOULD BE 4 INCLUDED IN EACH PRICING PERIOD? 5 A. No While the average hourly load in each month provides a reasonable starting 6 point for such a determination, the averaging process often conceals the peak load 7 requirements in a given month. These peak load requirements result from weather- 8 related fluctuations in the Company's load. For example, the highest average 9 hourly load in February (1994-1996) is about 60% of the annual peak demand. 10 However, from February 1 through February 5, 1996, the hourly load exceeded 70% 11 of the annual peak demand in 59 hours and 75°% of the annual peak demand in 26 12 hours. Clearly, the average hourly load does not capture the peak load 13 requirements of the TU Electric system and, as such, are not sufficient to form the 14 sole basis for the assignment of hours into time-of-use pricing periods. 15 Q. HOW WERE THE MAXIMUM HOURLY LOADS USED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRICING PERIODS IN THE PROPOSED RATES? 17 A. The hourly loads for the peak day(s) in each month of 1996 were analyzed to 18 determine how the peak loads in each month relate to one another with respect to 19 the magnitude of the monthly peak demand and the daily load patterns expenenced 20 in each month. As a result, common load relationships were noted in four distinct 21 monthly groups: (i) December - March; (ii) April, October, and November; (iii) May 22 and September; and (iv) June - August. The main conclusions that can be drawn 23 from a review of Exhibit SJH-6 are as follows 24 (1) The maximum hourly loads in the months of December - March 25 exhibit both an morning and an afternoon peak, with the maximum 26 load of about 80% of the Company's peak load. 27 (2) The maximum hourly loads in the months of April, October, and 28 November do not deviate significantly from the average values. 29 (3) The maximum hourly loads in the months of May and September, 7- Houle - Direct . approach 85% to 95% of the annual peak (4) The maximum hourly loads in the months of June - August exhibit the 3 same pattern as the average hourly load pattern for these months, but 4 at a higher percentage of the Company's peak load s O. HOW DID THE NEED FOR SIMPLIFYING THE APPLICATION OF THE 6 PROPOSED RATES AFFECT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRICING PERIODS? 7 A Rates with an overly-complex pricing structure typically discourage customer a acceptance. One way to simplify these rates is to limit the number of times per year 9 that the pricing period changes. The proposed rates are limited to weekday and 10 weekend pricing periods in four seasonal groups In addition, the two pricing 11 periods with the highest prices (Pricing Periods 3 and 4) occur only in the five 12 consecutive months of May - September. The simplicity of these rates is also 13 enhanced by having as many pricing periods throughout the year as possible begin 14 or end at certain "key" hours (e g., as shown in Exhibit SJH-4, many pricing periods 15 begin at 1000 a.m. or 2:00 p.m. and many pricing penods end at 2.00 p.m. or 10:00 p m ) The Company has attempted to stnke a balance between the multiple pncing 17 periods needed to send proper pricing signals and the need to simplify the 18 application of the rates as much as possible. Also, meter costs and technology 19 must be considered. The proposed rate structure can be administered using 20 existing meter technology. 21 O. HOW WERE THE HOURS IN A GIVEN MONTH OF THE YEAR ASSIGNED TO 22 THE FOUR PRICING PERIODS? 23 A. Pricing Period 1 represents the hours for which the Company's average load is less 24 than about 60% of its annual peak demand and for which the maximum load does 25 not consistently exceed about 66% of the annual peak demand. For example, as 26 shown in Exhibit SJH-4, all hours in the months of April, October, and November are 27 in Pricing Period 1. Pricing Period 1 contains 5,880 hours, or about 67.1% of the 28 hours in a year. 29 Pricing Period 2 includes (i) the peak load hours during the months of -8- Houle - Direct December - March, (u) some of the "shoulder" load hours in May - September, and m) the weekend peak hours in the months of May and September Pricing Period 3 2 represents the hours for which the Company s average load is typically about 60°° 4 to 70% of its annual peak demand. although for relatively few hours during the 5 winter months, the hourly load can exceed 80% of the Company's traditional 6 summer peak load These relatively few high load hours are offset by the number 7 of winter days when the maximum hourly load is less than 60% of the system peak g load The maximum hourly load in this penod typically ranges from about 66% to 9 about 80% of the annual peak demand. Pricing Period 2 contains 1,640 hours, or 10 about 18 7% of the hours in a year. 11 Pricing Period 3 includes (i) the peak load hours during the months May - 12 September, (u) the weekend peak load hours in the months of June - August, and 13 (iii) some of the"shoulder" load hours on weekdays in June - August. Pricing Penod 14 3 represents the hours for which the Company's average load is between 70% and 15 80% of the annual peak demand and for which the maximum load is typically about 80% to 92% of the annual peak demand. Pricing Period 3 contains 854 hours, or 17 about 9.7% of the hours in a year 18 Pricing Penod 4 includes the peak load hours (weekdays from 2.00 p.m. to 19 8'00 p.m.) during the months June, July, and August Pricing Period 4 represents 20 the hours for which the Company's average load is greater than 80% of the annual 21 peak demand and for which the maximum load is typically more than about 92% of 22 the annual peak demand. Dunng this penod, the Company's costs are usually the 23 highest due to the need to use additional peaking capacity for extended penods in 24 order to meet its load. Pricing Penod 4 contains 384 hours, or about 4.4% of the 25 hours in a year. 26 V. COST BASES & RATE DESIGN 2.7 O PLEASE EXPLAIN THE BASIS FOR THE MONTHLY CUSTOMER CHARGES IN L8 THE PROPOSED RATES. 29 A. The customer charges in Rate GTU-M vary according to the type of service required .9- Houle - Direct tie secondary, primary. or transmission) and are the same as those for the Company s General Service time-of-use rates approved in Docket No 11735 The 3 customer charge proposed for Rate RTU1-M, Residential Time-of-Use Service - 4 Municipality. is $9 00 per month TU Electric has an existing Residential Time-of- Use Rate (TU Electric's Rate RTU - Residential Time-of-Use Service, a two-step 6 time-of-use rate), which would remain in effect after the approval of the new rate, 7 that has a customer charge of $9.00 per month The proposed customer charge in 8 Rate RTU1-M would make the two charges the same and would simplify customers' 9 ability to choose between the two rate options. The customer charges in Rate to GTUC-M also vary according to the type of service required and are equal to the 11 sum of the Rate GTU-M customer charges plus a $200 charge to recover the cost 12 of additional metenng and communications equipment and the administrative costs 13 associated with curtatlable service. 14 Q. WHAT IS THE BASIS FOR THE FACILITIES CHARGES IN THE PROPOSED 15 RATES" A. The Facilities Charges are based on the Company's unbundled transmission and 17 distribution costs, adjusted for losses. These charges are applied to the higher of 18 the customer's maximum annual demand or contract demand. The calculation of 19 the facilities charges for secondary, primary, and transmission voltage customers 20 for Rates RTU1-M, GTU-M, and GTUC-M are as shown in Exhibit SJH-7. 21 Q. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE $1.00/KW FACILITIES CHARGE FOR 22 DEMAND IN EXCESS OF THE CONTRACT DEMAND" 23 A. This charge is designed to partially recover the costs associated with possible 24 equipment failures and related engineering studies, and with the administrative work 25 associated with reevaluating and recontracting for higher electnc loads, when the 26 customer places a higher demand on the Company's facilities than the customer 27 has contracted for This charge also acts as an incentive to customers to adjust 28 their contractual arrangements with the Company, so that the types of expenses 29 mentioned above can be avoided. This provision is identical to the $1/kW charge -10- Houle • Direct for demand in excess of the contact demand that was approved in Docket No 2 11735 for the Company's General Service rates 3 Q HOW WERE THE ENERGY CHARGES IN RATE GTU-M DERIVED FOR EACH OF 4 THE FOUR PRICING PERIODS. AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT SJH-17 5 A. The calculations of the energy prices in Rate GTU-M are shown in Exhibit SJH-8 6 These calculations are based on the Company's demand and energy usage data 7 for the 12 months ending in December 1996 The methodology used to determine 8 these charges can be summarized as follows- 9 (1) Calculate the average of the maximum demands in each month, for 10 each pricing period, from the data tabulated in Exhibit SJH-8, Sheet 11 3 For example, the maximum monthly demands during Pricing 12 Period 4 for the three months with Pricing Period 4 hours (June - 13 August) are 19,382 kW, 19,668 kW, and 19,268 kW, respectively. 14 Thus, the average monthly maximum demand for Pricing Period 4 is 15 19,439 kW (see column [1] of Exhibit SJH-8, Sheet 1). (2) Develop a demand allocation percentage for each of the four Pricing 17 Penods based on the ratio of the average monthly maximum demand 18 for each pricing period to the total of the average monthly maximum 19 demands for Pricing Periods 1-4 (67,640 kW). Thus, the Demand 20 Allocator for Pncing Period 4 is 19,439 kW divided by 67,640 kW, or 21 28.74% (see column [2] of Exhibit SJH-8, Sheet 1). 22 (3) Determine the number of hours in each pricing period (see column [3] 23 of Exhibit SJH-8, Sheet 1). 24 (4) Allocate the system-wide Annual Production Revenue Requirement 25 (excluding fuel) of $2.743 billion from the Company's latest Public 26 Utility Commission-approved functionalized cost-of-service study 27 (based on the Final Order in Docket No. 11735) to each pricing 28 period, by multiplying the total revenue requirement by the demand 29 allocator for each pricing period. For example, the Revenue -11- Houle - Direct • 1 Requirement applicable to Pricing Period 4 is 28 74% of $2 743 billion, or approximately $788 million (see column [4] in Exhibit SJH-8. 3 Sheet 1 ) 4 (5) Determine the number of kilowatt-hours consumed during each of the 5 four pricing periods (see column [5] in Exhibit SJH-8, Sheet 1) 6 (6) Calculate the unit charges for each pricing period by dividing the 7 revenue requirement for each pricing period (column [4] in Exhibit a SJH-8, Sheet 1) by the number of kilowatt-hours in each pricing 9 period (column [5] in Exhibit SJH-8, Sheet 1). For example, for 10 Pricing Period 4, the energy charge is $788 million divided by 6 362 11 billion kWh, or 12.390/kWh. 12 (7) Adjust the unit charges for each pncing period by the appropriate loss 13 factor to determine the energy charges for service at secondary, 14 primary, and transmission voltages. These loss factors, and the is energy charges for each voltage level and pricing period, are shown in Exhibit SJH-8, Sheet 2. 17 Q HOW WERE THE ENERGY CHARGES IN RATE RTU1-M DERIVED FOR EACH 18 OF THE FOUR PRICING PERIODS, AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT SJH-2? 19 A The energy charges in each pncing period in Rate RTU1-M were determined by the 20 same methodology described above for Rate GTU-M. 21 Q. HOW WERE THE ENERGY CHARGES IN RATE GTUC-M DERIVED FOR EACH 22 OF THE FOUR PRICING PERIODS, AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT SJH-3? 23 A. The energy charges in each pricing period in Rate GTUC-M were determined 24 by applying a 45% reduction to the system production cost. Otherwise, the 25 energy charges were determined by the same methodology described above for 26 Rate GTU-M. 27 Q. WHAT IS THE BASIS FOR THIS REDUCED ENERGY CHARGE? 28 A. The energy charges in Rate GTUC-M were designed to recover the same 29 percentage of the Company's production costs as is recovered from the Company's -12_ Houle • Direct Noticed Interruptible Rate ' This is an appropriate basis for the energy charges in Rate GTUC-M because the value of curtailable service to the Company is 3 essentially the same as that of noticed interruptible service 4 Q HOW WILL THE COST OF FUEL BE RECOVERED UNDER RATES GTU-M. 5 RTU1-M, AND GTUC-M7 6 A As shown in Exhibits SJH-1, SJH-2, and SJH-3, the applicable fuel cost is 7 determined in accordance with the Company's Rider FC, which is applicable to the a Company's standard Residential and General Service rates. 9 Q. HOW WILL THE COST OF PURCHASED POWER BE RECOVERED UNDER 10 RATES GTU-M, RTU1-M, AND GTUC-M? 11 A As shown in Exhibits SJH-1, SJH-2, and SJH-3, purchased power costs are 12 determined in accordance with the Company's Rider PCR. This is the same cost 13 recovery mechanism that is applicable to the Company's standard Residential and 14 General Service rates. 15 VI. SPECIAL PROVISIONS OF PROPOSED RATES Q. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE AGGREGATE BILLING OPTION PROPOSED IN RATES 17 GTU-M AND GTUC-M. 18 A. This option allows customers with several points of delivery to receive a single 19 monthly bill, provided the following criteria are met: (i) all points of delivery are billed 20 on the same voltage level service; (ii) all points of delivery are on the same billing 21 cycle; and (iii) all points of delivery are under the same ownership. A one-time 22 charge of$25 for each point of delivery is made under this billing option in order to 23 recover the administrative costs associated with this service. 24 Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE THE BASES FOR THE CURTAILMENT PROVISIONS 25 INCLUDED IN RATE GTUC-M. 26 A. Rate GTUC-M limits the curtailment of the customer's load to no more than 700 Noticed Inlerrup4We Service(NIS)includes both a demand charge(that is 50%of the demand charge for comparable ov in firm he service rate)and ence the charge uc�5% st the for NI$ production s d5%� recovered In the energy charge -13- Houle - Direct hours in the last 12 months and no more than 12 hours in any 24 hour period except that the 12 hour limit is not applicable during system emergencies when the 3 Company has made public pleas to restrict electric energy usage to essential needs 4 because of an area or statewide shortage of electric power and/or energy These 5 provisions are identical to those applicable to noticed interruptible service, as 6 contained in the Company's Rider I. In lieu of interrupting equipment, Rate GTUC- 7 M contains an energy charge applicable during a curtailment period of 70¢ per a kilowatt-hour unless the customer actually curtails at least 35% of its total load 9 throughout the curtailment period, in which case, the energy charge is 50¢ per 10 kilowatt-hour. The 35% minimum voluntary curtailment in order to qualify for the 11 50¢ energy price, rather than the 70¢ energy price, is applicable to the total load at 12 each individual point of delivery if the customer has not selected the Aggregate 13 Billing Option or to the total load of all of a customer's points of delivery under Rate 14 GTUC-M that are aggregated under the Aggregate Billing Option provided for in 15 Rate GTUC-M. with total load being defined as the customer's 15-minute demand recorded immediately prior to the customer's receipt of notice from the Company of 17 the curtailment period This alternative curtailment period energy price is purposed 18 to provide further encouragement to the customer to curtail load during a curtailment 19 period, without imposing such a high price as to make the marketing of this rate 20 impossible This provision is designed to replace the active control hardware 21 required for service under Rider I and assures that the Company will be able to 22 recover the costs of capacity and energy used by a Rate GTUC-M customer in the 23 event the customer chooses not to curtail load when requested to do so. This 24 pricing level also represents a price that will exceed the outage costs of most 25 customers and, in so doing, sends the proper pnce signal to any customer that 26 might otherwise ignore a curtailment request 27 The Company will request customers served under Rate GTUC-M to curtail 28 their loads within 15 minutes after either of the following occurrences: (i) when the 29 Company is required by the ERCOT Independent System Operator to interrupt -14- Houle - Direct noticed) interruptible loads, or On when the Company's hourly load is at or above 95% of the estimated system peak load for the current calendar year In the event 3 tnat the actual system peak load exceeds the estimated system peak load, the 4 actual system peak load automatically becomes the new estimated system peak 5 load on the next day. 6 0 PLEASE EXPLAIN THE BASES FOR SPECIAL CONDITIONS (c)AND (d) IN RATE 7 GTUC-M 8 A. The initial three-year term of service is required to assure some reasonable level of 9 cost recovery for the Company's facilities used to serve the curtailable load. The 10 initial three-year term and the one-year termination notice allow the Company the 11 time to adjust its planning process associated with securing capacity resources. 12 These terms are also needed to prevent customers from attempting to "game the 13 system" by switching back and forth between firm service and curtailable service 14 Special Condition (c) requires the customer to pay the difference between the 15 billings under Rate GTUC-M and what the billings would have been under the applicable firm service rate (i.e., Rate HV - High Voltage Service, Rate GP- General 17 Service Primary, or Rate GS - General Service Secondary, depending upon the 18 voltage level of the service provided at the point of delivery) for a period not to 19 exceed three years rf the customer decides to switch from Rate GTUC-M during the 20 initial term of the Agreement for Electric Service and not to exceed two years if the 21 customer decides to switch from Rate GTUC-M during a subsequent term. Interest 22 would also be payable on such difference at the rate applicable to undercharges. 23 Q. DOES THIS CONCLUDE YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY? 24 A. Yes, it does. -15- Houle - Direct STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF DALLAS § BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared Stephen J. Houle, who, having been placed under oath by me, did depose as follows' My name is Stephen J. Houle. I am of legal age and a resident of the State of Texas. The foregoing direct testimony and the attached exhibits offered by me are true and correct, and the opinions stated therein are, to the best of my knowledge and belief, accurate, true and correct. p Steppe // SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME by the said Stephen J. Houle this '} &day of , 1999. 6'i' No<ary Public, State of Texas -16- Tariff for Electnc Sera ice E■hibit SIH-I Texas Utilities Electnc Company Page 1 of 2 3 :General Sen ice Sheet ]' Applicable Ciues Exercising Ongmal lunsdicuon Pace of Rican Date Re' seam rncina l 3.2.25 Rate GTU-M - General Service Time-of-Use - Municipality Application Applicable to any customer for all clean senice supplied at one point of delivery and measured through one meter Each pomp of delivery is metered and billed separately,unless the Aggregate Billing Opnon is elated A time-ofday demand meter or mien al recorder is required pnor to service being provided under this n¢ Not applicable to temporary,shared or resale senice Type of Service Single or three phase 60 hertz,at the most n arable secondary,pnmary.or uansnussion voltage Where service of the type desired by Customer a not already available at the point of delivery,addiuooal charges and special contract arrangements between the Company and Customer may be rrquirt pnor to semi¢being furnished The Company may,arm option,meter Service on the secondary side of Customer's transformers and adjust for transformer losses in accordance with Company s Tana for Electric Service Monthly Rate Charge Amount Secondary Prmary Transmission (GTU-M-SEC) (GTU-M-PRI) (GTU-M-IRAN) Customer(per point of delivery) S24 00 525 00 5425 CO Facilities Higher of the Contract kW or Annual kW 5347 per kW 5274 per LW SI 08 per LW Charge (pa point of Each airrent month kW m excess of the Contra kW SI 00 per 1W SI.00 per kW 51 00 per 1W delivery) Emcrgy Phang Period 4 13420 per kWh 1302'per kWh 1278 c pa kWh Pncing Penod 3 6 I8 per kWh 5 99 c per kWh 5 88 c per kWh Pnamg Petod2 3 50 c per kWh 339cper kWh 333 c per kWh Pnaog Period l 1 09 c perkWb 106cpea kWh 1,040 per kWh Fuel Cost' Plus an amount for fuel con calculated in accordance with Rider FC.using the General Service-Secondary factor for GTU-M- SEC,the Genera]SerwiwPrimary factor for G U-M-PRI.and the General Service-Transmission flexor for GTU-M-TRAN. Power Con: Plus an amount for purchased power cost calculated in accordance with Rider PCR,using the General Service Secondary faaur for GTU-M-SEC,the General Service Primary factor for GTU-M-PRI.and the High Voltage Service factor for GTU-M-IRAN Payment: Bills are due when rendered and become past due if not paid within 16 days thereafter. Bills are increased by 5%J not paid within 20 days after bang readeaed. Aggregate Billing Option An entity with multiple points of delivery receiving service under Rate GTU-M may elect to recave an aggregate summary bill Aggregate billing is available to entities that meet all of the following mien a) all points of delivery are billed on the same voltage level service. b) all points of delivery are on the same billing cycle,and c) all points of delivery are under the sane ownership A one-tame charge of$25 per point of dehvery is made when Customer selects the Aggregate Billing option Definitions Contract kW is the maximum kW speafied in the Agreement for Electric Service. • 1999 Texas Utilities Electric Company Ras Schedules 29 24 Tang for Electric Service Exhibit SJH-1 Texas Utilities Electric Company Page 2 of 2 Sheet l2 General Service Page or Applicable Clues Exernatig Onginal lunsdt<aon Faomn On el nail EQcan< Date Annual kV. Is the highest I5-nanute kV, recorded at the point of del"ery dung the I2-month penod ended with the currant m^nth Current month k`A is the mgbcg I5-minute KW recorded at the point of delivers donna the current month Pnnng Penal Is the billing penod determined in accordance with the following and the specified hours an local Dallas Texas time Pricing Penod 4 Pricing Penod 3 hieing mod 2 Month Pnnrg Penod t Weekdays 0.cetends Weekdays Weekends Weekdays theekends y'A N/A N/A 6 a m - N/A All Other Hours December March NA 12noon 6pm-10pm Apnl & October - NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Hours November May &September NeA N'A 2pm-8pm N/A loam-2pm 2pm-IOpm All Other Hours epm-IOpm June-August 2pm-Spm N/A IOam-2pm 2Pm-IOpm Sam-Want ;�1pm All Other Hours 8pm-lOpm nudmght midnight Special Conditions (a) Where customer has another source of power that is connected,either elslncally or mslanically,to equipment that may be operated concurrently with service provided by Company.Customer mug install and maintain.at Customer's expense,such dm ices as may be necessary to protect Customer's and the Company's equipment and service tbl Customers may discontinue service under Rate GTU-M and change service to an otherwise applicable Company rate dung the first year without penalty Agreement An Agreement for Electnc Service with a ten of not Ito than three years is required The maximum a edncal load specified in the Agreement for Elcdnc Service may not be less than the sum of Customer's normal load plus the load that may be canted all or part of the time by Customers generator or prune mover or other source of energy Notice Service hereunder is subject to the orders of regulatory bodies having jurisdiction and to the Company's Tend for Deane Service Rate Schedules 29 25 ° 1999 Texas Utilities Electnc Company Tang for Electnc Seri ice Exhibit 5J11-2 Texas Utilities Electnc Company Page 1 of 2 3 I Residential Service Sheet S Applicable Cures Exercising Original'anodic-bon Page I of 3 Effective Date: Redsion One ran 3.1.8 Rate RTU1-M - Residential Time-of-Use Service - NIunicipality Application Applicable to all customers for all of the electric Ono/¢s supplied al one point of delivery and measured through one meter used for residential purposes(which may include small amounts of commercial usage incidental to residential usage)in an mdnidual pnvate dwelling or in an mdmdually metered apartment for which no specific ram is presided A time-of.day demand meter ss required pnor to service being presided under this rate Not applicable to temporary,shared.or resale sem me Type of Service Single or three phase.60 hertz at standard voltages as descnbed in the Company's Tanff for Electric Service Where semice of the type desired by Customer a not already as viable at the point of delivery,additional charges and special contract arrangements between the Compare and Customer mar be required pnor to service being famished Monthly Rate Charge Amount Customer $9.00 Facilities Charge Higher of the Contract kW or Annual kW SI 92 per kW Each current month kW in excess of the Contract kW SI.00 pa kW Energy Pnang Penod 4 13 42 C per kWh Pnang Penod 3 6 18 C per kWh Pnang Period 2 3 50 c per kWh Prang Penod 1 1 09 c per kWh Fuel Cost Plus an amount for fuel cost calculated m accordance with Rider FC,using the Occidental Service factor Power Cost Plus an amount for purchased power cost cal tilaed m accordance with Rider PCR,using the Residenual Service factor Payment Bd6 an due when rendered and become past due if not paid within 16 days thereafter Definitions Contract kW is the maximum kV, specified lathe Agreement for Electric Service Annual kW is the highest I5-mmme kW recorded at the point of delivery during the 12-month penod ended with the current month Current month kW is the highest 15-minute kW recorded at the point of delivery dung the current month Cl999 Texas thnlinas Elecvw Company Rate Schedules 11 5 Tariff for Electric Seri ice Exhibit S11-1+2 Texas Utilities Electric Company Page 2 of 2 3 I Residenml Seri icc Shea Applicable Clues Exercising Onginal lunsdtmon Page 2 of 2 Etienne Date: Rec men Onemal Pr-me Pe nod is the billing penod determined in accordance with the folly mg ani the specified boon are local Dallas Texas time Prnng Penod 4 Pncntg Period 3 Pmmmg Period 2 month Pricing Penh I Weekdays Weekends Weekdays Weekends W eekdays Weekends December-March NIA NIA N/A N/A 6 a m - NIA All Other Hours 12noon 6pm-lOpm April & October • NA N.A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Hours hot ember May &September N/A N/A 2pm-8pm N/A 10am 2pm 2pm-IOpm All Other Hours spm-lOpm lune-August 2pm-8pm N/A IOam-2pm 2pmlOpm lam-loam IOam-2pm MI Other Hours 8pm-lOpm lOpm-l2 1Opm-12 midnight midnight Agreement An Agreement for Elennc Service with a term of not less than one year,required If Customer terminates service on Murata,said Customer as ineligible for service under this rate for a penod of one year from termination date If Customer temmnates service before the end of the initial one year twin of service,the final bill will include an adjustment for the amount by which billing on Residential Service Rate R exceeds the billing rendered on this rate If ten iceis terminated due to the Company's withdrawing this rate the above adjustment to the r al bill does not apply Notice Service hereunder is subject to the orders of regulatory bodies havingjurudsetmn and to Company's Tariff for Ekrne Service C1999 Texas Utilities Deane Company Razz Schedules 11 6 I anti for Electric Sen ice Exhibit \Ill 3 Texas Utilities Electnc Company Page 1 of 3 3 p General Service Ro t Sheet 2n Applicable Giu u s Exercising Original lunrd¢mon Pace of 3 EfR<at na Date 11 rang mi 3.2.26 Rate GTUC-M - General Service Time-of-Use Voluntary Curtailable - Municipality Application Applicable to any customer for all electnc service supplied at one point of delivery and measured through one meter Each point of del.en is metered and billed separately unless the Aggregate Billing Option is selected An interval demand recorder is required pnor to sect ice being prostied under this me The applicability of this me is limited.on a firsicome-firzbserved basis to a maximum tool contacted load from all Customers of 1.000 MW U e .a tool of all Customers Contract twi for the Company's summer peak season of 1999 and 2.000 MW for the Company's peat season of 2000 and thereafter hot applicable to temporary shared.or resale service Type of Service Single or three phase,60 Benz, al the most asailable secondary, pnmary,or transmission voltage Where service of the type desired by Customer is not already available at the point of delivery,additional charges and special contract anangemenu between the Company and Customer may be required pnor to service being furnished The Company may. at to option.meter service on the secondary side of Customer s transformers and adjust for transformer losses in accordance with Company's Tang for Eleanc Semce Monthly Rate Charge Amount Secondary Primary Tranmacvoa (GTUC-M-SEC) (GTUC-M.PRI) IGTUC-M .TRAM) Customer per point of delivery) 5224 00 $225 00 $625 00 Facilities Higher of the Comsat kW or Annual kW 53 47 per kW 52 74 per kW SI 08 per kW Charge (Per POlniof Each current month kW in excess of the Contract kW 51.00 per kW SI 00 per kW SI 00 pertW delivery) Energy Pricmg Penod 4 7 38 c per kWh 7.16 c per kWh 7 03 c per kWh Pncing Penod 3 340 0 per tWh 3 29 c per kWh 3 23 a per tWll Prang Period 192c per kWh 186 c per kWh 1 83 c per kWh Prang Penod I 060c per kWh 0.58c per kWh 0 57 c per kWh Fuel Cost Plus an amount for fuel cost calculated in accordance with Rider FC,using the General Service-Secondary factor for GTUC-M- SEC,the General Service-Primary factor for GTUC-M-PRI,and the General ServiewTnavilssaon Isaac for GTUC-M-TRAN- Power Coe- Plus an amount for purchased power cost aloilated in accordance with Rider PCR using the General Servna Secondary factor for GTUC-M-SEC,the General Service Primary factor for GTUC-M-PRI,and the High Voltage Service factor for GTUC-M-TRAN. Payment Bills an due when rendered and become pact due if tot paid within 16 days thereafter Bills are increased by 5% if not paid within 20 days after being rendered Curtailment Provisions Customer's load will be subject to no more than 700 hours of cunalment dunng the 12 months ending with the current month and no more than 12 hours in any 24 hour penod.except when the Company has made public pleas to tear electric energy usage to essential needs because of an am or statewide shortage of clean power and/or energy,then the 12 hour hmtl no longer applies Customer will have 15 minutes in which to volumaniy curtail all of the load at the point of delivery or.if Customer chooses rem to cowl all of the load at the point of delivery,all kWh used during the curtailment penod will be billed at an energy charge of 70c pa kWh,rather than at the energy charge specified above,provided that,m the event the Customer curtails 35%or more of the total load it a point of delivery not included in the Aggregate BdWg Opizoo,or 35% or more of the total load at W pot=of delivery to the Customer aggregated under the Aggregate BaWng Opton,throughout the curail=n period,the energy charge for all kWh used during the curtailment penod at such point(s)of delivery will be billed at an energy charge of 50c per kWh Total load(u0wr at a single point of delivery or aft of Customer's[mum of delivery under the Aggregate Ban Opoon)s defined as the Customer's I5-mina demand recorded immediately prior to Customer's receipt of the Douce from Company of the cuttatmen penod •1999 Texas Utilities Electric Company Rate Schedules 29 26 Tariff for Electric Senice Exhibit SIH-3 Texas Utilities Electric Company Page 2 of 3 3 2 General Service ghee: 3v Applicable Gun Exercising Onguul Jurisdiction Page :.d 1 Effector Date Rev:sum I in:ina Curvymmenu will.veer dunng the following condmons a, when the Compans is required by the Electric Reliability Counul of texas ERCOT Operating Guides or the EPCt:T Indepcniert System Openor LISO to interrupt intern.pubic [cad, The Curti ment penod is the entire penod during w h,-h ERCOT Operating Guides or the ERCOT ISO requires the Cempam v :nmmgt interruptible loads begmrung 15 minutes ant- Customer a requested to curtail load. or lb/ when the Company's system load is at or above 95% of the higher of'II the estimated system annual peak load for the current calendar year or 12)the actual system peak load for the current calendar year In the event Nat the actual system peak load in the calendar year tweeds the previously estimated system annual peak load for that calendar year, such actual system peak load shall become the new estimated system annual peak load beginning on the following day The curtailment penod is the enure penod dunng which the Company's system load d at or above 95% of the estimated system annual peat load for the anent year beginning 15 minutes after Customer is requested to curtail load Aggregate Billing Option An entity with multiple points of delivery receiving service under Rate GTUC-M may elect to receive art aggregate summary ball Aggregate billing is available to enuues that ma all of the following cntena al all points of delivery an billed on the same voltage level service, to all pound of delivery are on the same billing cycle,and a all points of delivery an under the same ownership A one-time charge of$25 per point of delivery is made when Customer selects the aggregate Billing opuoo Definitions Contract kW is the maximum kW specified to the Agreement for Eleanc Senice Annual kW is the highest 15-minute kW recorded at the point of delnery dunng the 12-month penod ended with the current month. Current month kW is the highest 15-minute kW recorded at the point of delivery dunng the current month Hourly System Load is TU Elecmc's total system demand excluding non-Gran economy energy sales Pncing Penod is the billing period deterrnaned m accordance with the following and the spectf ed hour are local Dallas,Texas,time Prang Pored 4 Pricing Penod 3 Pnctng Penod 2 Month Pncing Penod I Weekdays Weekends Weekdays Weekends Weekdays Weekends December-March N/A N/A NIA N/A 6 a m N/A All Other Hours 12noon 6pm-IOpm April & Oaobet - N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Hours November May&September N/A N/A 2pm-Spm N/A lOane2pm 2pm-lOpm All Other Hours 8pm-IOpm lune-August 2pm-Spm N/A 1Oam-2pm 2pm-lOpm aam-loam l0am-2pm All Other Boum Spm-lOpm lOpm-12 1Opm-12 midnight midnight Special Conditions a Where customer has another source of power that is connected,either eleancally or mechanically,to equipment that may be operated concurrently with service provided by Company,Customer rams install and maawm,at Customer's expense,such devices as may be necessary to protect Customer's and the Company's equipment and service DJ Customer must pay all costs associated with installing and=attaining any special metenng equipment and telephone charges,if required c) An Agramcot for Electric Service IS required for an initial tram of three years when swim d fan rendered under this rate and for subsequent pcnods of 2 years thereafter,continuing until canceled by alba party by written notice I year m advance of the end of the imWl period or any subsequent period. Customers that discontinue aarddable service under Rate Gf11C-M during the term of the • 1999 Texas Utilities Electric Company Rate Schedules 29 27 Tariff for Electric Service Exhih❑ SIH-3 Texas Utilities Electric Company Page 3 of 3 Sheet 2r 3 2 li able service Applicable ee Guex Eaerosing Ongmllunsdlcuon Revision enrinat of 3 Rex EReune Date ngreemenl for Eectnc Service shall be charged the W^ere race MIAten their billings under Rate GTUC-M and what their billings would haxe Men under an applicable firm service rate t either Rate Hs Rate GP or Race GS. depending upon the voltage level of the Customer s verviw t for We Initial term the Customer reecued ten we under Rate GTUC-M not to exceed three years not to d two wears for subsequent terms,plus inserts(thereon at We rate applicable m undercharges esublishaf pursuant to the Co¢mmission s Substannve Rule 23 3501 If it is determined at any unit by Company that the Customer has faded to operate and maintain communications equipment in such a manner m that Were can be compliance with the provisions of this rate.then the Customer will be immediately billed on the rate schedule for firm power for the penod since service was first commenced under this rate.or for the one year penod rust pnor to such determination whichever penod is less The difference between the actual bills rendered and the amount so calculated shall be adjusted each month to cover the Company's annual cost of capital, compounded monthly from such month to date,as determined in the Company's most recent me case by the Public Utility Commission of Texas Such adjusted difference shall immediately become due by Customer to Company Agreement An Agreement for Elecrnc Sennett nth a term of not less than three van Is required The maximum electrical load specified in the Agreement for Electnc Strums may not be less than the sum of Customer's normal load plus the load that may be earned all or pan of the time by Customers generator or prune moor or other source of energy Notice Service hereunder Is subject to the orders of regulatory bodies having Nnsdtaion and to the Company's Tanff for Etecuic Service e 1999 Texas Uuhues Electnc Company Rate Schedules 19 28 E*mbtl SJMA Sheet t of t N N N J 0 J r O to O O L L L 0 y r t L 0 L _ a O Q O O O O o O v N N d < < N N N Z Z O 0 O Z N 3 O N a Os O ca Ga m 2 0 y p p O O N a O O 'O N N < N et CNI 0 U r4 C 8S Z o0 00 C.) 0 G N O N N h IN D 0 r V 0 N W 0 d Z Z Z °o J d < W a) •v£ c 0 3 .5 .3 . ' �`d @ 0 N p _ .0 L Y < < N N CI a) Z Z 0 0 0 N 3 O N•r O p a. 0 y CO as m < < < < W v ) 'z Z Z Z 0 O y en 0 d V < < < N N Z Z Z op 0) < SD 113 I 15 ID c E . cO f E °es E O m ` = p i T a c m 5 m O2 <OZ 2u) � < Exhibit SJH-5 Sheet l of L^ N N N N CO I N 01 O )+ I - N 'Cr 9 - Y � O , m ; t - m C 'c _ O ' to - m 2 to 0 H c j d > Y en d - 7 fl _ N S 0 0 & I R I 0 Q I _ o L1 c J 1. - m W m .' m v !_— m ,, . n U - m m 0 to W > - e Q * "' • - N • 0 to 8 to to a c co jead we;sAg Ienuuy of lueoJad Exhibit S11-1•5 Sheet 2 of 12 it • • N ■ - N en ■ N CD A N Y ■ N a ■. _ I- Q I _ o 00 - I . J ° �m m 2 m Q - la W I- 2 a' v _ cp m U) 3 ■ ro ■ V- O NS m m E I - CS F- > o U a J A - a W ccoo 'K. - o D Y i— m - N to f0 P - N j a - O - t7 - N - C co 0 N C e O t0 Heed wals(s ienuuy of wowed Exhibit SJ}i-S Sheet 3 of N - N N co l0 • _ N Y I 1V �. N mOi L _ co Q 2 ■ T I _ m 2O W a d • Y d• d * - ^ ` o U rn a * - _ (II CI , 0X > 1 - U . • J m t - al T W L `• - m D Y 3 l r - S - to a1) • - it Q 1 - a 1 - n - N . i - 1- 0 N O 1A 0 in 1p 1(J in O mead weisAg ienuuy of wowed Exhibit SJ1i•5 Sheet 4 of 12 a N N N N N - N N Q en •- a ¢ O tD J > 2 ° w c 0 in up m >- o' c0 0 0 Ft Y IP _ Ni - h- < ', C l o U w to � • � - rn J > , WY x -. - m D $ O H '• n w rn 4 - m ate`) I . n a - < - N - r tea) so v a en Of Nees wa;sAs ienuuy of luaOJad Exhtbu SIH-5 Sheet 5 of 12 _ o N M N N ■ 7 N 9, ■ N s : - Of O l0 I co Q r O � J c C O _ in We Y • - ir W I - el U ° . _ N > ■ . � Q U 2 i _ O W m m � Y $ CO C _ m a 111 0 I - In _ t - e, ▪ N 0 0 0 0 eon 0 0 co Need wags(g lenuuy of luaaad Exhib t 5JH-5 _Sheet 6 of 12 - N CO II- - N . N N - N O ■ - N I Tr P 1 - O ch a) m ? 7 - Y la m m m O 3 03 O • W c • < F Y I r Co d en r" i o (n a ,` N 2 r U 1- a -si w 5 W m , cn J > Wa a - °o we d r I-- -6) m to m N Q 1 - a 1 - • - N - r O g 0 0 m t 0 Ot mead we sAg ienuuy o3 3uaoJed Exhibit SIH-5 Sheet ? of 12 N h .' N • • III N N N co O T I O rn * m al_T 9 co 41 • O c y d 1 a1 Co J i 3 3 I W2c Q F— x I Cr) 3 0 ^ x U rn •ci 111, e IU m .'.t rn J a '-� co W Y D $ * N F— * m a, Pi * N cv a`i Q 0 ° 0 ea N r 0 O O 0 0 c0 0 O 0 O r mead weisAS lenuuy 0111.'9019d Exhibit 5711.5 Sheet S of 12 N N N - N CD * ' N O N T rf N eD 0 0 Q < lil - O a) >. U diG O CO U, CO W, v i Y >-''^^ _ l7 vJ C N = U ch ~ _Y it d •t 3 - Q t _ o J m Y es - O' W 0- c : . - co P- a- ai U t- 3 d a - - un at > - it el N O o 8 m N CO in It 1- mead we sAg ienuuy of luaoJad Exhibit SIH-5 Sheet 9 of 12 N H en N - N 9) • - N nr 111 N O r :It _ m 0 m • n Q m • - r D CO co J `o 0 W o I-- c 'v r 3 U 3 • '� m — r _a f— Q r U T •, - W 9 �W W f6 $ T ``I m F=- Y 3 4 — N * - co a I - VI 01 it * v I — en I — N II' r 0 0 0 F- f0 O V 01• Need weisAs ienuuy o3 3ueoiad Exhibit SIH-5 Sheet 10 of 12 1 - N - N N N 9) O - N 6. • 0 0 O 0 ii - r J 3 # _ m 2 a o I in H c 0 - d y en y 0 b en o U0 It c! I3 - 0 Q . - o U w c .'0 J - © w �'11. m H C %* - N 0 (` 1 - to m a * - v • - f7 Si - N . ' O O O N N (O � f el Mead wa3sAg Ienuuy o3 fuaOJOd Exhibit SIH-5 Sheet 11 of 12 •. N en - N - N 0 I - N _ o N Q Z ,'U -..1 a I - `r° • >- 0 in w O. CO m >- % ^ '5 U 0 . N x r 2 m C I W o � o v w 10 n, t — w m co co e * - N Q * v i - 0) ■ - N . - r 0D N o to O O in Need we;s tg ienuuy o; ;uaaed Extubu SJ1-1-5 Sheet 12 of 12 N 1 N - N 9, * N rn O U N v. Y _ c1 d m E 3 .. - m% 00 0 1 J 3 2 '' - U, Wo F I ' 1 - icr U) m ›- d i g- ; U > M' -+ N m I— Y ., o W � W m Da �, o H it U N. a - co m m 4 - to Q * v 1y - N o I co co t 10 1. Y Need walsA9 ienuuy of luaolad Exhibit SJH-6 Sheet I of 4 Vt CD - _- — _ - N L .0 E / A — N A g O 1 i tO ; q'^� y T h t me Q rr r�CL O ` O i a I - m O ea U 1 O 1 — Z Z+ - •It CO W C r l / . C J A I / ' N N W aa e W n rx w,.,i • y' a � , n } x W en Co r H W IL d t _ - w �r �p H T = ' - .0 - C _ ; a 0 E - N d r+ N T I Cl) 0 0 0 00 0 n m m uy ;o Mead Ienu Exhibit SIH-6 Sheet 2 of 4 et CD N - / N V Q1 / .0 G / N 0 ) O I Z Z \ : op Q 06 `\ ' a \ 2 m co O U $ a I o le V—, O I / r c F ,` / 9 ct W Q I 1 w J 1 0 1 r W ' 1 _ 0 b I W it en \ s �_ g \ --- rz 0 \ to ea tv CO a - < % to X W L.+ F— v 2 E o N w N T N 0 0 i°. t°o 0 It Aged Ienuuy ;o % Exhibit SJH-6 Sheet 3 of 4 a /- -_ N . .7 .. 9 N r ..Jy.....ys N V in i co : . : a n t .[. . - a ; _ ta 0 2N a 0 U T . : U m a _ a r c eo U H ° e .c, u en �� sQ x#.' ...yr W W 'C a s a; z W to d fA o W_ a P Y J CD a T _ to Q C d - • CO N • en 0 o 01 co N t0 In r dead ienuuy ;o % Exhibit S.M.() Sheet s of4 1 e �. ;% '";: -- a N o N to al } a.N J C CO CC = - O. Q t0 5 0 W P Cli. _ - ��_ U c if U u C el c M. W U � ♦ t . I"' 7 g W CO \ 0/ ° S W d S * - W -Id 3 I + d J 4. T N nr __ CD N -_ 0 X 2 v W E F y at N N CO . 0 o 0 m in 1- mead ienuuy ;o % Exhibr Sir ' Sheet 1 of ' TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY Rates RTU1-M, GTU-M, and GTUC-M Calculation of Facilities Charges General Service Transmission Costs Residential Secondary Primary Transmission Annual Transmission Rev Req ' $89,491,596 $75.998,555 $14,447,382 $7,705,718 Class NCP ( kW ) ' 8,254252 6,409,748 1,232,688 640,728 Avg Class NCP ( kW ) 2 4 36 22 72 181 44 10,775 90 Avg of Customer Max Demand ( kW )2 10 63 30 48 210 41 11,507 24 Annual Cost! kW' $4.4469 $8 8381 $10.1065 $11.2622 Monthly Cost/kW K3706 luau $0 8422 50 9385 General Service Distribution Costs Residential Secondary Primary Transmission Annual Olstnbution Rev Reg ' $343,948,404 $258,477,275 $30,434,833 $902,854 Class NCP ( kW ) ' 8,254,252 6,409,748 1232,688 640,728 Avg Class NCP ( kW )2 4 36 2272 181 44 10,775.90 Avg of Customer Max Demand ( kW )2 10 63 30 48 210 41 11,507.24 Annual Cost! kW' $17.0911 $30.0590 $212904 $1.3196 Monthly Cost 1 kW 51,4243 525049 57.2742 1111.1211 Total Monthly Cost/ kW $1.7949 13.2414 52.6164 $1.0485 Demand-Related Loss Factor 1.07091 1.07091 1 048861 1.026417 Monthly Facilities Charges ($/kW) $1.92 $3.47 $2.74 $1.08 1 •Source FuncUorakZed Cost of Service Study based on the Final Order in Docket No 11735 2.Avg Class NCP and Avg of Customer Max.Demand are based on the Company's load research data for the 12 months ending in December 1996 3.The Annual Cost per kW for each cost component is determined as follows Cost Component=[(Revenue Requirement)/(Class NCP)1'((Avg Class NCP)t(Avg of Customer Maximum Demand)] Sheet 1 o'3 �} / - , _(NJ cr to E Z § - S ° , 6 N R . E UP( § $ / j et S G ) : E j o c c _ 2E - - _ § i § 2 # � t � ƒ C. \ \ \ N / \ \ f /Tr 0 03 T. o■ K } | / | ) A . c CO 00 _ , { ) . {to 6-i 5 f - _ fl ! § � 2 ) 2 � | vj | $ ! ! ; / � § - • __ ; N N N N - ) } ) 3g )Ca . $ ) ) # i -5 i � !` \ ; ) 1 ! $ 3ikk } _ - - CD i / } t3 ƒ ! C & E 25_.2 k § qt 59, N to £ 2 Exhib,, S.', Sheet 2 o' p -. CO M O m N L 0 m r E m z N S 0 O C tl Q r N F- m J 2 Z o — 0 Cr) M 0 cD LO 0 2 O a E Y o in O 1-- m a U L7 d ° U c m IT A c m 1- u O1 N CO t°n 0 CO° W f u 3 r ro CO r p, d v 7 C 0 Y o I. W 0 w • n W CO G F J 7 C m F q I- .E O D CC ` c o rO u . Co c M N L N N .. U . Y M r + . H a {E w ~ 0 0 ._. J W re 0 9 I— C) m 'C 0. co m 0 0 IX 2 O T G C' < M N r C CO CC a a w _ • 5J TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY Monthly Peak Demands By Pricing Period 1996 Maximum Demand (MW) In Pricing Period : Month 1 2 3 4 January 15,160 15,826 - - February 15,371 15,775 - - March 13,355 15,162 - - April 13,746 - - - May 14,531 16,308 17,804 - June 13,189 16,133 18,359 19,382 July 13,694 16,856 18,746 19,668 August 13,150 16,477 18,013 19,268 September 14,719 15,884 16,601 - October 13,328 - - November 14,316 - - - December 15,605 16,624 - - Average 14,180 16,116 17,905 19,439 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department Administration Council Meet rg Date 02/08/99 Subject Moratorium on Signs and Landscaping Permits - Agenda Number GN 9942 Ordinance No. 2366 Councilman Russell Mitchell requested that an item be placed on the City Council action agenda that would place a moratorium on sign and landscaping permits for the next 40 days to allow time for any new sign and landscaping regulations to be developed and put into place. The city attorney has prepared an ordinance for your consideration, which would become effective, if approved February 9 and would continue to March 23, 1999. This would then give Council an opportunity to consider any new sign and landscaping ordinance changes or revisions and have those in effect. In the event that this work is not complete, Council could consider extending the moratorium What this actually means is that any new building permits that are issued after February 9 would not include a landscaping or sign permit until March 23 and by doing so, the buildings or properties permitted after February 9 would have to meet any new sign or landscaping requirements passed by Council during the moratorium. A point to consider regarding this proposed moratorium is the overall affect this may have on any building permits being issued The uncertainty regarding costs, requirements, etc. may impact more than just landscape and signage since these are key areas in the building permit process. Recommendation: To consider approval of Ordinance #2366 placing a moratorium on sign and landscaping permits until March 23, 1999. (If Council decides to change the meeting dates of the March Council meetings staff recommends that the moratorium end on the March 15 date) Finance Review Source of Funds Account Number Bonds (GO/Rev) Sufficient Funds Available Operating Budget Other Finance Director Department Head Signature y Manager Sigpatiie Page 1 of ORDINANCE NO 2366 WHEREAS, the City Council has been studying proposed changes in its Ordinances dealing with landscape requirements and sign regulations on commercial property, and WHEREAS, the study is nearing completion and the new regulations are expected to be available for passage in Ordinance form by March 23, 1999, and WHEREAS, in order to provide for orderly development of commercial property within the City and in order to protect the health and welfare of the City, the City council finds that this Ordinance should be passed BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS TEXAS that 1 The City staff is directed to issue no landscape permits or sign permits involving any commercial property within the City until Mardi 23, 1999 Commercial property is defined as being any real property zoned or used for purposes other than single family residence 2 In order to avoid a moratorium on building permits during that period of time, the Council directs the Building Department as follows Between now and March 23, 1999 any person wishing to procure a building permit upon a tract affected by this Ordinance will be entitled to receive such building permit, assuming all other requirements and conditions are met, by signing the following conditions to be attached to the building permit "It is understood by the recipient of this building permit that a sign and landscape permit will be required before final inspection can be given under this permit. I further understand that I will be expected to procure such sign and landscape permit and meet such requirements and regulations as may be imposed by Ordinance of the City passed prior to March 23, 1999 " 3 Any person receiving a budding permit under the above conditions must comply with the terms of any Ordinance on landscaping and signs passed prior to March 23, 1999 4 Any person who is not willing to take out a building permit under the above described terms will be denied a building permit until March 23, 1999 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its date of passage and approval PASSED and APPROVED this 8th day of February 1999 APPROVED Charles Scoma, Mayor ATTEST Patricia Hutson, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY Rex McEntire, Attorney for the City CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department Council Council Meeting Date 02/08/99 Subject Resolution #99 -10 - Expressing Councils Desires Agenda Number GN 99-013 Concerning Conduct The Mayor Pro Tern presents this Resolution to the Council for passage and approval. Recommendation: To approve Resolution #99-10. Mayor Pro T Page 1 of RESOLUTION NO 99-10 WHEREAS, in order to make its wishes and aims clear and to make certain they are not misunderstood, the Council finds that it is necessary to pass this resolution NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, that 1 The Council views with disfavor any interference by the Mayor in telling the City Manager, the City Secretary or any other member of the staff of the City not to send out communications to which the Council is entitled. The Council views with disfavor any attempt by the Mayor to curb free discussion by the Council on all agenda items at council meetings 2 The Council will not condone action by the Mayor in changing or attempting to change agenda items which are published by any board or commission of the City 3 The Council expresses dissatisfaction with the failure of the Mayor to treat all council members with respect and dignity 4 By this resolution the Council urges the Mayor and each of its members to treat each other with respect and move forward in an unselfish way toward the goals of the Council and in the betterment of the City and its institutions. 5 The Mayor Pro Tem is authorized to approve this resolution 1 PASSED AND APPROVED this 8th day of February, 1999 APPROVED Don Phifer, Mayor Pro Tern ATTEST: Patricia Hutson, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY. Rex McEntire, City Attorney 2