Loading...
2001-04-06 CC MinutesCity of Farmers Branch City Council Regular Meeting Agenda City Hall Plaza 13000 William Dodson Parkway Farmers Branch, Texas Monday, April 16, 2001 7:30 p.m. The following members of the City Council were present: Mayor Mayor Pro Tern Councilmembers Bob Phelps Bill Moses Jim Robbs Calla Davis Charlie Bird Paul Walden The following members of the City Administration were present: City Manager Richard L. Escalante Assistant City Manager Linda Groomer Assistant City Manager John Burke Assistant to City Manager John Roach Assistant to City Manager Margaret Somereve City Attorney John Boyle City Attorney Matthew Boyle City Secretary Cindee Peters Communications Director Tom Bryson Director of Economic Development Norma Nichols Director of Community Services Michael Spicer City Engineer Jerry Murawski Director of Parks & Recreation Jeff Fuller Director of Equipment Services Don Moore Library Director Mary Jane Stevenson Police Chief Jimmy Fawcett Director of Finance Charles Cox Fire Chief Kyle King Director of Public Works Mark Pavageaux Recording Secretary Suzanne Reynolds Mayor Phelps called the City Council meeting of April 16, 2001 to order at 7:30 P.M. The meeting was televised. A.1 INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. Mayor Phelps gave the invocation and Councilwoman Davis led the pledge of Volume 86, page 7 allegiance to the flag. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT Mayor Phelps announced there would be a public meeting to discuss the planning of the Old Farmers Branch area and the future DART Light Rail Station area on Tuesday, April 17, 2001 at 7 p.m. in the Council Chamber. He stated DART Representatives and City staff would be present to answer questions that the residents may have. Mayor Phelps extended an invitation to those that would like to attend the meeting. A.2 CONSIDER ACCEPTING HISTORICAL PARK DONATIONS FOR THE 1sT QUARTER, 2001, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps presented the following information. The Historical Preservation and Restoration Board have approved several donations to be added to the inventory. Mrs. Frances Glancy, Vice-Chair of the Historical Preservation and Restoration Board presented the following items for Council approval. A crocheted vanity set of three doilies and a chiffonier cover circa 1936 from Mrs. Betty Thacker of Farmers Branch. Her mother, Cecil McLaury, made the set. A circa 1936 sled from Old City Park in Dallas. A 1900 English Cookbook from Mr. Neil Stolp of Farmers Branch, given in memory of his wife, Doris. A Model T tire and rim, donated by Patsy Mayo of Farmers Branch. An early 20th century carpenter's plane and a kerosene can from George and Glenna Grimmer of Farmers Branch. Two early 20th century typewriters, a telegraph box, 7 Franklin Mint advertising dolls, a McKaskey account register, and a Dictaphone from Mrs. Jean Airoldi of Farmers Branch. The flag used in former Mayor A.J. "Spot" Airoldi's funeral from Mrs. Jean Airoldi of Farmers Branch. The Board has decided to fly the flag at the Historical Park on special occasions, beginning with Independence Day 2001, weather permitting. A circa 1926 ceiling fan from Mr. Dean Nichols of Farmers Branch. Original Dodson House furniture from the 1930s-40s: an iron table with a Volume 86, page 8 glass top; six matching iron chairs; and an iron coffee table with a glass top from Mrs. Delanie Murphy of Dallas. The Director of the Parks and Recreation Department recommends accepting the first quarter donations to the Historical Park. A motion by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, seconded by Councilman Walden, all voting "aye," accepted first quarter donations to the Historical Park with appropriate thank you letters to be sent. A.3 PRESENTATION OF SERVICE AWARD. Mayor Phelps presented a 15-year employee service award to Pete Pistole of the Public Works Department. A.4 REPORT ON STUDY SESSION ITEMS. Mayor Phelps and the City Council gave a brief summary of the items discussed in Study Session prior to the regular meeting. A.5 PRESENTATION OF BOARD APPLICATIONS. There were no board applications presented. B.0 CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING AS CONSENT ITEMS AND TAKE THE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps read for the record Resolution No. 2001-036 opposing the proposed DART policies on new member cities and commuter rail services. Mayor Phelps stated the Resolution would be sent to DART and to mayors of other member cities in the area. He also stated the City's DART representative encouraged the other board members to contact their mayors and city officials regarding this issue. A motion by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, seconded by Councilman Bird, all voting "aye," added agenda item D.3 to the Consent Agenda. A motion by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, seconded by Councilman Robbs, all voting "aye," approved the Consent Agenda as amended. B.1 APPROVED MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 2, 2001. B.2 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2001-036 OPPOSING PROPOSED DART POLICIES ON NEW MEMBER CITIES AND COMMUTER RAIL SERVICES. Volume 86, page 9 B.3 ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 2596 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1381, SPECIFYING THE PLACEMENT OF STOP SIGNS AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS ALONG TOM FIELD ROAD AND DENNIS LANE AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1382, SECTION 2 DELETING YIELD SIGNS AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS; REPEALING ALL CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH, TEXAS; AMENDING ORDINANCE 1381, SECTION 2, SPECIFYING THE PLACEMENT OF STOP SIGNS AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS; AND AMENDING ORDINANCE 1382, SECTION 2, DELETING YIELD SIGNS AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS; REPEALING ALL CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. B.4 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2001-033 AWARDING THE BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF SMALL EQUIPMENT FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT. D.3 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2001-035 AWARDING THE BID FOR THE ASBESTOS ABATEMENT AND DEMOLITION OF THE BUILDINGS AT 2404-2420 WICKER AVENUE AND 2415 VALLEY VIEW LANE TO AMX ENTERPRISES, INC. C.I. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER THE REQUEST FROM WILLIAM S. DAHLSTROM ON BEHALF OF CARLYLE HERITAGE, L.P. AND MONUMENT HOLDING, INC. TO REZONE AN APPROXIMATELY 19.6- ACRE IRREGULAR SHAPED TRACT LOCATED GENERALLY AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF L.B.J. FREEWAY AND INWOOD ROAD/DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY, FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 39 ZONING DISTRICT TO A DIFFERENT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT, INCLUDING ESTABLISHING PERMITTED USES, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND CONCEPT PLAN AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps presented the following information. The public hearing and consideration of this request was continued from the City Council's April 2, 2001 meeting at the mutual request of City staff and the applicant. The continuance was necessary in order to allow additional time to resolve a misunderstanding regarding the requirement of a Specific Use Permit for hotels and motels in PD- 39. Volume M, page 10 Two landowners own the subject property. One owns 7.2 acres and the other owns 12.4 acres. The properties are bound together by an existing concept plan, site plan and Developer's Contract that make it difficult for the properties to be developed separately. The owner of the 12.4-acre tract intends to subdivide and develop a 0.6-acre lot in the near future. Therefore, the landowners have filed a joint application to rezone the entire 19.6-acre portion of Planned Development No. 39 to a different Planned Development zoning district. The proposed rezoning would: establish the final alignments and street design standards for McEwen Road and the north/south street between McEwen Road and the LBJ frontage road; repeal the existing approved concept plan and site plans that encumber the properties; establish new setbacks for existing structures; upgrade landscaping requirements to be consistent with the intent of the current concept plan and site plan; modify loading space requirements; preserve the existing land use rights and development standards for the western 7.2 acres of the subject property; and establish new procedures for concept plan approval for the entire 19.6 acre subject property. Timing of roadway construction is addressed in the companion Amended and Restated Developer's Contract associated with the proposed replat, both of which are items on this Council agenda. Consideration of the replat and the Amended and Restated Developer's Contract is not contingent upon favorable action by City Council regarding the zoning change request. The Planning and Zoning Commission, by unanimous vote, recommends approval of the proposed rezoning request. Mayor Phelps opened the public hearing. Bill Dahlstrom, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, stated he was present tonight on behalf of the applicant. He thanked staff for working with them and preparing the ordinance and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Mayor Phelps asked Mr. Dahlstrom if he was in agreement with staff's recommendations. Mr. Dahlstrom replied they were in agreement. Volume 86, page 11 A motion by Councilman Walden, seconded by Councilman Robbs, all voting "aye," closed the public hearing. There being no further discussion, a motion by Councilman Bird, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, all voting "aye," adopted the following captioned Ordinance No. 2589 approving the rezoning request as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH, TEXAS, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED; BY REZONING A PORTION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT NUMBER 39 (PD-39) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT NUMBER 84 (PD- 84) INCLUDING ESTABLISHING PERMITTED USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; FOR AN APPROXIMATE 19.6- ACRE IRREGULARLY SHAPED TRACT LOCATED GENERALLY AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF L.B.J. FREEWAY (I.H.-635) AND INWOOD ROAD/DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY (SUBJECT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" AS TRACTS I, II, AND III); REPEALING IN ITS ENTIRETY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2071 AND ORDINANCE 2143 AS IT PERTAINS TO SUBJECT PROPERTY ONLY; REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 88-087; REPEALING THE CONCEPT PLAN APPROVED ON JUNE 23, 1986 APPLICABLE TO SUBJECT PROPERTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING INJUNCTIVE RELIEF; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. C.2 CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF CARLYLE HERITAGE, L.P. FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF HERITAGE SQUARE ADDITION BEING A REPLAT OF A PORTION OF FARMERS BRANCH OFFICE PARK ADDITION AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps presented the following information. The Heritage Square Addition is approximately 12.4 acres located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of I4635 and the Dallas North Tollway, adjacent to Galleria Drive. The property contains high-rise office buildings and parking garages. The landowner wants to subdivide a portion of Farmers Branch Office Park Addition to create two separate lots. The plat creates two lots and provides street names for the three existing roadways, "Galleria Place", "Galleria Circle", and "Galleria Drive". Galleria Drive was formerly called McEwen Road. A developer's contract associated with this development will set forth provisions for the Volume 86, page 12 construction of Galleria Place, Galleria Circle, and Galleria Drive when future development occurs. The developer's contract and rezoning associated with this property are other items on this agenda. The plat is consistent with the City requirements for Final Plat approval and the proposed companion rezoning. City Staff recommends that the final plat for the Heritage Square Addition be approved. Bill Dahlstrom, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, stated items C.2 and C.3 are companion items to C.1 and they are in agreement with staff's recommendations on all three items. There being no further discussion, a motion by Councilman Robbs, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, all voting, approved the Final Plat for the Heritage Square Addition. C.3 CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 2001-031 APPROVING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPER'S CONTRACT WITH MONUMENT HOLDINGS, INC. AND CARLYLE HERITAGE, L.P. RELATIVE TO DEVELOPMENT OF LOTS 4A AND 4B, FARMERS BRANCH OFFICE PARK ADDITION AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps presented the following information. On December 19, 1994, a Developer's Contract with Hartford Fire Insurance Company was approved relative to the development of Lots 4A and 413, Farmers Branch Office Park Addition. Farmers Branch Office Park Addition is located generally in the northwest quadrant of I-635 and the Dallas North Tollway in close proximity of the Hilton Hotel and Oxy Tower. The Developer's Contract set forth provisions for development of each lot and requirements for the extension of McEwen Road through the development. Carlyle Heritage, L.P. is now the owner of Lot 4A. Monument Holdings, Inc. is now the owner of Lot 4B. Carlyle Heritage, L.P. proposes to subdivide Lot 4A into two lots by plat, which is another item on this City Council agenda. The rezoning of the property is also another item on this City Council agenda. One lot is approximately 11.87 acres and the other lot is approximately 0.62 acres. The proposed Amended and Restated Developer's Contract releases the 0.62-acre lot from the provisions of the contract but does state that development of the 0.62- acre lot shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance No. 1430, as amended, and the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 769, as amended. The proposed Amended and Restated Developer's Contract provides that the construction of the extension of McEwen Road and a north- south street shall be required, as a condition for development of the remainder of the property. Volume 86, page 13 The City Engineer recommends the adoption of Resolution No. 2001-031 approving an Amended and Restated Developer's Contract with Monument Holdings, Inc. and Carlyle Heritage, L.P. relative to development of Lots 4A and 4B, Farmers Branch Office Park Addition. There being no discussion, a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, seconded by Councilman Bird, all voting "aye," adopted Resolution No. 2001-031 approving an Amended and Restated Developer's Contract with Monument Holdings, Inc. and Carlyle Heritage, L.P. relative to development of Lots 4A and 4B, Farmers Branch Office Park Addition. CA PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF J. RINGER CUSTOM HOMES TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF 4.874 ACRES FROM ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT - 2 TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT THAT WOULD ALLOW 19 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ESTABLISH USE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND APPROVE AN ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPE AND SITE PLAN DEPICTING THE LOT LAYOUTS FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 2910, 2926, 2942, 2965 AND 2970 SOUTH SUNBECK CIRCLE, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps presented the following information. The rezoning application involves three noncontiguous sites. In December 2000, the Council denied, without prejudice, a request for 20 homes on these sites. The applicant has re- filed a new proposal that calls for the construction of 19 single-family residential lots in three areas. Area 1, located at the southeast corner of Josey Lane and Sunbeck Circle, would be comprised of six residences served by a private cul-de-sac. The proposed perimeter fence would be constructed of brick with wrought iron inserts. A 10 foot wide landscaped easement along Josey Lane and South Sunbeck Circle will be provided. Area 2, located on the south side of Sunbeck Circle approximately 680 feet east of Josey Lane, would be comprised of nine residences. Three out of nine residences will have front entrances oriented towards South Sunbeck Circle. The remaining residences will face a new proposed public street. All lots would gain access from the new public street. Area 3, located on the north side of Sunbeck Circle approximately 680 feet east of Josey Lane, would be comprised of four residences. The front facades of all of these homes will face Sunbeck Circle. The central issue on this rezoning case continues to be whether the character of Sunbeck Circle should remain the country lane that it is today or be transformed Volume 86, page 14 into a street that functions more like a typical suburban street with multiple subdivisions gaining access from it. Should there be a desire to retain and improve the existing single-family country lane character of the Sunbeck Circle neighborhood, the proposed development is not appropriate. Should the City Council determine that the existing development pattern is no longer viable and a significant change in character is appropriate, then this proposal should be evaluated. The Planning and Zoning Commission, by unanimous vote, recommends approval of the rezoning request with the following conditions: All proposed fences, landscaping, signs, private cul-de-sacs, private access-ways, common areas and associated improvements and appurtenances as shown on the site plan (Exhibit C) shall be maintained by 3 independent neighborhood associations. All perimeter fences as shown on the site plan (Exhibit "C") shall be maintained by the neighborhood associations, rather than certain sections being separately maintained by individual property owners and other sections being maintained by the associations. However, the staining or painting of the interior side of wooden fence sections may be done by the individual property owners on whose property such sections are located. All street-facing garages in Area 2 shall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from the street maintenance, utility and sidewalk easement in order to provide sufficient space to accommodate the parking of at least one vehicle in front of the garage without the vehicle overhanging the public sidewalk. Any signage not to be attached to the fences or walls as shown in Exhibit "C" shall be subject to the approval of City staff. The five submitted "typical elevations" shall be included as part of the site plan (Exhibit "C"), not as strict design requirements, but to illustrate the general character and intent of the type of housing to be built within the PD-85 planned development zoning district. In Area 3, garages facing Sunbeck Circle and side-loaded garages accessible from Sunbeck Circle shall be prohibited. Garage access for all lots shall be via the common access easement. Circular driveways along Sunbeck Circle shall be required for homes built prior to the reconstruction of Sunbeck Circle to provide adequate off-street parking for visitors. Subsequent to the reconstruction of Sunbeck Circle, the requirement of a circular drive shall not apply. Article IV, Section 3c of the proposed Development Standards be amended to permit stucco, in addition to masonry, as an allowable exterior finish occupying a minimum of 75 percent of all exterior facades; amend Section 3d to require that Volume 86, page 15 exterior finish stucco be applied at a minimum thickness of 7/8" in strict accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code; and amend Section 3e to delete the reference to stucco limiting it to no more than 25 percent of the exterior fagade. Mayor Phelps opened the public hearing. Mayor Phelps stated the following persons had completed forms but did not want to speak: Nettie Nickless, 2965 S. Sunbeck Circle, in favor of the development; Marta Sanchez, 2936 S. Sunbeck Circle, in favor of the development; Thomas Williams, 2955 N. Sunbeck Circle, against the development; Naomi Howard, 2923 N. Sunbeck Circle, against the development. Jurgen Ringer, President of J. Ringer Custom Homes, 4112 Edith Court, Dallas, stated he and his staff have made radical changes on their proposal with the help of City staff. He stated they have come up with some things he hopes the Council will like better. Michael Coker, 6350 LBJ Freeway, spoke representing J. Ringer Homes. He stated his colleague would be handing out information to the Council. Mr. Coker reviewed the background on this application. He stated the proposal is much different from the original proposal and it addresses staff recommendations made after the initial proposal. He stated three of the four cul-del-sacs that were in the first proposal have been eliminated. The new plans will have a ten-foot setback as requested by the City on Josey Lane and Sunbeck Circle. As a result of the setbacks, the number of lots has been reduced in the first cul-del-sac from seven lots to six lots. The perimeter wall will be brick columns with wrought iron inserts. Mr. Coker showed several graphics and artist renderings of Phase I of the development. He emphasized the lots sizes have been increased by 700 square feet and the lot width has been increased from 35 feet to 40 feet. As a result of the reorganization of the proposal they have saved enough money to pay for the water line. Mr. Coker stated they are pretty much in agreement with the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission. He stated with regard to recommendation Number 2, that maintenance of the perimeter wall be provided by the homeowners association, he would like Council to consider changing the language to read "all of the public side of the perimeter wall to be maintained by the homeowners association." Secondly, he stated they have provided an easement for sidewalk/utility purposes in Area II. He stated they would prefer not to install sidewalks because it would be the only place on Sunbeck Circle with sidewalks. Regarding parking in Area III on Sunbeck Circle, he stated they propose to add an additional asphalt lane in front of those properties to accommodate guest parking in lieu of the Planning and Zoning recommended Volume 86, page 16 circular drives. Mr. Coker stated this would not impact traffic along Sunbeck Circle, and asked Council to consider this request. Mr. Coker stated in his opinion there is a significant difference in the South Sunbeck Circle area and the North Sunbeck Circle area, which should allow the areas to be treated differently. Mr. Coker stated that the South Sunbeck Circle portion of the roadway could be improved in the future while leaving the North Sunbeck Circle portion as it is. Mr. Coker stated they would like to make sure that in condition Number 5 recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission that elevations are typical and all of the design specifications are attached to the ordinance. They want to comply to the minimum standards. He stated he would be available to answer any questions the Council may have. Jan Gaub, 2973 N. Sunbeck Circle, stated she has been at her home for almost 40 years. She stated that she was generally in favor of the project but is opposed to the widening of Sunbeck Circle to a 27-foot city street with curbing. John Webb, 3014 Abbey Lane, stated he was in favor of the development but he is concerned about the Homeowners Association. He feels it should be one unified association. He stated he feels the sidewalks should be added at the time of construction. He also recommended that the sidewalks along Josey be pushed in to allow more distance between the sidewalk and Josey. Gail Gatcomb, 2638 Farmers Branch Lane, requested an 18-month extension so citizens could review the proposed project. Ms. Gatcomb stated she feels the Council has already made a decision on how they are going to vote and does not listen to the citizen's input. She stated she was definitely opposed to the project. Robert Wadley, 2980 S. Sunbeck Circle, stated there are two different neighborhoods. He stated he would like to see this project move forward and feels it would be an asset to Farmers Branch. He did state that he would not like to see the streets widened to 27 feet, and suggested leaving them just as they are. Ed and Joan Bareis, 2935 N. Sunbeck Circle, stated when this was first presented to the neighborhood she was in favor of the project. Without all the details such as density, eight-foot fences, neighborhood association, and street widening, they are now objecting to the project. Mrs. Bareis also wanted to inform the Council and Mr. Ringer that the Sunbeck Circle area is in the Dallas Independent School District. Beth Crocker, 2702 Mount View, stated she does not live in the area but has seen what some of the changes in planned development neighborhoods have done to the City. She stated she feels the 19 homes are too high density, and very ill conceived. She stated she feels very few changes have been made from the Volume 86, page 17 previous proposal with the exception of 19 homes instead of 20 and the developer paying for the water line. She again emphasized that this project is wrong for Farmers Branch. Dennis Redwine, 2624 Dixiana, stated his street was widened and he is not happy with the results. He would have preferred for the street to stay the same. Ann Barfield, 2971 N. Sunbeck Circle, stated it has been discussed that North and South Sunbeck Circle have different atmospheres. She asked Council if they let the development happen, to please dead end North Sunbeck Circle and let it keep the atmosphere that it has, a country lane, and let South Sunbeck Circle have its development. A motion by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, seconded by Councilman Bird, all voting "aye," closed the public hearing. Councilman Bird stated he resents the accusation that someone thinks the Council has already made up his or her mind before the facts are presented. He stated no decision is made until the very end; the Council is honest and with integrity. Councilwoman Davis asked Mr. Coker if staff had seen the plans presented at the meeting. Mr. Coker replied yes. Councilwoman Davis stated she spent a lot of time reading the information and what was presented this evening was not the same information. Councilwoman Davis stated she has some concerns about this issue. She stated the people on North Sunbeck Circle have a lot of issues with the creek, their homes, and their property values. Those on South Sunbeck Circle have the same issues but not to the same degree. Councilwoman Davis stated she felt that the Council made it clear that this project needed to be reasonable and dropping one lot off expanding the size, doing all this is not reasonable. She stated trying to get 19 homeowners to get together and take care of the fence is not reasonable. She stated she feels that this is not a plan she can support. Mayor Pro Tem Moses stated he objects to people saying that the Council settles everything during the Study Session. He stated no decisions were made prior to the meeting and Council does listen to citizens. He stated Council decisions are made at the Council meeting in front of the public and on the television. He stated his decision has nothing to do with what was discussed upstairs. Councilman Walden asked Mr. Coker to explain the three homeowners association versus one. Mr. Coker stated the Number 1 area with the cul-del-sac has the largest proportion of suggested improvements. He explained that it has the longest piece of exterior wall with brick and metal inserts and would have the Volume 86, page 18 majority of public site and landscaping visible to everyone. He stated when the property owners purchased the lots for their homes they know that they will be encumbered with a portion of the responsibility for the maintenance for not only the public portion but for the cul-del-sac as well. Mr. Coker stated the number two area, the public portion areas are not the same, there is public landscaping, a property owners association, maintained fence on one side and these standards need less requirements. Lastly, he stated Area 3 has fewer amenities. It has the public visible fence that goes out to Sunbeck between the church and the residential property, and has a fence that is along the access easement that provides access to the back of the three lots. He stated having three separate property owners associations who are responsible for those things that affect them directly makes the most sense in their minds. Councilman Walden stated there are a lot more amenities in Area 1. He stated if someone damages the fence, it would be more palatable to pay 1/19 than 1/6 of the cost. Councilman Walden stated he has a hard time distinguishing these three separate pods and it is a concern to him. Councilman Walden asked Mr. Spicer about Mr. Ringer wanting to abandon the City's standard practice of having the 75% masonry exterior in lieu of a stucco exterior. Michael Spicer, Director of Community Services, stated as originally proposed in the Ordinance presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission, 75% masonry exterior for all exterior walls would have been required with a limitation of stucco to a maximum of 25%. He stated the recommendation that was forwarded from the Planning and Zoning Commission allows stucco as a primary exterior material. Councilman Walden asked Mr. Spicer if he had any concerns about this. Mr. Spicer stated the reasoning behind the original ordinance proposal stems from the recent bad experience with stucco construction and stucco finish. Councilman Walden asked if the City has adequate resources to ensure that the thickness would be a minimum of 7/8 inches and expansion joints would be properly located. Mr. Spicer stated in order for the City to ensure compliance with that provision, it would require the builder to have third-party certification presented to the City. Mayor Phelps asked Mr. Coker if they would be putting stucco houses next to a brick fence. Mr. Coker replied if a prospective purchaser wanted a stucco residence, then they Volume 86, page 19 would build them a stucco home. Mayor Phelps asked if they would be pushing stucco. Mr. Coker replied no, and they are finding that 20% of the purchasers are requesting stucco. Mr. Ringer stated that stucco is more expensive than brick. Ms. Gatcomb stated she has lots of experience because she is a real estate broker and the $800,000 homes in Glad Acres cannot be compared with the Sunbeck Circle project. Councilman Bird asked Mr. Coker if he attended the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting when they approved this item. Mr. Coker replied yes. Councilman Bird asked Mr. Coker if he agreed to the seven conditions that were proposed at the meeting. Mr. Coker stated there were a couple of conditions that were not addressed; those being the sidewalk issue and the circular drive issue. He stated other than these issues they are in agreement with Planning and Zoning Commission recommendations. Councilman Bird asked Mr. Coker about the fence that faces the private property that is not in the association. He asked if the private property owner would be responsible for that side. Mr. Coker replied they would not be responsible but would have the opportunity to maintain it on their side. Councilman Bird asked Mr. Coker if he were allowed to build on the property how would they control the heavy traffic during construction. Mr. Coker replied there might be a way to manage it, but not control it. He stated they would establish appropriate routes for the construction crews assuming they would agree. He stated they would restore or replace any damages in the roadway. Councilman Bird asked Mr. Coker if he liked the country atmosphere on North Sunbeck Circle. Mr. Coker replied they like the street just as it is. Councilman Bird stated residents have come in and are willing to donate land to shut off North Sunbeck from South Sunbeck Circle. Councilman Bird complimented Mr. Coker for coming back with a better presentation and taking care of many of the requests of staff. His only concern is the homes; he stated he feels they are cramming too much into such a small space and ruining the neighborhood. He stated he would not be voting for this item to pass. Councilman Robbs stated for the last 16 years he has lived in a zero lot line townhome association of 165 members. He stated in his association he has seen where neighbors would not take care of their own fences. He stated in the Sunbeck Circle proposal they are indicating four members to a homeowners association. He asked what would happen if one of these members refuses to take Volume 86, page 20 care of their fences. Would the other three members sue them? Councilman Robbs stated a homeowners association to take care of a common area would not work for 4, 6, or 8 homeowners. Councilman Robbs stated he has a problem with taking an urban development and putting it into a country atmosphere. Mr. Escalante stated the true issue from the beginning of this project, when it was filed last year, was related to changing the character of Sunbeck Circle. He stated the substance of the application has changed, with significant revisions to the submittal. The essential issue is whether South Sunbeck Circle has the potential to develop in a manner that is consistent with the character of North Sunbeck Circle. Is this an essential issue representative of a neighborhood that must change? If there are going to be changes, is the change desirable for the future of that neighborhood? He stated that remains the issue before Council. Mr. Escalante stated if Council believes that it is prudent to change the character of the neighborhood, if this is the character the Council would like to see along Sunbeck Circle, then the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff have identified certain conditions that are included in the Ordinance. He stated the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff have not agreed on all of these issues, which have been addressed with the exception of the fence issue. He stated there has been discussion about the changes proposed. There has also been discussion for the potential of a street widening, which has been raised by staff and others as indicative of the kind of change that may occur. He stated staff would be available to answer any questions Council may have regarding the conditions made by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mayor Phelps stated he was at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and there was a statement made that this is two distinctively different neighborhoods. He stated you have a north and south but many streets have north and south and still remain the same neighborhood. He stated he does not understand the thinking on it. Councilwoman Davis stated this was presented to Council tonight and Council is making a very serious decision of people's lives, their largest holdings, and their biggest debt. She stated she studied the information extensively and feels that the information she received today is different. She stated she has a problem with this and asked Mr. Coker and Mr. Ringer to come up with a plan as to what they want to do and give Council the plan. She also stated 19 houses are too many. Councilman Bird stated that this has gone on for 18 months and Mr. Ringer stated that less than 19 homes is not feasible for them because there is no profit in it. He stated he would hate to put this back on staff unless they came back with 14 homes. There being no further discussion, a motion by Councilman Bird, seconded by Volume 86, page 21 Mayor Pro Tem Moses, all voting "aye," denied Ordinance No. 2597. C.5 CONSIDER REQUEST OF ANN CLARK TO DISCUSS HER PROPERTY IN FARMERS BRANCH AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps presented the following information. This item has been placed on the agenda at the request of Ms. Ann Clark. Ann Clark, 13561 Denton Drive, provided the Council with information regarding the foreclosure of her business. She stated she is currently seeking refinancing to keep the business open. She explained that she cannot get the refinancing unless the business is operating. The City of Farmers Branch has revoked her certificate of occupancy and the business has been closed for ten months. Ms. Clark explained in detail that the building is in good condition and not a threat to human life. Ms. Clark explained that the building has been in compliance since June 1999 and spent a lot of money to make the building in compliance. She stated in November 1999 she received a letter stating she was not in compliance after she believed that she had been complying with the Ordinance. In December 1999 she started action was brought against her because she was boarding horses in the building. The horses have since been removed from the property. Ms. Clark stated a suit was brought against her in January 2000 for noncompliance. She stated her contractor on two different occasions tried meeting with Jim Olk, Building Official, but he did not attend the meetings. Ms. Clark read portions of a deposition that was taken in the suit. She detailed Officer Tim Dedear's qualifications as a Fire Inspector and restated the violations that Officer Dedear found during his inspection. Ms. Clark stated according to the deposition Officer Dedear stated all violations had been resolved by 1999. She stated she has tried to resolve all violations to get the business reopened but it cannot be done in the dark. She is asking the Council to reinstate the Certificate of Occupancy so the utilities can be turned on and she can reopen the business. Ms. Clark emphasized that she does not live at the business address; she lives at 4109 Travis, Dallas, and has been living there since June of 1999. Ms. Clark stated she needs the utilities turned on so the inventory can be counted, the place cleaned out of scrap materials and cleans up damage from the ten months that the business has been idle cleaned. Mayor Phelps asked Ms Clark if she had a permit to do the electrical work. She replied no. Mayor Phelps asked if the contractor was hired. She replied yes. Volume 86, page 22 Mayor Phelps asked if the contractor obtained a permit to do the work. She replied apparently not. Mayor Phelps asked about the horses. She stated three city officials gave her permission to bring the horses on the property. She also stated that the permission was later withdrawn. Mayor Phelps stated that he knows it is illegal to keep horses in a building in the city. Mr. Escalante stated since April of 1999, the Police, Fire, and Code Enforcement personnel have been involved in ensuring the safety of the public and the animals. He stated the violations raised significant safety considerations. He stated the Certificate of Occupancy has been withdrawn based on the circumstances that were found. He stated since there were no permits taken out the City did not have an opportunity to inspect and reinspect the building for compliance. Mr. Escalante stated on August 24, 2000 a temporary restraining order was obtained and it is now under appeal. He reiterated that this action was taken out of concern for the health and safety of the public, the horses and visitors to the building. He stated these matters would be resolved in the court system. Ms. Clark stated she would invite anyone to come and inspect the building for compliance. She stated her contractor stated everything was done the way it should have been done. Ms. Clark restated all the items that have been repaired, and she feels there is no justification for revocation of her Certification of Occupancy. Mr. Escalante stated the appropriate steps would be for the contractor to obtain permits for the work so the building could be reinspected and if everything passes reinspection then she could reapply for the Certificate of Occupancy. Mayor Phelps asked Ms. Clark if she has a contractor. If she does the contractor needs to meet with Jim Olk and sit down and discuss what permits are required. Mayor Phelps asked if she has an inspection report. She replied no. Mayor Phelps stated there is no information indicating the building was in compliance. Mayor Phelps asked Mr. Olk if he had been in contact with Ms. Clark's contractor. Mr. Olk stated they have had one call from Ms. Clark's contractor and after explaining what was needed he never contacted the city. Volume 86, page 23 Mr. Escalante asked Mr. Olk if there was anything else that needed to be done for Ms. Clark to apply for her Certificate of Occupancy. Mr. Olk replied the property needs to be reinspected to see what violations have been resolved. Mr. Olk stated the City obtained several search warrants to see if repairs had been made and they had not been corrected. This resulted in revocation of Ms. Clark's Certification of Occupancy. Mayor Phelps suggested again to Ms. Clark to have her contractor call Mr. Olk to see what needs to be done. Ms. Clark stated in the past she has asked Mr. Olk to set an appointment to inspect her property. She stated he has not done this; instead he has gotten inspection warrants to check her property. Mr. Escalante stated staff has reviewed the time line on the violations and does not know where the misunderstanding is. He stated this process began in April of 1999, finding violations in June 1999, attempting to work with the contractor to get some of the repairs done. He stated in July 1999 the City tried to do reinspections. Ms. Clark stated in June 1999 the City left her property stating everything was repaired. Mr. Olk stated it was in 1999 and that was incorrect. The Fire Department had violations that needed to be corrected. He stated the Building Inspectors had many outstanding violations. Mr. Olk stated the Fire Inspector is not trained to inspect the plumbing, electrical, air condition and heating hazards. Mr. Escalante stated the City had to deal with issues of fly infestation, horse manure, and horses being left on the property in November. Ms. Clark stated the horses are not on the property anymore. Mr. Escalante stated the chronology of what has happened, such as, code violations, inappropriate uses, fly infestation, manure piles, and problems with horses, leading to a letter that was sent in November 1999 concerning building code, property maintenance, and environmental issues. Mr. Escalante stated there were many attempts to conduct reinspection and the action the City took going to court is the last resort in an attempt to get compliance. He stated the City only does this in cases where safety is an issue. Mr. Escalante stated the City would work with Ms. Clark but the City also has to make sure the building is safe and meets City codes. He stated the court order Volume 86, page 24 allows the building to be shown and City Attorney Matthew Boyle is present to discuss the issues if necessary. Ms. Clark restated she has had the repairs that were requested by the City done and does not know what Mr. Olk is complaining about. Mr. Escalante asked Ms. Clark when inspectors could inspect the building to see if it is in compliance. Ms. Clark asked if there could be an independent neutral inspection of the building to determine the compliance because she feels there have been problems with the inspections that have been done before by the City. Mayor Phelps stated again to Ms. Clark to have her contractor contact Mr. Olk to see what needs to be inspected but this should be done in a legal manner. Mr. Escalante stated to Ms. Clark to contact Mr. Olk or Mr. Spicer in the morning to make arrangements for inspections. They will set up an appointment to meet the contractors. He stated the inspectors will work expeditiously and show the contractors what needs to be done for the building to be in compliance. Mayor Phelps asked Mr. Spicer and Mr. Olk to please keep Council informed of when contractors call and the results. Ms. Clark asked again for a temporary reinstatement of her certificate of occupancy. Mayor Phelps replied that the Council would not take any actions until permits are received and necessary corrective action is completed. Mr. Escalante stated the City has photographs of violations that have been observed and he stated there are serious safety issues involved. Ms. Clark asked to see the photos and explained that one of the photos is a horse toy. She asked again if Council would give her a temporary reinstatement until the trial in October. Mayor Phelps again stated to Ms. Clark to please have her contractors contact the city. D.1 CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 2001-034 REJECTING ALL BIDS FOR THE MAYBROOK DRIVE SCREENING WALL AND CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS AND SCREENING WALL ALONG JOSEY LANE AND BAY MEADOW CIRCLE PROJECT AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps presented the following information. This project includes Volume 86, page 25 replacement of approximately 600 feet of the screening wall along Maybrook Drive, repair of drainage channel lining along Maybrook Drive, and replacement of the existing ornamental block wall located along the west side of Josey Lane, north and south of Bay Meadow Circle. All of the improvements were combined into one bid package. Eight contractors were invited to bid; only two bids were received. The low bid received in the amount of $322,287.50 is $84,300 over budget. The other six contractors were contacted and one said they did not have experience constructing screening walls and declined to bid. Two of the contractors said they do not do screening walls; the others did not respond. Staff recommends that the bids be rejected and the channel repairs and the screening walls be bid separately. By bidding the channel repairs and the screening walls separately, more contractors are expected to bid, and the City should expect to obtain more competitive bids. The City Engineer recommends the adoption of Resolution No. 2001-034 rejecting all bids for Maybrook Drive Screening Wall and Channel Improvements and Screening Walls along Josey Lane and Bay Meadow Circle projects. Shirley Call, 2832 Bay Meadow Circle, stated she had discussed replacement of the wall with Mr. Murawski over the past four years. She asked that the bids be rejected and that the Bay Meadow wall be bid separately from the Maybrook wall. Mr. Escalante asked if the two walls would be bid separately. Jerry Murawski, City Engineer, stated the bid was presented as one project. He proposed to bid the channel repairs separately from the screening walls. He stated the construction of the screening walls along Josey would be concurrent with the construction of the channel repairs along Maybrook. Under the proposed scenario the construction of the screening walls along Josey would not be delayed any more than if the Josey screening walls were bid separately from the Maybrook screening walls. Mr. Escalante asked when it would go out for bid. Mr. Murawski replied within the next thirty days because separating the bids does not require any changes to the plans. There being no further discussion, a motion by Councilman Robbs, seconded by Councilwoman Davis, all voting "aye," adopted Resolution No. 2001-034 rejecting all bids for Maybrook Drive Screening Wall and Channel Improvements and Screening Walls along Josey Lane and Bay Meadow Circle projects. D.2 CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 2001-037 AWARDING THE BID Volume 86, page 26 FOR CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION REPAIRS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS TO KEN-DO CONTRACTING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps presented the following information. The Public Works Department administers an annual concrete pavement section repair program. Requests for bids on the 2000-2001 contract were sent to six vendors. Four bids were received and opened on April 3, 2001. All four bids met specifications. Ken-Do Contracting submitted the low bid meeting specifications in the amount of $134,582.50. Ken-Do Contracting has performed work for the City in the past and the work has been satisfactory. Staff has reviewed the bid proposal and found that prices bid are competitive. Funds in the amount of $135,000.00 are available in the 2000-2001 Public Works budget for this contract. Quantities of work were estimated and unit prices were bid for various types of pavement repairs. The total payment amount will not exceed $135,000.00. The Director of Public Works recommends adopting Resolution No. 2001-037. There being no discussion, a motion by Councilman Walden, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, all voting "aye" adopted Resolution No. 2001-037. D.3 CONSENT. DA CONSIDER APPOINTMENTS TO THE LIBRARY BOARD, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, AND THE SCHOOL-COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMITTEE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Mayor Phelps stated the Planning and Zoning Commission and the School- Community Relations Committee would be postponed until the next meeting. A motion by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, seconded by Councilman Robbs, all voting "aye," reappointed Susan Saiter, Ruth Ann Parish, Betsy Armstrong, and Matt Wenthold to the Library Board. D.5 PRESENTATION OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ORGANIZATION REPORTS. Mayor Phelps stated he attended the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition meeting last week and they discussed legislative issues regarding transportation. He stated there is some concern about cities and counties forming transportation councils. He stated in regard to transportation funding having one voice is important and the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition feels that one transportation organization Volume 86, page 27 should be formed. Mayor Phelps also stated that the segment of I-35 to I-635 has been approved. D.6 CONSIDER COUNCIL TRAVEL REPORTS AND REQUESTS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. There were no travel reports or requests. D.7 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. John Tepper, President, Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District Board of Trustees asked the Council for their support on a proposition that will be held on the May 5, 2001 General Election Ballot. He stated the wording on the proposotion is as follows: Authorizing the Board of Trustees of the Carrollton/Farmers Banch Independent School District to educate students of other school districts with local tax revenue. He stated by voting for this proposition, it would allow the Carrollton/Farmers Branch Independent School District to save approximately $1.5 million. The $1.5 million amount is the administrative fee that would be paid to Austin. By passing the proposition it would allow the School District not to pay this fee. He encouraged the Council and others to vote on this proposition. MAYOR PHELPS ANNOUNCED THAT THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA FOR THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WERE DISCUSSED IN THE 4:30 P.M. WORK SESSION. MAYOR PHELPS EXPLAINED THE CITY COUNCIL CONVENED INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:45 P.M. AND CONCLUDED AT 7:06 P.M. TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 551 OF THE OPEN MEETING LAW PROVIDES THAT SUCH ITEMS AS PERSONNEL MATTERS, LAND ACQUISITION AND PENDING AND CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION MAY BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION. E.1 Discuss pending and contemplated litigation - Texas Government Code Section 551.071. 1. Consultation with Attorney regarding City of Farmers Branch vs. Ann Clark, et. al. Mayor Phelps explained Staff was present to discuss this item with the City Council. F.1 Consider necessary action on items discussed in the Executive Session. Mayor Phelps stated City Council was updated on items in Executive Session and no action was necessary. Volume 86, page 28 F.2 Adjournment. A motion by Mayor Pro Tem Moses, a second by Councilman Walden, all voting "aye", adjourned the City Council meeting of April 16, 2001 at 10:35 p.m. Mayor Phelps City Secretary L!. Volume 86, page 29