Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2000-12-05
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 667 NORTH CARROLL AVENUE SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS DECEMBER 5, 2000 MINUTES COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Rick Stacy; Mayor Pro Tern Gary Faxvks; Deputy Mayor Pro Tern Ronnie Kendall. Members: Patsy DuPre, Greg Standerfer, Rex Potter and Keith Shankland. CITY STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Billy Campbell; Assistant City Manager Shana Yelverton; Assistant to the City Manager John Eaglen; Director of Finance Sharen Elam; Director of Economic Development Greg Last; Director of Planning Bruce Payne; Senior Planner Ken Baker; Director of Community Service Kevin Hugman; Interim Director of Public Works Charlie Thomas; Assistant to the Director of Public Works Valerie Bradley; Public Works Operations Manager Michael Patterson; Public Information Officer James Kunke; Manager Building Services Malcolm Jackson; Building Official Paul Ward; Plans Examiner Charlie Bloomberg; Court Administrator Scan Leonard; Technology Services Manager Gary Gregg; City Attorney E. Allen Taylor Jr.; and, City Secretary Sandra L. LeGrand. WORK SESSION: Mayor Rick Stacy called the work session to order at 5:30 p.m. Councilmembers and staff discussed items on the agenda. The work session was audio and video tape-recorded for future reference. Copies are available upon request from the City Secretary. Agenda Item #5-C~ Resolution No. 00-107, Supporting the introduction and passage of legislation which mod!ties the requirement for authorizing the holding ora citywide local option election to allow a city located in more than one county the ability to hold a local option election. Councilmember DuPre stated she attended the annual TML Conference in Austin as a participant on the Resolutions Committee. Even though it was passed last year through the Resolutions Committee, the City of Tatum requested that this resolution be brought forward again this year in an effort for cities to be counted again this year. Director of Economic Development Greg Last stated the last resolution, which passed a fexv years ago, included this legislative issue as well as a few others. The resolution before Council tonight is dedicated to only Local Option Elections. Last added that about thirty-two (32) cities are included in this effort and that it is a "big deal." Agenda Item #5-H, Award of bid to Harley-Davidson of Dallas .for a twelve- month lease on seven (7) Harley-Davidson police motorcycles. Chief of Police Marlin Price explained the concept of "lease versus purchase" of this equipment. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 1 of 19 Agenda Item 1d-A, Authorize the Mayor to enter into an interloca[ agreement with the cities of Southlake, Colleyville, Grapevine, and CISD for Teen Court. Teen Court Coordinator Monica Broadhurst was present to respond to questions from Council regarding the interlocal agreement. Council determined that this item could be added to the consent agenda. Agenda item #1 O-C, Modification of Conditional Sign Permit.[br Gateway Plaza Development, pursuant to the Sign Ordinance No. 704-A. Plans Examiner Chuck Bloomberg answered questions regarding the request for a conditional sign permit for Gateway Plaza Development. Agenda Item #l O-D, A ward of bid for.janitorial services. Assistant to the Director of Public Works Valerie Bradley explained the bids received for the janitor services contract: Option #1 -- hire city staff; Option #2 -- use county contract, and Option #3 -- award city contract. After reviexving the information, Ms. Bradley suggested that Council approve Option #3, and that the bid be awarded to Ultra Clean Janitorial even thought they were not the lowest bidder. The bid received was in the amount of $69,369.00. A copy of the information provided is hereby attached to the minutes of this meeting. This item is included with the consent agenda portion. Terry Wilkinson, developer of Gateway Plaza. Mr. Wilkinson stated he wished to discuss the Public Art Policy agenda item. Mr. Wilkinson expressed concerns with the entry portal at the corner of FM 1709 and SH 114. He said the area looks bad and he understood that the city does not have the funds to get it cleaned rip. He offered to donate the services and do some work in the area. He commented that the entry portal group did not get a handle on how the signage would be done on the entry portal. Wilkinson said there were a lot of differences of opinions and the committee never came up with anything that the group liked. What he proposed was not the entire "grand scheme," but to clean up the undergrowth and work with city staff in determining what was appropriate in the area as far as cleaning it out. He stated he did not want to take responsibility for cleaning ont under the trees, as he did not want to disturb the trees. He asked that the City use their equipment and grade out the area, smooth up the area and put in irrigation and some trees along the Norcross and SH 114 side. He stated he would like to use the $10,000 he donated to this entry portal project toward the clean up of the area. He said he felt the entire project would cost $40-$50 thousand dollars and would like for the $10,000 [Wilkinson previously donated] to go towards this project as he would do the plans and was willing to pay for the project. Councilmember Ronnie Kendall stated, "When we talk about Public Art Policy and we have a developer who is willing to come forward and offers to pay for this type project, the city should at least match funds. There has been a lot of time and effort put into this entry portal project. We have the plans, but we do not have the money to complete the project." She stated the city should work with the developer on this project as it is not everyday that a developer offers to come Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 2 of 19 forward for this kind of project. Councilmember Patsy DuPre agreed that we should work to get something started on this project and thanked the developer for coming forward. Mayor Stacy suggested that the City Manager have the Manager of Public Works Mike Patterson work with Mr. Wilkinson on this project. The work session ended at 6:07 p.m. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Agenda Item #l-A, Call to Order Mayor Rick Stacy called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:10 p.m. City Council meetings are video and audio tape-recorded for future reference and copies are available upon request from the City Secretary. Agenda Item #2-A, Executive Session Mayor Rick Stay advised the audience that the City Council would be going into £xecutive Session pursuant to the Texas Government Code, Sections 551.071, 55].072, 551.073, 551.074, 551.086 to seek legal advice from the City Attorney; to deliberate regarding real properly matters; to deliberate regarding a prospective girl; to deliberate regarding personnel matters; to deliberate regarding security devices; and/or to deliberate regarding economic development negotiations. Council adjourned into executive session at 6:12 p.m. Council returned to open session at 7:05 p.m. Agenda Item #2-B, Action Necessary/Executive Session No action was taken as a result of the executive session. Agenda Item #3, Invocation/Pledge to the Flag: Mayor Stacy led the pledge to the flag. Agenda Item #4-A, Mayor's Report Mayor Stacy announced the following: The Planning and Zoning Commission meeting will be held on December 7, at the Southlake Church of Christ Church located on FM 1709, west of Davis Boulevard, due to the overflow crowd that is expected with Target Super Store issues on the agenda. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 3 of 19 A Joint City Council/SPIN meeting will be held on December 12, beginning at 6:00 p.m. A tour of Town Hall will be included in the evening. Contact John Eaglen if you plan to attend. ,/ A City Council work session will be held on December 19 beginning at 6:00 p.m. to discuss economic development issues. City staff will began the move to Town Hall December 20. City Hall xvill be closed from December 20 until December 26. Town Hall will also be closed on January 1 for New Year's Day. Mayor Rick Stacy presented appreciation plaques to former President of the Crime Control and Prevention District Andy Wambsganss and to Pam McCain, a former member of the Crime Control and Prevention District board. He thanked them for the time they put into the initial board. Agenda Item #4-B, City Manager's Report City Manager Billy Campbell introduced Southlake's new Senior Civil Engineer, Mike Hutchinson, who xvas formerly with the City of Bedford. The City Manager announced that a Director's Retreat was planned for December 11 and that all directors would be away from their offices that day. Directors can be reached in case of an emergency. Topics for discussion at the Retreat include the teen building, vehicle replacement plan, budget preparation and internal development, capital pro.jects and Town Hall planning. Tarrant County is a member of the Gateway Urban Forestry Council, which includes 17 counties. They elected Keith Martin as President of that Council for the year 2001. "We feel very fortunate to have Keith on our staff;" commented the Mayor. Councilmember Keith Shankland reported that Interim Director of Public Safety Ricky Black was currently in San Diego, California, and was president of a Fire Fighters Organization. Shankland said he was proud of Ricky Black's accomplishments and stated the city was fortunate to have staff that is recognized around the country. Agenda Item #4-C, SPIN Report The SPIN report was given by Roger Hutton, 1900 Shady Oaks Drive, Southlake. Mr. Hutton is representative of SPIN #I 1. During the report, Mr. Hutton stated a meeting was held on October 30 regarding drainage issues in Mission Hills Addition. On December 6, SPIN #9e and #gw will meet regarding the proposed retail near the Southlake Senior Center. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 4 of 19 Agenda Item #4-D, Library Board Report No report was given this evening. Agenda Item #5, Consent Agenda Mayor Rick Stacy informed the audience that "consent" agenda items, which consist of several items, are considered by one vote. He said if anyone had a request for an item not to be considered during the consent agenda segment, that item would be deleted from that portion of the agenda and considered separately. The consent agenda items were as follo~vs: 5-A. Approval of minutes of the Regular City Council meeting held November 7, 2000. 5-B. Award of bid to Libra Tech Corporation for library furnishings. Resolution No. 00-I07, Supporting the introduction and passage of legislation which modifies the requirement for authorizing the holding of a citywide local option election to allow a city located in more than one county the ability to hold a local option election. 5-D. Renew contract with TruGreen LandCare, Inc. for mowing the city parks and facilities. 5-E. Renew contract with Avanti Landscaping for mowing of city and State right-of- ways. Award of bid by section to the Alexander Christian Corporation and Worth Business Forms for printing services for new Town Hall stationary and office supplies. 5-G. This item intentionally left blank. 5-H. Award of bid to Harley-Davidson of Dallas for a twelve-month lease on seven Harley-Davidson police motorcycles. Authorize the Mayor to execute a residential developer agreement for Worthing Addition. Resolution No. 00-112, Authorizing the acquisition of right-of-way for the reconstruction of South Kimball Avenue, from FM 1709 to Crooked Lane. 5-K. Ordinance No. ,,d - . 762, 2 Reading, Amending the Code of Ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, by adopting the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code, Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 5 of 19 Volumes 1 and 2; repealing Ordinance No. 572. Table to January 2, 2001 meeting, continuing the public hearing. ZA 00-114, Plat Revision of proposed Lots 2R1 & 2R2, Block 5, Cornerstone Business Park, on property described as Lot 2, Block 5, Cornerstone Business Park, being 2.7804 acres. Resolution No. 00-110, Appointing one member to serve on the Board of Directors tbr the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number One, of the City of Southlake. 10-A. Authorize the Mayor to enter into an interlocal agreement with the cities of Southlake, Colleyville, Grapevine and CISD for Teen Court. 10-C. Request for a modification to Conditional Sign Permit for Gateway Plaza Development, pursuant to Sign Ordinance No. 704-A. 10-D. Award of bid for janitorial services. Motion was made to approve the consent agenda consisting of Items #5-A through #5-M; agenda Item #5-M, naming Rob Glover to the TIF Board; approving agenda Item #I0-A, #10-B, and #10-D; table agenda Item #5-K to the January 2, City Council meeting, continuing the public hearing to that date. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: DuPre Standerfer DuPre, Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, and Stacy None 7-0 vote ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 5-A. ~4pproval of the minutes of the Regular City Council meeting held November 7, 2000. The minutes were approved as presented. Award of bid to Libra Tech Corporation for library furnishings. The Library Board and city staff have worked with the architectural firm of Hidell and Associates over the last nine months to determine the scope and specifications tbr the library fl~rnishings. Items reviewed included library shelving, tables, chairs, study carrels, computer stations, circulation desks for the main area, reference, and children's areas. Based on the information derived from the process, library furnishings specifications were developed, advertised, and opened per State bidding procedures on October 3I, 2000. Two bids were received, however, Library Design Systems of Houston, was disqualified from bidding for failure to submit a complete bid. As a result, Libra Tech Corporation, which was the loxv bidder, submitted a total furnishings bid of $168,30I .84. Funding in the amount of $1,139,000 was currently available in the TIF for library related items with Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 6 of 19 $161,500 ear-marked for furnishings, $172,000 for automation, and $805,500 for resource materials. It was recommended that the difference ($6,802) between the proposed budget ($161,500) and the low bid be absorbed within the existing library funding allocated in the TIF. Resolution No. 00-107, Supporting the introduction and passage c?f legis'lation which modifies the requirement fi)r authorizing the holding (4f a citywide local option election to allow a city located in more than one county the ability to hold a local option election. Basically, the situation is such that Texas cities that are wholly within a single county have the right to hold a Local Option Election (LOE) and cities that are within multiple counties cannot hold such an election. This resolution supports an initiative to change the law. Renew contract with TruGreen LandCare, Inc. for mowing of city parka' and facilities. The 2000 contract for city parks and facilities with TruGreen LandCare expired on October 31, 2000. The approved contract provided for two (2) twelve- month renewals. These renewals allow for factoring inflation and the inclusion of additional property, but the total percentage increase must not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the original contract amount. Council authorized the Mayor to extend the contract for annual city-owned parks and facility mowing services with TruGreen LandCare in the amount of $69,352.57. Renew contract with Avanti Landscape for mowing of city and State right-of ways. The 2000 contract for city and State right-of-way mowing with Avanti Landscape Management expired on November 30, 2000. The approved contract provided for two (2) twelve-month renewals. These renewals allow for factoring inflation and the inclusion of additional properties, but the total percentage increase must not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the original contract amount. Council authorized renewal of the contract with Avanti Landscape Management for $32,493.75. Award of bid by section to the Alexander Christian Corporation and Worth Business Forms fi~r printing services for new Town Hall stationery and r?J'fice supplies. Council authorized the award of bid by sections to Alexander Christian Corporation for Section A, Section E and Section F and to Worth Business Forms for Section B, Section C and Section D of the Semi-Annual Contract tbr Printing Services. This item intentionally left blank. Award (~f bid to Harley-Davidson of Dallas for a twelve-month lease on seven Harley-Davidson police motorcycles. Harley-Davidson of Dallas was the only bidder because of the inclusion of maintenance in the agreement. This lease agreement provides a fee of $299 per month per motorcycle for a total of $25,116 for the year. Funds were budgeted for this expense. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 7 of 19 10-A. Authorize the Mayor to execute a residential developer agreement for Worthing Addition. The final plat for the Worthing Addition, located on Rainbow Drive adjacent to Cambridge Place Addition, was approved on October 19, 2000. The addition consists of nine residential lots on a cul-de-sac off Rainbow Drive. The developer agreement is a standard city developer agreement and covers the construction of public streefs, drainage, water and sanitary sewer. The Park Board recommended a park fee of $1,500 per lot in accordance with the ordinance. Since the addition has been changed from 10 lots to 9 lots, a total park dedication fee of $13,500 is required. Resolution No. 00-112, Authorizing the acquisition of right-oJ:way ,[br the reconstruction of South Kimball Avenue, from FM 1709 to Crooked Lane. The engineering design cost for the reconstruction of South Kimball Avenue from FM 1709 to Crooked Lane was included in the 99-00 Capital Improvements Program (CIP). The construction cost was included in the 00-01CIP. The engineering design has progressed to the point of identifying the necessary right of way acquisitions along South Kimball Avenue. Council authorization is necessary to initiate the acquisition of this right-of-way. The total cost of the acquisitio~ of right of way for South Kimball Avenue from FM 1709 to Crooked Lane was estimated to be $650,000. Ordinance No. 762, 2'~ Reading, Amending the Code of Ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, by adopting the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code, l/olumes ] and 2; repealing Ordinance No. 572. This item was tabled to the January 2,2001 City Council meeting, continuing the public hearing at that time. ZA 00-114, Plat Revision of proposed Lots 2RI and 2R2, Cornerstone Business Park, on property described as Lot 2, Block 5, Cornerstone Business Park, being 2. 7804 acres. Cornerstone Business Park is located at the end of Silicon Court cul-de-sac. The primary purpose of this request was to divide the lot for conveyance of the proposed north lot. The current zoning on this property is "O- 1" Office District. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this action on November 9, 2000, (4-0 vote) subject to the Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated November 3, 2000. Resolution No. 00-110, Appointing one member to serve on the Board of Directors fi2r the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number One of the City ef Southlake, Texas. City Council appointed Rob Olover to serve on the TIRZ board as a representative of the CISD. Authorize the Mayor to enter into an interlocal agreement with the cities (4f Southlake, Colleyville, Grapevine, and CISD for Teen Court. The 1999-00 interlocal agreement outlines the Metroport Teen Court Program. This agreement also outlines the development of the Metroport Teen Court Advisory Board, the Metroport Teen Court Budget Advisory Committee, and the roles aud responsibilities of each of their members. This accord also authorizes the City of Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 8 of 19 Southlake to employ a full-time Teen Court Coordinator, provide office space for him/her and collect revenues from the other participating cities and school districts in order to maintain the program. The city's participation in the cost of the Teen Court is $28,958. Each entity pays $14,479. Southlake is being asked to fund the portion that GCISD did not fund in addition to their $14,479. 10-C. Request for a modification to Conditional Sign Permit for Gateway Plaza Development, pursuant to the Sign Ordinance No. 704-,4. Mr. Terry Wilkinson of Wyndham Properties applied for a modification to the Conditional Sign Permit in order to establish a special sign criteria for temporary development signs at Gateway Plaza Development. The developer requested to erect two 6'X10' signs, one each on Southlake Boulevard and Highway 114, for four months. He also requested similar signs for a maximum of six months when they open Phase 1I of the development. For comparison purposes, Town Square was allowed t~vo oversized development signs for a year and the time has been extended twice tbr an additional year. 10-D. ,4 ward of bid for janitorial services. Council approved Option #3, awarding a city contract for janitorial services for Town Hall in the amount of $69,369. A copy of the information provided is attached to the minutes of this meeting. Agenda Item #6, Public Forum No comments were made during the public forum. Agenda Item #7-A, Ordinance No. 794, 2na Reading, Abandonment and Quitclaim of Tract A, Woodland Heights Addition Interim Director of Public Works Charlie Thomas presented Ordinance No. 794, 2no Reading, stating the Woodland Heights subdivision platted in 1982 and at that time the developer platted a tract of land, shown as Tract A on the plat, and conveyed the land to the City. Tract A was located between Lots 9 & 10, Block 1 and was 35 feet wide. The tract of land was planned to be used for access to the land immediately west of the Woodland Heights subdivision owned by Theron Ragan. The City was negotiating with Mr. Ragan to purchase a portion of his property to use for a site to construct an elevated water storage tank. Once houses began to be built and residents began to live in the Woodland Heights subdivision, opposition to the elevated water storage tank ensued. Thereafter, plans to construct the elevated water storage tank on the Ragan tract were abandoned. Eventually, the elevated water storage tank was constructed where it currently exists in the Miron Business Park. Tract A is no longer of any use to the City and would be better served if it was abandoned and quitclaimed to the adjoining landowner. Ms. Donna Halley, the owner of Lot 10 that adjoins Tract A has mowed and maintained Tract A for twelve years. Therefore, staff recommends quitclaiming Tract A to her. Ms. Halley has agreed to accept the land if the City quitclaims it to her. PUBLIC HEARING: No comments were made during the public hearing. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 9 of 19 Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 794, 2"d Reading, abandonment and quitclaim of Tract A, Woodland Heights Addition. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: Kendall Fawks Kendall, Fawks, Shankland, DuPre, Standerfer, Potter, and Stacy None 7-0 vote Agenda Item #7-B, Ordinance No. 795, 2nd Reading, An Ordinance Authorizing Issuance of Tax & (Limited Pledge) Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2000- C The approved FY 2000-01 Capital Improvement Project budget consists of street and drainage improvements totaling $4,417,169. Approval of this ordinance will provide the funding tbr the projects. The certificates are issued by adoption of an ordinance. The City is issuing certificates of obligation for capital improvement projects because the projects are more than the City can fund in one year from the current revenues or other sources of funds, The proceeds from the bonds will be used for street and drainage improvements. PUBLIC HEARING: No comments were made during the public hearing. Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 795, 2nd Reading. Motion: Kendall Second: Fawks Ayes: Kendall, Fawks, Shankland, DuPre, Standerfer, Potter, and Stacy Nays: None Approved: 7-0 vote Agenda Item #7-C, Ordinance No. 796, 2"a Reading, An Ordinance Authorizing the Issuance of Tax & WW & SS Surplus Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2000-D On October 17, 2000, the Council approved the FY 2000-01 Capital Improvements Project Budget consisting of water and sewer capital improvement projects totaling $7,934,586. The City is issuing certificates of obligation for capital improvement projects because the projects are more than the City can fund in one year from the current revenues or other sources of funds. The proceeds from the bonds will be used for water and sewer capital improvement projects. PUBLIC HEARING: No comments were made during the public hearing. Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 796, 2"d Reading. Motion: Kendall Second: DuPre Ayes: Kendall, DuPre, Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, Shankland, and Stacy Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 10 of 19 Nays: None Approved: 7-0 vote Agenda Item #7-D, Ordinance No. 797, 2na Reading, An Ordinance authorizing the issuance of Tax and Tax Increment Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2000- E (TIRZ#1) Ordinance No. 797, 2'~d Reading, Authorizing the issuance of Tax & Tax Increment Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2000-E (TIRZ#1). The certificates of obligation will be issued with a dedicated pledge of accumulated tax increment reinvestment zone revenues, and a backup pledge of the City's property tax. The reinvestment zone was created effective January 1, 1997, meaning that date i~-the baseline for the values within the zone. City, county, hospital district, community college and Carroll School District property taxes collected on the increment values after that date are dedicated to the zone, and will be used to fund the Town Hall and other infrastructure improvements within the zone. The amount is $3,500,000. PUBLIC HEARING: No comments were made during the public hearing. Motion xvas made to approve Ordinance No. 797, 2nd Reading. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: Kendall Shankland Kendall, Shankland, DuPre, Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, and Stacy None 7-0 vote Agenda Item #7-E, ZA 00-109, Site Plan for Burger King on North Kimball Avenue ZA 00-109, Site Plan for Burger King, on property described as Lot 3, Block 1, Kimball/I709 Addition, being 1.1135 acres. Senior Planner Ken Baker presented this case, noting the property is on a 1.114 acre site, located on the east side of North Kimball Avenue, between FM 1709 and SH 114. It is directly in front of Lowe's development, currently under construction. There are some trees located on this site, but it appears that none will be preserved due to their location within the building's footprint, driveways, and parking areas. KFC/Taco Bell/Pizza Hut is located south of the site and McDonald's is to the north. The land use category for this property is Retail Commercial and the Zoning is "C-3" General Commercial District. On November 9, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved this case (4-0 vote); subject to the Site Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated November 3, 2000, and subject to the following: · To allow the variance to Item #1 to allow a portion of the northeast bufferyard to be 3' insteadof5'; · To allow the variances to Item #2 (100' stacking depth) and #3 (pitched roof). Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 11 of 19 Mark Wainscotl, Wainscott & Associates, 5355 Landscale, Fort Worth, Texas. Mr. Wainscott was present to answer questions from Council regarding signage on the building. PUBLIC HEARING: No comments were made during the public hearing. Councilmember Gary Fawks asked for a timetable on construction. Mr. Wainscott stated if approved tonight, they would begin construction the first week in January with an 80- day construction window. Councilmember Greg Standerfer asked if the wing-wall was constructed for the location of the sign? Mr. Wainscott replied, it is a new image and new logo for Burger King. Motion was made to approve ZA 00-109, subject to the Site Plan Review Summary #3 dated November 3, 2000; and following the recommendation made by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: Kendall Standerfer Kendall, Standerfer, DuPre, Shankland, and Stacy Fawks, Potter 5-2 vote Agenda Item #7-F, Resolution No. 00-106, (ZA 00-116), SUP for horse-drawn carriage service within Town Square Resolution No. 00-106, (ZA 00-116), Specific Use Permit for the operation of a horse- drawn carriage service within Southlake Town Square. Senior Planner Ken Baker presented Resolution No. 00-106, noting the applicant was Classic Carriages. The location for this use is the northeast corner of the intersection of East Southlake Boulevard and North Carroll Avenue. The carriage rides would remain entirely within Southlake Town Square and would not be conducted on FM 1709 or North Carroll Avenue. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this SUP on November 9, 2000, 4-0 vote). PUBLIC HEARING: No comments were made during the public hearing. Motion was made to approve Resolution No. 00-106, (ZA 00-116), SUP for operation of a horse-drawn carriage service, incorporating in the Resolution that all waste by-product is properly cleaned up for the dates shown in the resolution. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: DuPre Standerfer DuPre, Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, and Stacy None 7-0 vote Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 12 of 19 Agenda Item #7-G, ZA 00-110, Site Plan for Lot 3, Block B, North Davis Business Park ZA 00-110, Site Plan for Lot 3, Block B, North Davis Business Park, being 1.0 acre is located on the northwest comer of the intersection of Greenwood Drive and Greenbriar Drive. Current Zoning is "I-1" Light Industrial District. Owner/Applicant is SLJ Exchange. Senior Planner Ken Baker presented this case noting three (3) variances were requested. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this case on November 9, 2000 (4-0 vote) subject to the Site Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated November 3, 2000; and subject to the following: · To allow the variance to Item #1 (driveway spacing); · To allow the variance to Item #2.a (synthetic product); · To allow the variance to Item #2.b (articulation). ,]ohn Daugherty, applicant, 3026 Columbine, Grapevine. Mr. Daugherty was present to answer questions from Council. PUBLIC HEARING: No comments were made during the public hearing. Motion was made to approve ZA 00-110, Subject to the Site Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated November 3, 2000; incorporating the variances approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: DuPre Standerfer DuPre, Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, and Stacy None 7-0 vote Agenda Item #8-A, Ordinance No. 480-351, 1st Reading (ZA 00-084), Rezoning and Concept Plan for Emerald Estates South Ordinance No. 480-351, 1st Reading, (ZA 00-084), Rezoning and Concept Plan for Emerald Estates South, on property described as Lot 2, Block 1, Emerald Estates South. Current Zoning is "AG" Agricultural District with a requested zoning of "SF-20A" Single Family Residential District. Senior Planner Ken Baker presented this case noting the developer asked that the zoning be changed from "SF 20-A" Single Family Residential District to "SF 30" Single Family Residential District. lie stated on November 9, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved (4-0 vote) subject to the Concept Plan Review Summary No. 4, dated November 3, 2000; and subject to the following: · To allow the change to "SF-30" zoning; Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 13 of 19 · To allow the variance to R.O.W. on East Dove Street providing 6' pedestrian access easement; · To allow the variance to the 100' lot width requirement with the minimum being 75'; · To accept the applicant's commitment to work with the surrounding residents on drainage and to maintain as many trees as possible and to insure that the canopy remains on Dove Street. Art I~ Clayton, Allegheny Land Company, 3929 Lake Drive, Southlake. Mr. Clayton stated the discussions at the Planning and Zoning Commission were related to the trees. They proposed moving the sewer line to the back of the property to save the trees. He proposed the area for a trail as being north of the tree line on the property. Comments were made regarding the trees on the property. Mr. Clayton stated the initial discussions with the City were to put the sewer line directly under the tree canopy along Dove Street, and that would have wiped out every one of the trees. Keith Martin's Tree Preservation Analysis indicates the more substantial trees are on the front of the property and the quality trees are on the front of the property. Mr. Clayton commented on the two existing easements on the property. He stated they liked this property because of the trees and is very sensitive to protect the trees. Councilmember Patsy DuPre stated, "If at some point we have to widen Dove Road, those trees will have to be torn down. Because, as Mr. Clayton stated, they are in the right-of-way -- what I would like to know is -- what can we get you to do to explain that to everybody who purchases this property?" Mr. Clayton stated, "First of all, it would be shown on the plat which will come to you. I would hope that we would do everything in our power to protect that tree canopy." Mr. Clayton agreed to add this issue to the deed restrictions stating, "In the building process, we will provide a survey for the property, and there will be a tree survey, so that individuals will be xvell aware of what is going on." Councilmember Rex Potter asked Bruce Payne if there was anything the city was giving up by approving this plan? Mr. Payne responded by stating, "The right-of-way on the north side of the street was dedicated in 1984, and then the ordinance change said 94' for the trail purposes. Like you said, he is trying to provide the trail with the easement behind those trees for the least amount of damage." A discussion was held regarding the number of lots to be located on Dove Road, with another issue being the large power poles on the property. Councilmember Keith Shankland expressed concerns with the residents coming out of the property onto a five-lane road (Dove Road) when it is widened several years down the road. Mayor Stacy commented that he doubted Dove Road would be widened in our lifetime. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 14 of 19 Councilmember Gary Fawks stated, "This is an unusual shaped piece of property and 1 don't think it falls back on us to make every square foot of it developable. I don't like the lots along Dove. I don't like the driveways and how shallow they are." Fawks commented on the 35' - 25' set back requirements, and continued, "It is too shoe horned ioto that small piece of property at the lot. That is why they can't get the footprints on. It is because of the too many narrow things. I'm not going to support it tonight because I don't see this plan fitting into that area. They are trying too hard to get too much on that property." A discussion was held regarding the number of lots on the cul-de-sac and too many lots being proposed. Motion was made to approve ZA 00-084, subject to the Concept Plan Review Summary No. 5, dated December 1, 2000; providing for a minimum lot width measured at the building set-back line of 100' for Lots 4 and 6; leaving the building set-back side yards at 35' for lots 3 and 7; providing a single access from Dove Road for Lots 9-12; and allowing a drive for Lot 13 off of Dove Road; noticing in the deed restrictions (or covenants) for the property to the residents that there is a right-of-way along Dove Road of whatever width back from the edge of the roadway so that they will know where their property actually comes; and adding a variance to the right-of-way dedication as requested in lieu of a public easement for sidewalks as proposed by the applicant. Understanding that the developer is going to have a meeting with the property owners to the rear, explaining the action taken by the City Council tonight in requiring a single access off of Dove for Lots 9-12. Motion: Standerfer Second: Potter Councilmember Rormie Kendall commented that she did not get this agenda item information in her packet and she wanted more time to review the issues. She would vote on this item tonight, but is not committing herself for a favorable vote at second reading. Councilmember Rex Potter stated he would vote for this issue tonight, but does not xvant to commit to a favorable vote at the second reading as he too feels he needs to study the issues more. Ayes: Nays: Approved: Standerfer, Potter, Kendall, DuPre, and Stacy Fawks, Shankland 5-2 vote All councilmembers expressed that they did not want to give the impression that they would support this item on the second reading, but wanted to give the developer the opportunity to go forward with the suggestions made tonight and bring it back to Council. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 15 of 19 Agenda Item #8-B, Ordinance No. 480-352, 1st Reading (ZA 00-111), Rezoning on Tracts 3 and 3F and portion of Tract 4C, Rees D. Price Survey Ordinance No. 480-352, 1~ Reading, (ZA 00-111), Rezoning on property described as Tracts 3 & 3F and a portion of Tract 4C, situated in the Rees D. Price Survey, Abstract No. 1207, and being 30.138 acres. Current zoning is "AG" Agricultural District and 2" Generalized Site Plan District for tropical fish distribution and related ancillary uses. Requested zoning is "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District. Senior Planner Ken Baker presented ZA 00-1 I1, noting that the owners of the property are Four Peaks Development and Lions Club of Dallas (Park Cities). The applicant is Four Peaks Development. The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at their November 9, 2000 meeting and it was approved (4-0 vote). David McMahan, 1335 Hidden Glen, Southlake. Developers Four Peaks Development and ~Varren Clark Development. Councilmember Rex Potter asked Mr. McMahan about including an avigation easement in the deed restrictions. Councilmembers Rex Potter and Greg Standerfer referenced a letter received from Sandra J. Lancaster, Senior. Noise Compatibility Planner with DFW Airport, Public Affairs Noise Office, dated December 5, 2000. The letter stated, "Given the facts noted above, the DFW Airport Board urges the City of Southlake to assist the airport in reducing future noise problems by not approving the proposed zoning change. However, should the City of Southlake consider the approval of the proposed project, we strongly rccommend the following be applied as conditions of approval: 1) an avigation easement lbr the property be obtained naming the DFW International Airport Board and the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth using language to be provided by DFW; 2) The City require mandatory building shell noise reduction of 25 dB Noise Level Reduction be incorporated into the building design, noted on the final building plans, and verified during the building inspection process in accordance with Ordinance No. 479. Motion was made to approve ZA 00-11 l; subject to the requirement of the disclosure statement to the homeowners of the existence of the requirements as noted above in the letter from DFW Airport Board regarding the avigation easement and mandatory building shell noise reduction being enl:brced with the final building plans and verified during the building inspection process in accordance with Ordinance No. 479. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: Standerfer Potter Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, DuPre, and Stacy None 7-0 vote Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 16 of 19 Agenda Item #8-C, ZA 00-112, Preliminary Plat for Wingate Hill ZA 00-112, Preliminary Plat for Wingate Hill (advertised as Wyndsor Hill and Whitehall Addition), on property described as Tracts 3, 3F, and 4C, situated in the Rees D. Price Survey, Abstract No. 1207, and being approximately 44.0 acres. Senior Planner Ken Baker presented ZA 00-112, noting this item was considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 9, 2000; and was approved (4-0 vote); subject to the Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated November 3, 2000; and subject to the following: · To allow the variance to Item #1 (another point of access); · To allow the variance to Item #2 (building setback lines); · And noting that the plat does not show the 25' building setback lines on Lot 4, Block 3, and Lot 17, Block 1. Mr. Baker stated the applicant is requested the following variances: Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, Section 5.01C & 5.031, recommends two points of access to the property. Applicant requests approval as proposed. Variance to allow reduction in building setbacks along the side street of comer lots under provisions of Ordinance No. 480, Section 4, Pages 4-22, drawing No. 4 which permits approval of a reduction down to the district side yard requirement of 20'. David McMahan, 1335 Hidden Glen, Southlake. Mr. McMahan commented about the Corp of Engineer property, noting the camp would still be operational. McMahan explained, "One of the reasons they wanted to sell this property is that they are running out of money and end up in the hole each year. They want to retain the camp for future use." He stated he disagrees xvith the interpretation of the staff on the setbacks in the ordinances. He noted that one of the reasons they do not want a second entrance is the large power lines at the point of entrance to the addition. Mr. McMahan felt it would take away from the subdivision by having the entrance under the power lines. He moved the entrance as far to the south as possible under the conditions as noted. Motion was made to approve ZA 00-112, subject to the Plat Review Summary No. 3, dated December 1,2000; granting the requested variances to the 25' setbacks on Lots 1 & 4, Block 3, and Lot 17, Block 1; showing a single access to the addition. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: Standerfer Potter Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, DuPre, and Stacy None 7-0 vote Agenda Item #10-B, This item left intentionally blank Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 17 of 19 Agenda Item #1 l-A, Discussion: Public Art Policy Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman stated staff was bringing this item to council tonight as a discussion item to receive input. Mr. Hugman said that about one year ago staff started working with other cities regarding their standards or policies for public art. He noted that Chris Carpenter would present a proposed policy regarding Public Art in Southlake. Chris Carpenter commented a draft policy for public art display was included in each councilmember's packets to review and make suggestions and also to see what other cities have been doing in regard to this issue. The information was gathered over a period of about seven years. Mr. Carpenter said he needed a decision from Council tonight on whether or not to go proceed with a policy on public art. Mr. Carpenter suggested Council consider having a committee work on the policy with Councilmembers serving on the committee. Points from the draft policy were reviewed. Councilmember Keith Shankland stated his only concern was that Council is responsible for approving expenditures for and approving art, and is not an art council. He stated he did not want to be locked into a situation where the city receives grants from universities or the State and that they have the authority for approval of the art and where it will be placed within the city. The approval must stay with the city council. Shankland said, "What I don't want is pornography disguised as art." Shankland said he wants the authority over accepting the art and expending the funds for art to stay with the City Council and not an art council making those decisions. Councilmember Ronnie Kendall stated, "I think you need a well balanced committee -- not just artists -- but very well balanced from all xvalks of life from the committee." Councilmember Patsy DuPre encouraged Council to go forward with a public art policy. She commented on an editorial she took from a newspaper regarding public art. Councilmembers commended Chris Carpenter for his work on this project and asked that staff go forward with development of a Public Art Policy. Agenda Item #2-A, Executive Session ,~[ayor Rick Stacy advised that Council would return to Executive Session pursuant to the Texas Government Code, Section 551. 074, to deliberate regarding personneI matters. Council adjourned into executive session at 9:35 p.m. Council returned to open session at 12:20 a.m. Agenda Item #2-B, Action Necessary/Executive Session Motion was made to amend the City Secretary's employment agreement to reflect a revised annual base salary of $60,000 and a new term to expire on December 31,200I. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 18 of 19 Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: Fawks Kendall Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, DuPre, Standerfer, Potter, and Stacy None 7-0 vote Motion was made to approve the amendment of the employment agreement with the City Manager to reflect the following changes: extending the employment agreement to December 31, 2002; amending the salary to $120,000 annually; amending the severance package to read "six (6) months notice in advance"; and amending the term of allowance for insurance allowance to a cap of $500 per month. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: Fawks Standerfer Fawks, Standerfer, Potter, Kendall, Shankland, DuPre, and Stacy None 7-0 vote _Agenda Item #12, Adjournment Mayor Rick ,~IO~Y, adjourned the Regular City Council meetin at 12:25 .,,,' ,.,~ sou~':,,~ . ...';.~ ~.; ......... .?~,...~ .--" %" ~t :- [ ~ }--q ~. Mav~r Rick Stac'Va-~' ', . ......... S~andra L. LeGrand City Secretary Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2000 Page 19 of 19 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM August 11, 2000 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Chris Carpenter, Senior Parks Planner (ext. 866) SUBJECT: Discussion of possible development of a Public Art Policy Action Requested: City Council initial thoughts on having a Public Art Policy in place to guide any future decisions related to this issue. Background Information: Historically, the City of Southlake has had only relatively informal dealings with the issue of art and the public. As the city matures, there will certainly be instances where the city will be called upon to officially review, commission, accept, erect, maintain, etc., items of public art. The city may one day even wish to structure a funding mechanism for public art. As well as artwork itself, the city may also seek to develop widespread artistic elements through the construction of infrastructure and public places. Through research, it is has been found that a structured public art policy best administers what is a very subjective process. Financial Considerations: Will be discussed as part of presentation. Briefly, no dedicated funding exists for public art. The examples of funding for public art mentioned in the three - page report and detailed in the sample policy are simply methods that have been used in other cities. Citizen Input/ Board Review: Some of the basic principles of a public art policy have been discussed with various members of the Entry Portal Work Group and others, though no group has reviewed this draft. Legal Review: A copy of this draft policy has been forwarded to the City Attorneys in their Council packet. Alternatives: Alternatives include the following: • Status quo — no formal public art policy; address any future issues when they arise • Advise staff to proceed with public art policy research, hold meetings with interested parties, and return to Council with that input Supporting Documents: Supporting documents include the following items: • Report entitled "Public Art Policy — A Study on Policy, Practice and Funding" 11A-- l Billy Campbell, City Manager December 1, 2000 Page 2 • Appendix A — Text of draft Public Art Policy • Appendix B — Section 372, Local Government Code — Improvement Districts • Appendix C — Public Art Policies of Other Cities Staff Recommendation: Staff would appreciate Council's opinions on this topic and will proceed accordingly. We would like to note that there is no immediate issue pressing this discussion and staff has ample opportunity to edit any proposed policy and gather citizen input in the process. It is also key to note that, though funding measures are included as examples, no funding mechanism is expressly proposed, and any funding issues would be developed over the course of more detailed discussions. Please place this on the Regular City Council Meeting agenda for December 5, 2000, as a discussion item. I may be reached at Ext. 866 or by e -mail at ccaipenter(2i ci.southlake.tx.us with any questions. CLC DRAFT m: v.` "R; o :Du F<PC E ,e ONLY Public Art A Study on Policy, Practice and Funding Prepared by Department of Community Services Parks and Recreation Division Introduction and Purpose Public art exists in many levels throughout many municipalities across the country. To what level it exists is a policy decision usually made through local initiatives, though in some states such as Massachusetts and Ohio it has its origins in statewide planning and funding. The following is a summary of the issues surrounding the creation of a municipal public art presence in Southlake as represented by experiences of other communities. It is the purpose of this report to promote the benefits of public art, outline all or most of the issues related to administration, review, and financing such endeavors, and to form an outline for drafting local public art master planning policies. The Potential Role of Public Art in Southlake Few would argue the significance of beautiful, unique and inspiring works of art adorning public places. At a minimum, other cities have found that public art has served to: (a) advance the understanding of visual art in the community (b) enhance the aesthetic quality of public places and thereby enhance their use (c) provide wayfinding and directional bearings for the community and visitors (d) provide a level of prestige and accomplishment to public projects and the city as a whole (e) provide a sense of community and ownership of public projects (f) provide special commemoration of persons, places or events in local history, and (g) offer a common, aesthetically based objective to guide the developer, architect, engineer, artist, and local citizen Essential Elements of Public Art Policy In establishing a policy on public art, several administrative areas must be considered: (a) the involvement of the community in an overall public art master plan which addresses local needs, concerns, objectives and goals; (b) the development of an enabling legislation, ordinance, or specific policy which provides local authority to carry out the policies of the public art master plan; (c) the creation of a public art advisory committee (or similarly titled body) to administer the ordinance and interpret the policies; this body may also be supplemented by ad hoc groups or neighborhood committees to assist with certain issues; (d) the development of systematic, yet flexible, art review and selection procedures to guide the decision - making of the public art board; . 1 w 7 DRAFT €. . s ._... iw ' l ! , , r u! 3 g r . ..1 Ni VV (( �. t . r o-� .. = .,,F 1 �x 1� t� -.d, .. wP .« y.. V� � ( � a I (e) a policy, or ordinance inclusion, that addresses the issue of donated or loaned artwork and the city's rights and obligations concerning these types of works; (f) provision of a systematic means of funding public art and establishing funding budgets and priorities; (g) provision of a maintenance and replacement policy for public art; and (h) the inclusion of a timely review of the public art master plan, as with all other master plans in this community. The elements described above will be addressed in the individual sections to follow. The recommended language in these sections is a combination of various examples from other cities and staff's inclusions. A. Public Art Master Plan — This plan would be proposed as a master planning element of the city similar in purpose and intent to the currently adopted master plan elements such as the Land Use Plan and the Trail System Master Plan, etc. It would be developed by a citywide planning effort focusing on the assessment, need, and objectives of placing public art in Southlake. The plan would have a planning horizon of at least four years, preferably ten, and contain long -range plans for providing enhancement to public areas, including those noted in the 1995 Corridor Study as potential sites for entry portals. During the planning process, other areas for display, specific types of artwork, genres or themes of artwork, and a host of other guiding principles could be uncovered and used to develop the plan. B. Public Art Policy (or Ordinance) — Equally as important as developing a long -range plan is the adoption of a policy (or ordinance) which enables the City Council to have a set of rules for dealing with public art issues. In many jurisdictions, such as Albuquerque and Hillsborough County, Florida, an ordinance itself more or less serves as the policy or master plan (though master plans are very useful long -range planning tools). These policies and /or ordinances vary in format and content, but most, at a minimum, establish or recognize the authority of a review board, establish permanent funding sources, set up minimum acceptable criteria for review, develop minimum acceptable implementation measures, and provide specific rights and remedies by the city, if any. A sample policy /ordinance developed by staff is located in Appendix A and includes all of these measures. C. Public Art Advisory Committee (PAAC) — Within most, if not all, public art ordinances is a provision for a committee charged with making recommendations, at a minimum, for the requisitioning of any public art in the jurisdiction. In the attached draft policy, staff provides a suggestion for the composition and duties of this board. In summary, the board should consist of at least two City Council members if the funding authority finally rests with Council, and the PAAC should have the authority to delegate any of it's advisory capacity to local ad hoc groups which may be sensitive to a local issue. D. Review and Selection Procedures — The main purpose of the policy and /or ordinance is to provide potential artists and interested parties a fairly concise set of guidelines for the requisition of artwork from start to finish. Artwork, though a very subjective item, should be more or less provided with minimum standard criteria in a policy or ordinance to prevent arbitrary rulings of the PAAC to the greatest extent possible. ► - --4 R ; ."` REVIEW y J 1 s J i P 3,,. S ONLY �,..r(i1"�. (1211100)— , �� a., i'i E �_.. '„ �;...sa J s .. >t ..Fi3 �.:• . E. Donated or Loaned Artwork — An element of any policy should be for the orderly and consistent acceptance and rejection procedures for artwork the City did not commission. The City of Austin has had good recent experience with this issue, and staff has consolidated their ideas in the donations section of the draft policy of Appendix A. F. Funding Mechanisms — The most critical issue concerning moving forward with public art is the method by which it fits in the city's overall funding plans. Many cities do this many different ways, including simply adding it as another capital expenditure category, but most cities have gone to what is commonly known as a "Percent for Art" funding plan. In these examples, cities provide for public art by adding a percentage (usually 1% of all project budgets $200,000 or greater) to all public capital improvement projects (new construction, utilities, renovations, etc.) Using this method, rather than a regularly appropriated amount, allows artwork to "piggyback" with otherwise approved projects. Another method of financing artwork, along with other improvements such as landscaping, amenities, etc., is to create "improvement districts" as authorized by state law. These districts assess a predetermined additional property tax on specifically identified properties within the "district." This additional assessment is used to provide amenities and enhancements above and beyond regular city services within the district. The text of Section 372 of the Local Government Code is attached as Appendix B and is mentioned in the financing section, but, generally: (a) a majority of property owners (or tenants) within the district must agree to enact it; (b) the funds are managed by a board; (c) the district must only exist for a specified length of time and must be voted be re- approved. A final source of funds is state grant money provided through the Texas Commission for the Arts through the locally administered Northeast Tarrant Arts Council. These funds typically range on the mid to lower levels and are fairly competitive. All of the funding strategies mentioned above are simply included for reference purposes. G. Maintenance — Most public art policies also pre- determine what course of action to take with proper maintenance of the artwork and procedures for decommissioning, or deaccessioning, the artwork from public use should the need arise. H. Public Art Master Plan Review — If a master plan for public art is adopted, the plan should be periodically scheduled for review to reflect any changes in the preferences of the public for artwork in the city. This ensures a proper representation of the city's ongoing plans for artwork and provides opportunities for input. D ' FT " 111 < — FOR � i aU d S[S g ON q�'°, s 6 t''t il: "1z3 , �. S', i1 tt'�e`�.�_.� x t...;i tia h��a.'.r �f # .,. Appendix A Public Art Policy Purpose and Goals. A. The purpose of the Public Art Program is to support a public process for incorporating artist services and artworks in the design of civic spaces and facilities, and to define the programs, policies and guidelines for acquiring and commissioning of art of the highest standards which shall enrich the quality of life for all residents and visitors of Southlake. B. The goals of the Public Art Program are to create a better visual environment for the residents and visitors of Southlake and to integrate the design of work of artists into the development of eligible City projects, as expressed in the Public Art Plan. The Public Art Program specifically seeks to: 1. encourage the selection of artists at the beginning stages of each project who can work successfully as members of the project design team, and to encourage collaboration among all arts and building disciplines; 2. foster quality design and the creation of an array of artwork in all media, materials and disciplines that best respond to the distinctive characteristics of each project site and the community that it serves; 3. select experienced artists who can represent the cultural landscape of Southlake; 4. encourage the selection of artworks that are accessible to the public and respect the historical resources and mobility of the citizenry; 5. encourage artists, artworks and programs for open spaces, parks, and facilities that enhance the quality and pride of neighborhoods in the city; 6. encourage the participation by citizens in the process of acquiring and commissioning of public art; 7. encourage the role of public art in enhancing economic development and cultural tourism; 8. encourage the role of artists and public art in the functional design of eligible projects; and 0.-- .. )RAFT ( 12'i!C ' 4 °O �? .,V P'-.,, P . s F. 9. exhibit art in designated facilities for the enjoyment of the public and to heighten awareness and appreciation for art. II. Applicability A. This policy applies to all artworks commissioned or acquired by the City, designed by a professional visual artist, or team of artists. Such artworks may include, but are not limited to: 1. The incremental costs of infrastructure elements, such as sound - walls, utility structures, roadway elements and other items if designed by an artist or design team that included an artist co- designer. 2. Artistic or aesthetic elements of the overall architecture or landscape design if created by a professional artist or a design team that includes a professional artist. 3. Earthworks, neon, glass, mosaics, photographs, prints, calligraphy, any combination of forms of media including sound, literary elements, film, holographic images, and video systems; hybrids of any media and new genres. 4. Murals or portable paintings in any material or variety of materials. 5. Sculpture — freestanding, wall- supported or suspended; kinetic and electronic in any material or combination of materials. 6. Temporary artworks or installations, if such artworks serve the purpose of providing community and educational outreach purposes. B. This policy and the review process defined herein, do not apply to: 1. Ineligible Artworks a) Art objects that are mass - produced or of standard manufacture, such as playground equipment, fountains or statuary elements, unless incorporated into an artwork by a project artist, or reproductions, by mechanical or other means, of original artwork, except in the case of film, video, photography, printmaking or other media arts. b) Decorative, ornamental, architectural or functional elements which are designed by the building architect, as opposed to elements created by artists commissioned for that purpose. � 1 A- -1 DRAFT _. zrty; FOR rZEVIEVI PURPOSES Or L‘{ c) Landscape architecture and landscape gardening except where these elements are designed by a professional visual artist and /or are an integral part of the artwork by the artist. III. Definitions A. Artist — A practitioner in the visual arts, generally recognized by critics and peers as a professional of serious intent and recognized ability, who produces artworks. B. Artist Services — Professional services by artists to develop designs for artworks or other architectural, landscape, or urban design elements, either individually or as a member of a project design team. C. Artists Registry — A regional local, national, and international slide and digital collection of artists and artworks used as a resource for art, art activities, and for the public art selection process. D. Artworks — Works in a variety of media produced by professional visual artists. Works may be permanent or temporary, functional or non - functional. E. Deaccessioning — The removal, relocation, selling or trading of artworks owned by the City. F. Donations (and Gifts) — Art donated to the City from a private individual or institution and /or other outside sources. G. Loan — Artworks given to the City for its use for a period of time and to be returned to the owner after the loan period expires. H. Public Art Advisory Committee (PAAC) — An ad -hoc committee that makes recommendations to the City Council on public art and art activities. IV. Funding A. Percent for Art (example) — The City Council shall determine, after all estimates of necessary expenditures and all requests for authorizations and appropriations for City construction projects, an amount for art equal to at least one percent (1 %) of the original estimated construction cost of any eligible project. For CIP construction projects, the original estimated construction cost shall be that estimated in the CIP for the year in which such funding is approved by the City Council. For non -CIP construction projects subject to the provisions of the Policy, the original estimated construction cost shall be that amount initially authorized in the departmental budget by the City Council. 1. For those projects which are only partially funded by the city, the one percent (1 %) assessment shall be based on the city's portion of the original 1) 8 D qR,, .k (12/11C°) Fl f ea i f t � 5 f " i F , Q � C� i 'n 3 �"` FOR . 4 7_., e r 3 � x # ?....! +._ r� .-.. ONLY estimated construction cost. All city grant applications for federal, state, or county support of eligible construction projects shall include a request for funds for the purpose of the Public Art Program. Additionally, the city shall actively seek to encourage its partners in all joint public /private ventures to participate in the Program. 2. As provided in the Policy, the Public Art Advisory Committee PAAC shall make periodic reviews, at least annually, of all CIP projects and other city construction projects. This review shall occur during the CIP planning process and annual operating budget process, for the purposes of making recommendations to the City Council regarding appropriations for works of art and art projects. 3. A Public Art Fund shall be established by the city for the purposes of administering the Program. The funds contained in said account shall be used for the selection, acquisition, installation, and substantive structural repair and maintenance of art and art projects commissioned and /or purchased through the Program. These Public Art Funds shall be maintained in accord with accepted governmental accounting procedures. All appropriations to and allocations from the Public Art Fund shall occur in accord with any legal restrictions associated with the source of funds. 4. The City Council shall authorize all disbursements from the Public Art Fund. B. Improvement Districts — The city, at its discretion or by representation from others, may petition to create improvement districts as authorized under Section 372 of the Local Government Code for purposes which may include the provision of public art. The hearings, assessments, service plans, and disbursements of any improvement district shall comply with the provisions of Section 372. C. Grants — The city shall actively pursue any state grant monies for public art for which it may be eligible and shall deposit said monies into the Public Art Fund for disbursement. D. Donations or Gifts — The city shall accept donations and gifts of money for deposit in the Public Art Fund. V. Public Art Advisory Committee (PAAC) A. Creation and Composition — The City Council shall have the authority to create a Public Art Advisory Committee that is composed of seven (7) individuals. B. Purpose- The purpose of the Public Art Advisory Committee is to act as an advisory committee to provide input and advice to the city concerning all matters pertaining to public art including the incorporation of art into the design of 1 -- D DRAFT q-..,.._ � 1 , FOR «..� { �{ f-- ) PURPOSES R E F y a 1 \/\ 1 2. � u0p i R�.�. �.,i ..«E{5.,.€ selected City projects and the commissioning of art pieces for public spaces and facilities. C. Terms — M embers shall be appointed, by the City Council, for two (2) year terms, provided three (3) members shall be appointed each odd - numbered year, and four (4) members shall be appointed each even - numbered year. Members shall serve until their successors are appointed, without compensation. D. Members — Membership shall consist of two (2) members serving on the City Council, two (2) members representing the artistic community of Southlake or an arts - related field, two (2) members being general citizens, and one (1) member of the Northaast Tarrant Arts Council. E. Ex- Officio Members — Non - voting advisors to the Public Art Advisory Committee may include, but is not limited to the design architect and /or engineer, or the city's project manager. VI. Responsibilities A. The Public Art Advisory Committee shall: 1. Develop, promote, and preserve aesthetic excellence in public spaces. 2. Make recommendations to the City on design, execution, placement, and maintenance of art and /or art projects 3. Make recommendations to the Department of Community Services on appropriate method(s) of artist selection, commissioning, placement, an execution of artworks related to the design of each appropriate project. 4. Make recommendations to the City Council on policy and procedures for the Public Art Program. 5. Review the Artists Registry, artists' applications and make final recommendations to the Department of Community Services on the artist(s) applying for the specific projects. 6. Review and select artists, taking into consideration the goals of the Public Art Program and the established general criteria. B. Department of Community Services Responsibilities 1. Maintain an inventory of publicly accessible spaces which are potential sites for placing artworks and /or incorporating art into the design of the projects. DRAFT 12/1/00) FOR R t / E V PURPO ONLY 2. Plan, develop and coordinate existing and future sites for the incorporation of artworks and artist services. 3. Develop and implement artwork projects at the specific sites, as designated by City Council. 4. Inform the Public Art Advisory Committee and /or City Council of any departmental activity related to the development and implementation of artwork and artist services. 5. Inform the Public Art Advisory Committee and /or City Council of planning for targeted improvement areas, which could potentially incorporate an art project. 6. Maintain all public works and art places as the responsibility and property of the City. 7. Act as a liaison between the Public Art Advisory Committee, City Departments, artists and the public. E. The Artist(s) shall: 1. Submit credentials, visuals, proposals and/or project materials as directed for consideration by the Public Art Advisory Committee. 2. Guarantee that the artwork or art concept is the result of the artist's personal creative efforts except in the case of design collaboration. 2. Insure that the art is unique and original and does not infringe upon any copyright. The artist must agree to hold the city harmless against any claims of copyright infringement. 4. Guarantee that the art or a duplicate has not been accepted for sale elsewhere and that the art is free and clear of any liens. 5. Conduct necessary research, including attending project orientations and touring project sites, when possible. 6. Design, execute, complete and transfer title of the artwork in a timely and professional manner. 7. Work closely with the project manager and /or other design professionals associated with the project. iIA - - II DRAFT ?A Fv ( 1 2 , ; 1 ; 0 0 ! _ � } S. v i civy Ld i t o i.w i.w. S,.fi ONLY 8. Submit to the Department of Community Services and the Public Art Advisory Committee any significant changes in the scope of the project, color, material, or design of the approved artwork. 9. Make public presentations, conduct community education workshops or a residency, as required by the contract with the City of Southlake. 10. Provide a maintenance plan that includes a list of materials, diagrams, names of fabricators describing processes used in fabricating the artwork, and the descriptions and drawings of installations, specifications and details of connecting methods. VII. General Criteria for Public Art Project Development A. Aesthetic Excellence — The art projects shall strive to be of the highest aesthetic and enduring value. B. Site Specific — The relationship of art and site shall be considered in terms of integration of art and architecture with landscape, social dynamics, local character and surrounding urban context. C. Durability of Design and Materials — Art projects shall be designed with consideration of minimum maintenance requirements and maximum resistance to vandalism. VIII. Selection of Artists A. General — Whenever possible, the selection process should begin at the conceptual stage of the project so the artist(s) will be able to integrate art concepts and artworks with the design of the specific projects and or sites. Early participation also allows for dialogue between the artist(s) and architect or designer to discuss the design processes and the inclusion of specifications for the artworks site preparation that are subject to zoning, design, and construction codes. The selection of artists or artworks must meet the following criteria: 1. The design capabilities of the artist(s) and the inherent quality of the artworks. 2. All media forms of visual arts may be considered, subject to any requirements set by the City Council, Public Art Advisory Committee or the Department of Community Services. 3. Artworks of all schools, styles, and tastes should be considered for the Public Art Program. 4. Artworks should be appropriate in scale, materials, form and content for the immediate, general, social and physical environments which they are related. 5. Consideration should be given to the artist's previously demonstrated ability to create works of structural and surface integrity, permanence and protection against theft, vandalism, weathering, excessive maintenance and repair costs. 7. Consideration should be given to the fact that public art is a genre that is created in a public context and that must be judged by standards that embrace factors other than the aesthetic, including public participation, social and political attitudes, and functional considerations. Public art may also serve to establish focal points, terminate areas, modify, enhance or define specific spaces, establish identity, or address specific issues of urban design. 8. The artist selection process shall ensure that the interests of all concerned parties are represented, including the public, art community and the City Departments. B. Methods of Selecting Artists. The City Council, with the recommendation of the Public Art Advisory Committee, shall determine the appropriate method of artist selection. 1. Design Team Selection — The design team for a project may directly select an artist following the criteria set forth by the Public Art Advisory Committee and the Department of Community Services. Final approval of the selected artist(s) must be given by the Public Art Advisory Committee. This method of selection is appropriate for those City projects which have been selected to have an art- enhanced design component. 2. Limited Competition — The Public Art Advisory Committee may invite a limited number of artists to submit credentials or proposals. 3. Open Competition — Any artist may submit credentials or proposals, subject to any requirements established by the Public Art Advisory Committee or the Department of Community Services. Calls for entries for open competitions shall be sufficiently detailed to permit artist to determine whether their work is appropriate to the project under consideration. 4. Direct Selection — The Public Art Advisory Committee may directly select an artist or artists. Generally, direct selection will not be employed except on those projects where an open or limited competition would be t 13 a7 t �A - FOR '^ x l '� PURPOSES t"'� � 1 DRAFT � (1 ''r I10�0) -°- FO RE- •r 3__' ON! inappropriate or impractical, such as a very urgent project timeline or very specific project requirements. C. Limited Competition Selection Process. 1. The City Manager or his /her designee shall recommend the scope of work, project criteria, budget, and develop a community profile, for review and approval of the Public Art Advisory Committee and City Council. 2. The Public Art Advisory Committee shall review the Artist Registry or other appropriate sources and select a predetermined number of finalists to be interviewed. Depending on the scope of work and timeline of the project, the selected finalists may be requested to submit their qualifications or a project proposal to the Panel. If the finalists are to submit a project proposal, finalists shall be presented with information pertaining to the selection process and the project, including a site and community profile. The project architect may set a meeting with the finalists to discuss the site and /or project. 3. The Public Art Advisory Committee shall interview the finalists and review the artists' qualifications or proposals. Qualifications may include a resume and samples of artist's past work. Proposals may include models, drawings, and a written statement. The Public Art Advisory Committee shall make its final recommendation to City Council. 4. Prior to consideration by City Council, but upon selection of finalist, the city shall request a formal proposal from the final artist(s) selected, specifying the time frame for proposal development, payment schedule, ownership and copyrights. All materials related to the proposal including model, drawings, etc will be property of the artist, but the city shall have the right to exhibit and use them for educational and promotional purposes. C. Open Competition Process — A project announcement shall be prepared and distributed to all artists in the Artist Registry as well as other venues. The Public Art Advisory Committee shall review all the applications and select a predetermined number of finalists. The limited competition process would then follow. E. Direct Commission Process — In special circumstances, the Public Art Advisory Committee may decide, by unanimous decision, on commissioning one artist to work on a project. F. Final Recommendations — The Public Art Advisory Committee has the responsibility of recommending an artist's proposal or artwork for a project to the City Council for final approval. DRAFT { 2/ s In0 , : D R _ V t .V'' Li RPOS N LY IX. Donations and Loans of Artwork Decisions of acceptance concerning donations or loans of artwork will be made by the City Council upon a recommendation of the Public Art Advisory Committee. Each instance will be reviewed separately with the City Council making the final decision. Exceptions to this review process are: A. Exhibitions or Loans of Sixty (60) Days or Less — Any artwork or exhibition of artworks to be displayed on city property for sixty (60) days or less will not be subject to the above outlined review process. Review and approval will be the responsibility of the department or agency with jurisdiction over the space involved. (See Temporary Exhibitions in City- Managed Buildings). B. Gifts of State — Gifts of State presented to the city by foreign governments (municipal, state, or national) may be accepted by the Mayor or the City Manager on behalf of the city. Appropriate placement shall be determined by the City Council upon a recommendation of the Public Art Advisory Committee. Appropriate recognition and publicity shall be the responsibility of the Public Information Officer. Provision for maintenance must be resolved when the gift is accepted. C. The City shall control the content and arrangement of all temporary exhibitions, and reserves the right to reject any part of an exhibition or to change the manner of display if the items to be exhibited are contrary to the city's standards of value and aesthetic quality. D. Book lists, posters, signs, brochures, publicity, and all materials relative to any exhibit shall be subject to review and approval by the city. E. An Exhibit Agreement shall be executed outlining the responsibilities of the exhibitor and the city. The city assumes no liability for the exhibition or loan other than specifically outlined in this agreement. G. Sale of works exhibited — The city shall in no way act as agent in connection with the sale of exhibited works not owned by the city. 1. Purchase prices shall not be posted, nor shall they be listed in exhibit brochures. 2. Inquires regarding purchase prices shall be referred to the exhibitor or his /her agent. 3. Transactions for the purchases of exhibited items shall be directly between the purchaser and the exhibitor or his /her agent. Such transactions shall not be conducted on or in the exhibit site. k. I 15— FUR 4. The city shall receive no fees, commissions or other regard from purchase of items from exhibits. 5. The city employees shall be treated as any other citizens with regard to purchase of exhibited items. 6. No exhibited item sold during the period of the exhibition may be removed before the end of the exhibition unless such removal and any necessary rearrangement is approved by the city. 7. The city may from time to time make exceptions to these policies in areas especially designated for the sale of artworks, or in the context of special events. 8. Termination of Exhibit — If the city does not receive notification regarding where an exhibit should be shipped (if a traveling exhibition), or if the exhibit is not claimed and removed within fifteen (15) days after the closing date, there shall be a charge to the exhibitor or owner of the item(s) exhibited, of a reasonable daily storage fee. This fee shall begin on the sixteenth (16 day following the close of the exhibit. If the items are not claimed within three (3) months following the closing date of the exhibit, the city may dispose of the items as it sees fit. Reasonable requests for extensions of exhibit time will be considered. 9. Responsibility of City — The city shall exercise the same care with respect to the loaned work as it does in the safekeeping of comparable property of its own. X. Deaccessioning of Artwork The City Council may consider, with the recommendation of the Public Art Advisory Committee, any of the following courses of action to deaccesion city -owned artworks: A. Relocate artwork. B. Sell or trade artwork (secure professional appraisal and advertise sale; seek competitive bids; dispose of work via surplus property procedures). C. Remove work from display and store. D. If no other alternative is evident, remove and permanently dispose of artwork.. Disposal could include return to the artist, or donation to charity or other local government entity. 11 --t DRAFT 3 0 i.' 9,0 ') -- FOR i L 't i _.+ .P .'?.._S ONLY Y E. Artists whose work is under consideration for deaccessioning shall be notified by reasonable means, to include written notification by registered mail, and shall have the right of first refusal to purchase the artwork(s). F. Proceeds from sale of artworks: 1. The city shall retain all proceeds from the sale of artworks except when the city is obligated by contract to share such proceeds with the artist. No such agreement shall provide for payment to the artist in excess of 15% of the appreciated value. 2. All other proceeds shall be deposited to the Public Art Fund for acquisition of other artworks for the city. XI. Contracts, Fabrication, Installation, Maintenance of Artworks, and Artists Registry A. Contracts will be negotiated between the Department of Community Services, the City Attorney, the artists, and with other consultants, if necessary. The artist must prepare a budget that includes costs for fabrications, materials, labor, transportation, site preparation and installation, insurance, artist fee and a contingency fund. Contracts will require the artist to develop a Maintenance Plan for the artwork, which must be submitted to the Department of Community Services before final acceptance of the artwork is issued by the city. Contracts will be executed by the City Manager, or designee, and administered by the Department of Community Services. B. Fabrication of the artwork will be by the artist or under the artist's direct supervision. C. Installations shall be coordinated between the Department of Community Services through the Public Art Program and the appropriate representatives of each Department having jurisdiction over the site and /or construction. Whenever possible, the installation of artworks will become part of the final project's construction contract, and will be executed by the contractor under the artist's supervision. D. All routine maintenance and repairs of permanent artworks, including cleaning shall be the responsibility of the City Department housing the artwork. When applicable, artwork that requires any maintenance shall follow the specific instructions and specifications listed under artist's Maintenance Plan. E. The Department of Community Services shall document the selection process and critical stages of specific projects such as fabrication and installation. All records relating to all projects such as contracts, correspondence, memoranda, proposals, models, and billings will be kept by the Department of Community Services. 1 1 A-- i� DRAFT � ' \ (' '"k R $ w 3 i S.> ONLY i � �' a � : yr s' � '� I '.. t _. � f� � ` `...J F�"e l" # i :,.J ,.... i..s` F. The Department of Community Services will administer an Artists Registry accessible to all local, regional, national and international artists interested in applying. This will ensure that the largest number of artists will be accessible to all public art projects. The Artists Registry will be used as a resource by the Public Art Advisory Committee and City Council for commissioning artists and art works. The Department of Community Services will periodically post notice of registry application and will use other art organizations' mailing lists to maximize artist participation. PrH ' �;y 1 T(1211;00) : _ F # E � i F PURPOSES p� S �"`"} ,$ a ��1< >, ,(� i `" � �., . _ ,..._fir � {a E ,a� ka t,vze.L: ._ t �C_ Appendix B Excerpt from Section 372, Local Government Code CHAPTER 372. IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS IN MUNICIPALITIES SUBCHAPTER A. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS § 372.001. Short Title This subchapter may be cited as the Public Improvement District Assessment Act. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.0015. Definition In this subchapter, "extraterritorial jurisdiction" means extraterritorial jurisdiction as determined under Chapter 42. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(b), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 372.002. Exercise of Powers Powers granted under this subchapter may be exercised by a municipality in which the governing body of the municipality initiates or receives a petition requesting the establishment of a public improvement district. A petition must comply with the requirements of Section 372.005. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.003. Authorized Improvements (a) If the governing body of a municipality finds that it promotes the interests of the municipality, the governing body may undertake an improvement project that confers a special benefit on a definable part of the municipality or the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction. A project may be undertaken in the municipality or the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction. (b) A public improvement project may include: (1) landscaping; (2) erection of fountains, distinctive lighting, and signs; (3) acquiring, constructing, improving, widening, narrowing, closing, or rerouting of sidewalks or of streets, any other roadways, or their rights -of -way; (4) construction or improvement of pedestrian malls; (5) acquisition and installation of pieces of art; (6) acquisition, construction, or improvement of libraries; (7) acquisition, construction, or improvement of off - street parking facilities; (8) acquisition, construction, improvement, or rerouting of mass transportation facilities; (9) acquisition, construction, or improvement of water, wastewater, or drainage facilities or improvements; (10) the establishment or improvement of parks; (11) projects similar to those listed in Subdivisions (1) -(10); (12) acquisition, by purchase or otherwise, of real property in connection with an authorized improvement; (13) special supplemental services for improvement and promotion of the district, including services relating to advertising, promotion, health and sanitation, water and wastewater, public safety, security, business recruitment, development, recreation, and cultural enhancement; and (14) payment of expenses incurred in the establishment, administration, and operation of the district. (c) A public improvement project may be limited to the provision of the services described by Subsection (b)(13). Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(c), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 372.004. Combined Improvements An improvement project may consist of an improvement on more than one street or of more than one type of improvement. A project described by this section may be included in one proceeding and financed as one improvement project. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(d), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. i -19 DRAFT ( ilk 9 '` r, :.. F_ R .: ; ?RPOS S .. )N!_ ,. § 372.005. Petition (a) A petition for the establishment of a public improvement district must state: (1) the general nature of the proposed improvement; (2) the estimated cost of the improvement; (3) the boundaries of the proposed assessment district; (4) the proposed method of assessment, which may specify included or excluded classes of assessable property; (5) the proposed apportionment of cost between the public improvement district and the municipality as a whole; (6) whether the management of the district is to be by the municipality, the private sector, or a partnership between the municipality and the private sector; (7) that the persons signing the petition request or concur with the establishment of the district; and (8) that an advisory body may be established to develop and recommend an improvement plan to the governing body of the municipality. (b) The petition is sufficient if signed by: (1) owners of taxable real property representing more than 50 percent of the appraised value of taxable real property liable for assessment under the proposal, as determined by the current roll of the appraisal district in which the property is located; and (2) record owners of real property liable for assessment under the proposal who: (A) constitute more than 50 percent of all record owners of property that is liable for assessment under the proposal; or (B) own taxable real property that constitutes more than 50 percent of the area of all taxable real property that is liable for assessment under the proposal. (c) The petition may be filed with the municipal secretary or other officer performing the functions of the municipal secretary. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(e), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 372.006. Findings If a petition that complies with this subchapter is filed, the governing body of the municipality may make findings by resolution as to the advisability of the proposed improvement, its estimated cost, the method of assessment, and the apportionment of cost between the proposed improvement district and the municipality as a whole. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.007. Feasibility Report (a) Before holding the hearing required by Section 372.009, the governing body of the municipality may use the services of municipal employees or may employ consultants to prepare a report to determine whether an improvement should be made as proposed by petition or otherwise or whether the improvement should be made in combination with other improvements authorized under this subchapter. The governing body may also require that a preliminary estimate of the cost of the improvement or combination of improvements be made. (b) For the purpose of determining the feasibility and desirability of an improvement district, the governing body may take other preliminary steps before the hearing required by Section 372.009, before establishing a public improvement district, or before entering into a contract. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1. 1987. § 372.008. Advisory Body (a) After receiving a petition that complies with Section 372.005, the governing body of the municipality may appoint an advisory body with the responsibility of developing and recommending an improvement plan to the governing body. (b) The composition of the advisory body must include: (1) owners of taxable real property representing more than 50 percent of the appraised value of taxable real property liable for assessment under the proposal, as determined by the current roll of the appraisal district in which the property is located; and (2) record owners of real property liable for assessment under the proposal who: (A) constitute more than 50 percent of all record owners of property that is liable for assessment under the proposal; or DRAFT ',211;00, r P ' a r . PURPOSES r 4NL is L 41P', i 3 � -- 3 �.✓ t -`.�, ; 1 � rf l � �` �J ONLY � 4.... 6 (B) own taxable real property that constitutes more than 50 percent of the area of all taxable real property that is liable for assessment under the proposal. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.009. Hearing (a) A public improvement district may be established and improvements provided by the district may be financed under this subchapter only after the governing body of the municipality holds a public hearing on the advisability of the improvement. (b) The hearing may be adjourned from time to time until the governing body makes findings by resolution as to: (1) the advisability of the improvement; (2) the nature of the improvement; (3) the estimated cost of the improvement; (4) the boundaries of the public improvement district; (5) the method of assessment; and (6) the apportionment of costs between the district and the municipality as a whole. (c) Notice of the hearing must be given in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality. If any part of the improvement district is to be located in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction or if any part of the improvements is to be undertaken in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction, the notice must also be given in a newspaper of general circulation in the part of the extraterritorial jurisdiction in which the district is to be located or in which the improvements are to be undertaken. The final publication of notice must be made before the 15th day before the date of the hearing. The notice must state: (1) the time and place of the hearing; (2) the general nature of the proposed improvement; (3) the estimated cost of the improvement; (4) the boundaries of the proposed assessment district; (5) the proposed method of assessment; and (6) the proposed apportionment of cost between the improvement district and the municipality as a whole. (d) Written notice containing the information required by Subsection (c) must be mailed before the 15th day before the date of the hearing. The notice must be addressed to "Property Owner" and mailed to the current address of the owner, as reflected on tax rolls, of property subject to assessment under the proposed public improvement district. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(0, eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 372.010. Improvement Order (a) During the six -month period after the date of the final adjournment of the hearing under Section 372.009, the governing body of the municipality may authorize an improvement district if, by majority vote of all members of the governing body, the members adopt a resolution authorizing the district in accordance with its finding as to the advisability of the improvement. (b) An authorization takes effect when it has been published one time in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality. If any part of the improvement district is located in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction or if any part of the improvements is to be undertaken in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction, the authorization does not take effect until the notice is also given one time in a newspaper of general circulation in the part of the extraterritorial jurisdiction in which the district is located or in which the improvements are to be undertaken. (c) Actual construction of an improvement may not begin until after the 20th day after the date the authorization takes effect and may not begin if during that 20 —day period written protests signed by at least two - thirds of the owners of record of property within the improvement district or by the owners of record of property comprising at least two- thirds of the total area of the district are filed with the municipal secretary or other officer performing the duties of the municipal secretary. A person whose name appears on a protest may withdraw the name from the protest at any time before the governing body of the municipality convenes to determine the sufficiency of the protest. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(g), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 372.011. Dissolution A public hearing may be called and held in the same manner as a hearing under Section 372.009 for the purpose of dissolving a district if a petition requesting dissolution is filed and the petition contains the signatures of at least I1 A--2 -1 DRAFI (12/1/001— FOk kE1 F'i p Pal ,i { „ ) £ 'l ONLY enough property owners in the district to make a petition sufficient under Section 372.005(b). If the district is dissolved, the district nonetheless shall remain in effect for the purpose of meeting obligations of indebtedness for improvements. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.012. Area of District The area of a public improvement district to be assessed according to the findings of the governing body of the municipality may be less than the area described in the proposed boundaries stated by the notice under Section 372.009. The area to be assessed may not include property not described by the notice as being within the proposed boundaries of the district unless a hearing is held to include the property and notice for the hearing is given in the same manner as notice under Section 372.009. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.013. Service Plan (a) The advisory body shall prepare an ongoing service plan and present the plan to the governing body of the municipality for review and approval. The governing body may assign responsibility for the plan to another entity in the absence of an advisory body. (b) The plan must cover a period of at least five years and must also define the annual indebtedness and the projected costs for improvements. The plan shall be reviewed and updated annually for the purpose of determining the annual budget for improvements. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.014. Assessment Plan; Payment by Exempt Jurisdictions (a) An assessment plan must provide that at Least 10 percent of the cost of an improvement be paid by special assessments against property in the improvement district. The assessment plan must be included in the annual service plan. (b) The municipality is responsible for payment of assessments against exempt municipal property in the district. Payment of assessments by other exempt jurisdictions must be established by contract. An assessment paid by the municipality under this subsection is considered to have been paid by special assessment for the purposes of Subsection (a). Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(h), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 372.015. Determination of Assessment (a) The governing body of the municipality shall apportion the cost of an improvement to be assessed against property in an improvement district. The apportionment shall be made on the basis of special benefits accruing to the property because of the improvement. (b) Cost of an improvement may be assessed: (1) equally per front foot or square foot; (2) according to the value of the property as determined by the governing body, with or without regard to improvements on the property; or (3) in any other manner that results in imposing equal shares of the cost on property similarly benefitted. (c) The governing body may establish by ordinance: (1) reasonable classifications and formulas for the apportionment of the cost between the municipality and the area to be assessed; and (2) the methods of assessing the special benefits for various classes of improvements. (d) The amount of assessment for each property owner may be adjusted following the annual review of the service plan. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.016. Assessment Roll (a) After the total cost of an improvement is determined, the governing body of the municipality shall prepare a proposed assessment roll. The roll must state the assessment against each parcel of land in the district, as determined by the method of assessment chosen by the municipality under this subchapter. (b) The governing body shall file the proposed assessment roll with the municipal secretary or other officer performing the functions of the municipal secretary. The proposed assessment roll is subject to public inspection. I A- DRAFT j_._1k . ; _ # .'r t PURPOSE ONL. The governing body shall require the municipal secretary or other officer to publish notice of the governing body's intention to consider the proposed assessments at a public hearing. The notice must be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality before the 10th day before the date of the hearing. If any part of the improvement district is located in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction or if any part of the improvements is to be undertaken in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction, the notice must also be published, before the 10th day before the date of the hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation in the part of the extraterritorial jurisdiction in which the district is located or in which the improvements are to be undertaken. The notice must state: (1) the date, time, and place of the hearing; (2) the general nature of the improvement; (3) the cost of the improvement; (4) the boundaries of the assessment district; and (5) that written or oral objections will be considered at the hearing. (c) When the assessment roll is filed under Subsection (b), the municipal secretary or other officer shall mail to the owners of property liable for assessment a notice of the hearing. The notice must contain the information required by ,,,, Subsection (b) and the secretary or other officer shall mail the notice to the last known address of the property owner. The failure of a property owner to receive notice does not invalidate the proceeding. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(i), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 372.017. Levy of Assessment (a) At or on the adjournment of the hearing referred to by Section 372.016 on proposed assessments, the governing body of the municipality must hear and pass on any objection to a proposed assessment. The governing body may amend a proposed assessment on any parcel. 4.1 (b) After all objections have been heard and the governing body has passed on the objections, the governing body by ordinance shall levy the assessment as a special assessment on the property. The governing body by ordinance shall specify the method of payment of the assessment. The governing body may provide that assessments be paid in periodic installments. The installments must be in amounts necessary to meet annual costs for improvements and must continue for a period necessary to retire the indebtedness on the improvements. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. WWI § 372.018. Interest on Assessment; Lien (a) An assessment bears interest at the rate specified by the governing body of the municipality, but may not exceed a rate that is one -half of one percent higher than the actual interest rate paid on the public debt used to finance the improvement. Interest on the assessment between the effective date of the ordinance levying the assessment and the '"R° date the first installment is payable shall be added to the first installment. The interest on any delinquent installment shall be added to each subsequent installment until all delinquent installments are paid. (b) An assessment or reassessment, with interest, the expense of collection, and reasonable attorney's fees, if incurred, is a first and prior lien against the property assessed, superior to all other liens and claims except liens or claims for state, county, school district, or municipality ad valorem taxes, and is a personal liability of and charge against the owners of the property regardless of whether the owners are named. The lien is effective from the date of the ordinance levying the assessment until the assessment is paid and may be enforced by the governing body in the "' same manner that an ad valorem tax lien against real property may be enforced by the governing body. The owner of wr assessed property may pay at any time the entire assessment, with interest that has accrued on the assessment, on any lot or parcel. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(j), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 372.019. Supplemental Assessments After notice and a hearing, the governing body of the municipality may make supplemental assessments to correct omissions or mistakes in the assessment relating to the total cost of the improvement. Notice must be given and the hearing held under this section in the same manner as required by Sections 372.016 and 372.017. ,,.. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.020. Reassessment The governing body of the municipality may make a reassessment or new assessment of a parcel of land if: (1) a court of competent jurisdiction sets aside an assessment against the parcel; TAR r1- -2-3 DRADRAFT } s� ---r• p a-' r' }� � �� B , , PURPOSES iRi j 7 °� 1 � 2, 1,O7 ." --- :` t ..R � � V IEi i d ONL k (2) the governing body determines that the original assessment is excessive; or (3) on the written advice of counsel, the governing body determines that the original assessment is invalid. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.021. Special Improvement District Fund (a) A municipality that intends to create a public improvement district may by ordinance establish a special improvement district fund in the municipal treasury. (b) The municipality annually may levy a tax to support the fund. (c) The fund may be used to: (1) pay the costs of planning, administration, and an improvement authorized by this subchapter; (2) prepare preliminary plans, studies, and engineering reports to determine the feasibility of an improvement; and (3) if ordered by the governing body of the municipality, pay the initial cost of the improvement until temporary notes, time warrants, or improvement bonds have been issued and sold. (d) The fund is not required to be budgeted for expenditure during any year, but the amount of the fund must be stated in the municipality's annual budget. The amount of the fund must be based on an annual service plan that describes the public improvements for the fiscal year. (e) A grant -in -aid or contribution made to the municipality for the planning and preparation of plans for an improvement authorized under this subchapter may be credited to the special improvement district fund. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.022. Separate Funds A separate public improvement district fund shall be created in the municipal treasury for each district. Proceeds from the sale of bonds, temporary notes, and time warrants, and other sums appropriated to the fund by the governing body of the municipality shall be credited to the fund. The fund may be used solely to pay costs incurred in making an improvement. When an improvement is completed, the balance of the part of the assessment that is for improvements shall be transferred to the fund established for the retirement of bonds. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.023. Payment of Costs (a) The cost of an improvement made under this subchapter must be paid in accordance with this section. (b) A cost payable by the municipality as a whole may be paid from general funds available for the purpose or other available general funds. (c) A cost payable from a special assessment that has been paid in full shall be paid from that assessment. (d) A cost payable from a special assessment that is to be paid in installments and a cost payable by the municipality as a whole but not payable from available general funds or other available general improvement funds shall be paid by the issuance and sale of revenue or general obligation bonds. (e) While an improvement is in progress, the governing body of the municipality may issue temporary notes or time warrants to pay for the costs of the improvement and, on completion of the improvement, issue revenue or general obligation bonds. (f) The cost of more than one improvement may be paid from a single issue and sale of bonds without other consolidation proceedings before the bond issue. (g) The costs of any improvement include all costs incurred in connection with the issuance of bonds under Section • 372.024 and may be included in the assessments against the property in the improvement district as provided by this subchapter. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 76(k), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 372.024. General Obligation and Revenue Bonds General obligation bonds issued to pay costs under Section 372.023(d) must be issued under the provisions of Chapter 1, Title 22, Revised Statutes. Revenue bonds issued to pay costs under that subsection may be issued from time to time in one or more series and are to be payable from and secured by liens on all or part of the revenue derived from improvements authorized under this subchapter, including revenue derived from installment payments of special assessments. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. 2-\{ § 372.025. Terms and Conditions of Bonds (a) Revenue bonds may be issued to mature serially or in any other manner but must mature not later than 40 years after their date. A provision may be made for the subsequent issuance of additional parity bonds or subordinate lien bonds under terms and conditions specified in the ordinance authorizing the issuance of the bonds. (b) The bonds shall be executed and the bonds and interest coupons appertaining to them are negotiable instruments within the meaning and for all purposes of the Uniform Commercial Code (Section 1.101 et seq., Business & Commerce Code). The ordinance authorizing the issuance of the bonds must specify: (1) whether the bonds are issued registrable as to principal alone or as to both principal and interest; (2) whether the bonds are redeemable before maturity; (3) the form, denomination, and manner of issuance; (4) the terms, conditions, and other details applying to the bonds including the price, terms, and interest rates on the bonds; and (5) the manner of sale of the bonds. (c) The ordinance authorizing the issuance of the bonds may specify that the proceeds from the sale of the bonds: (1) be used to pay interest on the bonds during and after the period of acquisition or construction of an improvement financed through the sale of the bonds; (2) be used for creating a reserve fund for payment of the principal of and interest on the bonds and for creating other funds; and (3) may be placed in time deposit or invested, until needed. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.026. Pledges (a) For the payment of bonds issued under this subchapter and the payment of principal, interest, and any other amounts required or permitted in connection with the bonds, the governing body of the municipality may pledge all or part of the income from improvements financed under this subchapter, including income received in installment payments under Section 372.023. (b) Pledged income must be fixed and collected in amounts sufficient, with other pledged resources, to pay principal, interest, and other expenses related to the bonds, and to the extent required by the ordinance authorizing the bonds, to pay for the operation, maintenance, and other expenses related to improvements authorized by this subchapter. (c) The bonds may also be secured by mortgages or deeds of trust on any real property related to the facilities authorized under this subchapter that are owned or are to be acquired by the municipality and by chattel mortgages, liens, or security interests on any personal property appurtenant to that real property. The governing body may authorize the execution of trust indentures, mortgages, deeds of trust, or other forms of encumbrances as evidence of the indebtedness. (d) The governing body may pledge to the payment of bonds all or part of a grant, donation, revenue, or income received or to be received from the government of the United States or any other public or private source, whether or not it is received pursuant to an agreement or otherwise. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.027. Refunding Bonds (a) Revenue bonds issued under this subchapter may be refunded or refinanced by the issuance of refunding bonds, under terms or conditions set forth in ordinances of the municipality issuing the bonds. The provisions of this subchapter applying generally to revenue bonds, including provisions related to the issuance of those bonds, apply to refunding bonds authorized by this section. The refunding bonds may be sold and delivered in amounts necessary for the principal, interest, and any redemption premium of the bonds to be refunded, on the date of the maturity of the bond or any redemption date of the bond. (b) Refunding bonds may be issued for exchange with the bonds they are refunding. The comptroller of public accounts shall register refunding bonds described by this subsection and deliver the bonds to holders of bonds being refunded in accordance with the ordinance authorizing the issuance of refunding bonds. The exchange may be made in one delivery or several installment deliveries. (c) General obligation bonds issued under this subchapter may be refunded in the manner provided by law. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. 2-3 fl . t i 211 / ! F 0 s 4 R E 1 - 01 PURPOSES ONLY § 372.028. Approval and Registration (a) Revenue bonds issued under this subchapter and a record of the proceedings authorizing their issuance must be submitted to the attorney general for examination. If bonds state that they are secured by a pledge of revenue or rentals from a contract or lease, a copy of the contract or lease and a description of the proceedings authorizing the contract or lease must also be submitted to the attorney general. (b) If the attorney general determines that the bonds were authorized and the contracts or leases related to the bonds were made in accordance with the law, the attorney general shall approve the bonds and the contract or lease. On the approval of the attorney general, the comptroller of public accounts shall register the bonds. (c) Bonds and contracts or leases approved and registered under this section are valid and binding obligations for all purposes in accordance with their terms and are incontestable in any court or other forum. (d) General obligation bonds issued under this subchapter shall be approved and registered as provided by law. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.029. Authorized Investments; Security (a) Bonds issued under this subchapter are legal and authorized investments for: (1) banks, trust companies, and savings and loan associations; (2) all insurance companies; (3) fiduciaries, trustees, and guardians; and (4) interest funds, sinking funds, and other public funds of the state or of an agency, subdivision, or instrumentality of the state, including a county, municipality, school district, or other district, public agency, or body politic. (b) Bonds issued under this subchapter may be security for deposits of public funds of the state or of an agency, subdivision, or instrumentality of the state, including a county, municipality, school district, or other district, public agency, or body politic, to the extent of the market value of the bonds, if accompanied by any appurtenant unmatured interest coupons. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. § 372.030. Subchapter Not Exclusive This subchapter is an alternative to other methods by which a municipality may finance public improvements by assessing property owners. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. SUBCHAPTER B. IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS IN HOME —RULE MUNICIPALITIES § 372.041. Authority of Home -Rule Municipality (a) A home -rule municipality may create improvement districts for the purposes of: (1) Levying, straightening, widening, enclosing, or otherwise improving a river, creek, bayou, stream, other body of water, street, or alley; (2) draining, grading, filling, and otherwise protecting and improving the territory within the municipality's limits; and (3) issuing bonds to finance improvements listed in this subsection. (b) If a home -rule municipality creates an improvement district in order to make improvements authorized by this subsection, the municipality must comply with the general law of the state relating to the creation of improvement districts. Bonds issued for improvements under this section must be issued in a manner that complies with the general authority of a home -rule municipality to issue bonds. (c) A home -rule municipality may require the owners of property in the territory specially benefitted in enhanced value by improvements made under this section to pay the costs of the improvement. If a municipality finances an improvement under this subsection, the municipality shall make a personal charge against those property owners and fix a lien against that property by special assessment. The municipality may issue assignable or negotiable certificates to pay for the costs of improvements and require the property owners to make deferred payments to retire the certificates. Interest on deferred payments may not exceed eight percent. The municipality may appoint special commissioners or provide otherwise for the making and levying of special assessments under this subsection, or may provide that the making and levying of the assessment be performed by the governing body of the municipality, in compliance with requirements for hearings and other procedures as may be adopted under or required by the municipal charter. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. DRAFT 3 - (1 tt' ) FOR- c #3 �� PURPOSES O , r Y �.+ � F"19 7 ( i �. � t C € t.� r `°"" FOR �'�. z�4 � 1 i � "i �. ONLY € 'a %_ t Appendix C Public Art Policies Of Other Cities /Agencies City of Grapevine 1. Grapevine has no known written policies /procedures governing the process only customary precedence. 2. Public art is either directly commissioned through the city council or by a council appointed appropriate committee (i.e. a committee of veterans to commission a war memorial). The city council makes all final decisions on the commissioning of the work. 3. The Grapevine Public Art Fund underwrites the commissions. This trust is funded by proceeds from the Annual Grapevine Wine Festival, Wine Festival merchandise, and prints /replications of City artwork. Each year the Wine Festival brings in around $10,000 which is deposited into the fund. 4. Grapevine has used money from the general fund in order to purchase art whenever the Public Art Fund has not had enough money in the fund to cover the purchase. City of Bedford 1. Bedford has no known written policies /procedures on the commissioning of public art. The City has acquired only one major piece, a library statue. 2. The statue was presented to the city as a gift from the Friends of the Library (independent auxiliary). The group worked with city staff to ensure the appropriateness of their gift. 3. The project was independently funded through the Friends of the Library. City of Euless 1. Euless has no known, formal written policies /procedures on the commissioning of public art. 2. The process that the City has used in the past is a cooperative effort between staff (usually Parks) and the City Council. 3. Public artwork is funded by a percentage of the '/2 cent sales tax, with the exception of the library which is funded through the Library Foundation. 4. Over the past two years $40,000 has been allocated for the purchasing art. These funds have been less than 2% of the V2 cent economic development sales tax. Euless has used this money to purchase outdoor bronze statuary. City of San Antonio 1. San Antonio has a formal policy on public art. The City has moved from a more specific policy to one that is more flexible. 2. The policy focuses on provided design enhancements to capital projects. 3. Projects are selected by the City Council as part of the Capital Improvement Plan. 4. The selected projects are then overseen by Community Projects Involving Design enhancement teams which are established by the Council Member who is the representative for the district in which the project is located. 5. The design enhancements are funded through an allocation from the total project DRAFT- (12/1100 . FOP. S y P U R P O S E S ONLY budget. City of Addison 1. Addison has no formal, written policy for public art. The City has commissioned one major artwork which is an approximately $2.5 million outdoor sculpture. 2. The City Staff worked with a group of consultants to select the artist with final approval by the City Council. 3. Funding for the project was determined by the City Council as part of the Addison Circle development project. City of Dallas 1. Dallas has a formal policy on public art. The policy's main components are a standing Public Art Committee which is overseen by the City's Cultural Affairs Commission. This committee oversees quality control for the Public Art Program and projects, recommends the nature and scope of projects and artworks, as well as artists for the program, and makes recommendations regarding any issues that arise from a specific artwork or art project. Final approval of all recommendations is made by the City Council. 2. The policy establishes procedures for artist selection, public involvement, deaccessioning, and donations or loans of artwork to the City. 3. Funding for this program is through the Public Art Fund and the Public Art Administration Fund. Appropriations to the funds are made through the capital improvement budgets. Dallas Area Rapid Transit 1. DART has a formal policy on public art. This policy is focused on incorporating public art into the rapid transit stations. 2. The policy uses a standing art advisory committee which advises the DART Art and Design Program staff on issues concerning the establishment and implementation of the program. The policy also establishes site specific committees in order to ensure maximum community participation. 3. Funding for this program comes from a $50,000.00 allocation per station. City of Colleyville 1. Colleyville has no formal policy regarding public art. 2. Currently, the city has one statue, which was funded and donated by a citizen's group and a private business. 12 -05 -2000 04:31pm From - PUBLIC AFFAIRS NOISE OFFICE 8725748544 T -009 P 002 /003 F -261 1JF W__ Jeffrey P. Fegan O tas / FC)rt Worth 1nt.: rnalional A irpvrt exaculi'' Director December 5, 2000 The Honorable Rick Stacy Mayor City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 RE: Council Agenda Item Nos. 8 B & C Reference No. ZA00 -111 & 112, Wingate Hill Dear Mayor Stacy: The Agenda for the Southlake City Council Meeting for December 5, 2000 contains two proposed actions for a property located on the east side of North White Chapel Boulevard, approximately 700' north of Sweet Street. Item 8.6. addresses a requested zoning change from "AG" Agricultural to "SF -1A" Single Family Residential (ZA00 -111). Item 8.C. addresses a Preliminary Plat for Wingate Hill (ZA00 -112). For reasons stated below, the Dallas /Fort Worth International Airport Board (''DFW ") is opposed to the proposed zone change and preliminary plat. Referencing the Airport's Official Noise Contour, the majority of the subject property is located within the 65 DNL noise level (refer to attached contour excerpt) and is located on the extended runway centerline for Runway 13L/31 R, approximately 6 statute miles from the north end of this runway. The property is subject to routine and regular overflights by aircraft operating to and from DFW International Airport. Historical aircraft flight information indicates jets operating as low as 1,000 feet Above Ground Level over the subject property. According to Federal Aviation Administration guidelines and the City of Southlake's own Ordinance 479, "Airport Compatible Land Use ", residential properties within the 65 DNL contour are considered incompatible. Given the factors noted above, the DFW Airport Board urges the City of Southlake to assist the airport in reducing future noise problems by not approving the proposed zoning change. However, should the City of Southlake consider the approval of the proposed project, we strongly recommend the following be applied as conditions of approval! 1. An avigation easement for the property be obtained naming the DFW International Airport Board and the Cities of Dallas and Fort Worth using language to be provided by DFW. 2. The City require mandatory building shell noise reduction of 25 dB Noise Level Reduction be incorporated into the building design, noted on the final building plans, and verified during the building inspection process in accordance with Ordinance 479. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please contact me at your convenience should you like to discuss our comments further. Sincerely, Sandra J. Lancaster Sr. Noise Compatibility Planner Attachment cc: K. Robertson Adminin r,Iri' peri,o. * 12oe ha.t Aoi,t{I nIt.r * Post Office Dr.,w. r h194211 * DFW lira. 73261 -9428 * '772 r 574 h(A1 Janitorial Service Options iioAtor e — L Annual Cost *Initial Contract Cost Dec. 18, 2000 - Sept. 30, 2001 Option #1 Hire City Staff $ 160,532.00 $ 126,820.28 Option #2 Use County Contract $ 131,436.23 $ 103,834.62 Option #3 Award City Contract $ 87,624.00 $ 69,369.00 *This term was used to allow us to re- evaluate for the next fiscal year. N O i6 O c ❑ o � a a co m a` CO o a) c a) O co >, • a) c M 2 V) o co N N co a) 7 Q J > C c C cu L 2 o 0 .0 N .c ( 6 L c n Q a E ) E D. N �, a) U E 2 co E O .c r 17L7 6- o C' m co m �. a) a a u' i n a) v i '6 u o `o -' ; a a) •_ a) cn 0 0 o cn ctJ V) c a) o a E E To cu n. m m (1) Y 'CS (I.) m 0 0 ct cc o o o . o U) w c _ O T a) • �' Q U .- •- c 2 2 F- C:' E co o � O O N >, c , O O L L Z = >' a) O O O C c c 1‘4..1 (� O a O T O O L.L -1-- O Q a p„ O 7 7 N C C d • c O v /� a) 2 u) `n a) c ❑ } LL 0 2 E 7_ _j N co C C i- Q Q m c(;)) u) E E E w 0 co 0 Ti Cr) 2- 5 0 a a .5 0 O Lo co ftf CO © N O CC) O 0 U) F- W O W : U) _ )- ❑.; =p U.. Ca Ct a C 1- o — ci) ca J , a) m u) U a) co 1— a) _ F- >, N Q O V E co E U — = i '�; (3 D C co ) .� -e. a) a) W a) ca 0 N a) a) as f > o - E E co 7 f a O. - - < 2 2 O Q) '— . > _ H _ c F- ` UQ O O O O 0 O 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 m N N O r !- r T ,-- r r r r » ƒ / k E as k . = .\ - c:, O w / ® > ® 2 / G ° (a- k . 0 ® a) 0 % . 7 ». a = ' - E c \ q 2 / E / 0 ® 2 § cu / m o ¥ > as / > o 0 —a / tot) E a a « L 2 c \ \ v2- ° ® o m n m / \ r % • / / 0 c o E $ 2 % 2 q ° % 0 0 c m § n % e C 2 / Q. c CO ) / / 2 c / c co / § q 2 a C J ' > 5 \% Er , = e ¥ 2 2 c c / f m w 0 T co o ° m I m / n c / $ E G) c\ ® � c = 2 w .-- - > a_ m d # O $ ƒ / c \ \ / \ \ \ k / \ / / / 0 in C\I 10 . .1 � ( 0 — / . \ \ \ % % 06 E — 9 0 \c 5 £ n < d « E / / / k E \ % / CL « CU 0 • 0 « E \ L $ z a 9 \ / \_0 = c \ / / k / / � ƒ 0 0 / 0 0 \ R / / \ \ w a 6 a 6 \ V" % / / \/ q \ \ \. O c N d' e ' . O LO < LO „ r „ . . } - ' N N = N , 4. tV RN, ti' a ri N S ,. H tL 0 1: � a � W s0 co co w L = , Y � � € d L J O p fn Nf d _ 00 y O ,_ 0 � a�i i n „ . 4 , m >- r�� O c Z a H O IL O « • U (A �G N j �� j uhf a. 0 G ($�� �^ c V h 3� �, [„. a :. ca wit 3 V 1 p : :. Z x � .dra a ¢._ . „ o - d Q £ O C x�`.”! i cc W Z O n i W 2 County Contract Costs - Option #2 Total area of city buildings = 100,333 square feet carpet = 75,249.75 square feet tile = 25,083.25 square feet Labor Rate $0.71 /square foot Carpet Cleaning Rate $0.10 /square foot to be performed twice per year Strip & Wax Tile Rate $0.15 /square foot to be performed once per month Total costs for labor to clean City buildings $ 71,236.43 Total costs for carpet cleaning $ 15,049.95 Total costs for strip & wax of tile $45,149.85 Estimated total cost using County contract $ 131,436.23 O I tn O O O L co CD N. N C 1- +. CD CO l e- 0 10 tD co O � OI M L I t" L O Irn I I E9 'ER- 69 64 � 69 0.• ° o o O O ° o o .0 Ti Lo N c`') IO C (7 CO 0 I � ti 2 co N c: co co I Et Eft 69- 69- EA M It O d O 0 0 0 0 C= O N ti O CO _ 0) ( Cr) CD •a- W O E!? 69 64 u 69 CL W 0 O O O co O •Y co O O O co O go O O O O 1 LC) 0 0) 0 CO .1.01 O 0 co "4 LX) O . 5 r' L 0 m 6 440 a 64 69 ER Eft 9 C _ O 0 0 0 �o 0 CD 0) 0 O O 00 Lri O O Itri N 0 CD 0 0 IN N co c N co ■ 64 69 64 69 EA- • �+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = d O O O O O Cr) N E t, 'O co O M 1 0 V C d m •c 0 69 ER EA- 69 Ef} CI3 4 E co O `� 0 0 0 0 0 L C 4) O d CQ (C) O O (C) Q) Ham. CD ti CD 0 1 N N N C m 0 G U) 69 69 64 E9 69 _ O O O O co +>,.. _ 1.-- N O � I C) 0 0 V Q 64 EA Eft 64 69 = O O co O O M cc co O co co O W O O O O .?..'s O c O co co U 69 69 69 69 I Ef} . CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 3 0 0 co 0 0 0)) in N Cr) O M 69 1K} E9 64 Ef> I A I I N = C 0 v a O CA C a3 1 0 I CU 1= as CU N O CB 5 cCS Y u)In —) vun vOC.) m 2