2011_04.14 CC Packet
405 Municipal Drive, Kennedale, Texas 76060
www.cityofkennedale.com
AGENDA
KENNEDALE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING –APRIL 14, 2011
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
WORK SESSION – 5:30 PM
REGULAR SESSION – 7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III.WORK SESSION – 5:30 PM
A. Discuss and review any item on the agenda, if needed
1. Presentation from Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS)
2. Discuss compensation of elected and appointed officials
3. Discuss Tree City USA application
4. Discuss Quiet Zone and notice
5. National League of Cities Service Line Warranty Program
6. Discuss other items on the agenda
*NOTE: Pursuant to Section 551.071, Texas Government Code, the City Council reserves the right
to adjourn into Executive Session at any time during the work session or the regular session to
discuss posted executive session items or to seek legal advicefrom the City Attorney on any item
posted on the agenda.
REGULAR SESSION - 7:00 PM
IV. INVOCATION
V. UNITED STATES PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
VI. TEXAS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
“Honor the Texas Flag; I Pledge Allegiance to Thee, Texas, One State under God; One
and Indivisible.”
VII. VISITOR/CITIZENS FORUM
At this time, any person with business before the Council not scheduled on the agenda
may speak to the Council. No formal action can be taken on these items at this meeting.
VIII. REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
In addition to any specific matters listed below, the city council may receive a report
about items of community interest, including but not limited to recognition of individual
officials, citizens or departments, information regarding holiday schedules, upcoming or
attended events, etc.
A. Mayor
1. Random drawing for $100 water bill credit due to one 2011 citizen survey
participant
B. City Council
C. City Manager
1. Warrant Round Up 2011 Results and presentation of Certificates of
Achievement for participation in the program
2. Presentation of ‘Organization of the Year’ award from the Tejas District
Council of the Boy Scouts of America, Troop 35, to the City of Kennedale
Fire Department
3. Keep Kennedale Beautiful (KKB) affiliation with state
4. Street name change process
D. Youth Advisory Council
1. Annual Report
IX. CONSENT AGENDA
All matters listed under consent agenda have been previously discussed, require little or
no deliberation, or are considered to be routine by the council. If discussion is desired,
then an item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately.
th
A. Consider approval of meeting minutes: Regular meeting dated March 10, 2011
B. Review and consider action regarding a notice from the Public Utility Commission
(PUC) of Texas for a Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment to municipal
telecommunications right-of-way access lines rates.
C. Consider approval of Resolution 358, listing the City Manager as the authorized
official for the Justice Assistance Grant application.
D. Consider authorizing City Manager to execute an Interlocal Agreement with Tarrant
County for services pertaining to the reconstruction of Mistletoe Drive.
E. Consider authorizing City Manager to execute an Interlocal Agreement with Tarrant
County for services pertaining to the reconstruction of Bolen Road.
24
Page of
X. REGULAR ITEMS
F. Review and consider action to accept certification of unopposed candidates, and
th
approve Ordinance 476, canceling the May 14, 2011 election.
G. Conduct a public hearing, discuss and consider approval of Ordinance No. 477
regarding CASE # PZ 11-02 to receive comments and consider a request by
Anarkali Enterprises, Inc. for a zone change of approximately 1 acre at Triangle
Business Park Addn Blk 1 Lot 8R1 (739 W Kennedale Pkwy) from “I” Industrial to
“C1” Restricted Commercial.
H. Conduct a public hearing, discuss and consider approval of Ordinance No. 478
regarding CASE # PZ 11-03 to review, receive comments, and consider action on
a request for a change in zoning from “C-1” Restricted Commercial to “C-2”
General Commercial” for approximately 2.5 acres located at 716 E Kennedale
Pkwy, Kennedale, Tarrant County, Texas, more particularly described as C.A.
Boaz Subdivision of J B Renfro Survey, Blk Lot 14R4. The rezoning is requested
by See Eang Eng.
I. Conduct a public hearing, discuss and consider approval of Ordinance No. 479
regarding CASE # PZ 11-04 to review, receive comments, and consider action on
a proposed ordinance vacating and abandoning a portion of Gilman Road in the
City of Kennedale, Tarrant County, Texas, and declaring that such property is
unnecessary for use as a public right -of -way; and reserving a public utility
easement. Roadway to be vacated and abandoned is more particularly
described as a 0.255 acre strip of land in the David Strickland Survey, A-1376,
being a portion of a tract of land conveyed to the City of Kennedale by deed
recorded in Volume 10552, Page 1622, Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas,
said strip of land being used as right-of-way for Gilman Road. The land is adjacent
to property with physical address 1384 Gilman Road.
XI. EXECUTIVE SESSION
A. The City Council will meet in closed session pursuant to Section 551.071 of the
Texas Government Code for consultation with the City Attorney pertaining to any
matter in which the duty of the City Attorney under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of
Professional Conduct may conflict with the Open Meetings Act, including
discussion on any item posted on the agenda.
B. The City Council will meet in closed session pursuant to Section 551.074 of the
Texas Government Code to deliberate the appointment, employment, evaluation,
reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer or employee.
1. Continuation of City Manager’s annual performance evaluation.
C. The City Council will meet in closed session pursuant to Section 551.072 of the
Texas Government Code to deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of
real property for the following:
34
Page of
1. 400 Little School Road - Condemnation
2. Right of way status
1101 Bowman Springs Road
1201 Bowman Springs Road
605 Little School Road
621 Little School Road
400 Dick Price Road
913/917 Little School Road
838 Woodland Court
XII. RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION, AND TAKE ACTION NECESSARY PURSUANT
TO EXECUTIVE SESSION, IF NEEDED.
J.
Consider approval of Resolution 358, AUTHORIZING THE CITY
ATTORNEY TO BRING A CONDEMNATION PROCEEDING FOR THE
PURPOSE OF OBTAINING FEE SIMPLE TITLE, DRAINAGE EASEMENT
AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ON A PORTION OF
LAND SITUATED WITHIN THE J.M. LILLY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 980,
AND BEING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND
DESCRIBED TO W. EDDIE PATTERSON AND WIFE, TAMMY K.
PATTERSON BY DEED RECORDED IN VOLUME 9268, PAGE 1477, DEED
RECORDS OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, FOR A PUBLIC ROADWAY
AND/OR OTHER PURPOSES PERMITTED BY LAW
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of Kennedale will provide
for reasonable accommodations for persons attending City Council meetings. This
building is wheelchair accessible, and parking spaces for disabled citizens are available.
Requests for sign interpreter services must be made forty-eight (48) hours prior to the
meetings. Please contact Amethyst Cirmo, City Secretary, at 817.985.2104 or (TDD)
1.800.735.2989
CERTIFICATION
th
I certify that a copy of the April 14, 2011, agenda was posted on the City Hall bulletin board
next to the main entrance of the City Hall building, 405 Municipal Drive, of the City of
Kennedale, Texas, in a place convenient and readily accessible to the general public at all times
th
and said Agenda was posted on the following date and time: Monday, April 11, 2011 by 5:00
p.m., at least 72 hours preceding the schedule time of said meeting, in accordance with Chapter
551 of the Texas Government Code.
Amethyst G. Cirmo, City Secretary Date Agenda Removed from Bulletin Board
44
Page of
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Work Session
Subject: Discuss potential resolution addressing compensation of elected and appointed
officials.
Originated by: Bob Hart, City Manager
Summary: See attached informational letter from Taylor, Olsen, Adkins, Sralla, and Elam
(TOASE).
6000 WESTER\ Pk ce, SUlre 200 i TELEPHo \ (817) 332 -2580
Taylaz '6lso Acllcxns Sra1la,Elm
1 -30 AT BRYANT -TRvk.x ROAD ToLr. FREE: ($00) 319-3400
FORT NVoRTH, TExas 76107-465 t " "' ✓ " FACSIMILE: (817) 332 -4740
E \[AIL: TOASEC�TOASE.COA1 Attorneys Co WFBSITE: WWW.TOASE.COM
Fredrick "Fritz" Quast
fquast@toase.corn
February 25, 2011
Bob Hart
City of Kennedale
405 Municipal Drive
Kennedale, Texas 76060
Re: Recent Supreme Court Decision; Abrogation of Individual Capacity Tort Claims
Against Government Employees Acting Within the Scope of Employment
Dear Bob:
This letter is to inform you about a recent Texas Supreme Court decision that expands the
individual immunity of government employees, including city employees, from tort claims under
Texas law. I also want to warn you about how this immunity only covers "employees" as that term
is defined in the relevant law. I would also like to suggest simple actions your city might take to
make sure its appointed and elected officials are protected.
In Franka v. Velasquez, a doctor and a resident that worked at a public hospital were sued
for medical malpractice.' The doctor and resident were sued for a fractured clavicle and other
injuries an infant sustained during delivery. The injuries happened while the defendants were trying
to free the baby's shoulder with their hands. This means there was no "use of tangible personal . .
. property" such that there was a wavier of sovereign immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act (the
Act).' Likely for this reason, the plaintiffs did not sue the public hospital? The plaintiffs only sued
the individuals.
The defendants moved to dismiss the case under Section 101.106(f) of the Act. Section
101.106(f) provides that:
(f) If a suit is filed against an employee of a governmental unit based on conduct
within the general scope of that employee's employment and if it could have been
brought tinder this chapter against the governmental unit, the suit is considered to
be against the employee in the employee's official capacity only. On the employee's
motion, the suit against the employee shall be dismissed unless the plaintiff files
`Fi-anka v. Velasquez, No. 07 -0131, 2011 WL 182198, at *1 (Tex. Jan. 21, 2011).
' Franka, 2011 WL 182198, at *1. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 101.021(2) (Vernon 2008).
'The hospital was University Hospital, a teaching hospital in San Antonio, which is owned by the Bexar County
Hospital District. The hospital was staff by faculty and staff employed by the University of Texas Health Science Center.
Clearly, all these entities are governmental in nature.
February 25, 2011
Page 2
amended pleadings dismissing the employee and naming the governmental unit as
defendant on or before the 30th day after the date the motion is filed.'
The Franka case turned on the language I italicized in subjection (f). The plaintiffs argued
subsection (f) did not apply because the defendants did not show the case fell within a waiver of
immunity in the Act and thus, their claim "could [not] have been brought under this chapter against
the governmental unit."' But the phrase "claim under this chapter" had already been interpreted to
include any tort claim, even if it did not fall within a waiver of immunity under the Act.
Consistent with these holdings, the supreme court held that subsection (f) applies in any case
where a tort claim is brought against a government employee acting within the general scope of his
or her employment. As the Texas Supreme Court recognized, this holding bars "suit against
a governmentat, employee in his individual capacity if he is acting within the scope of his
employment. "' As a result, section 101.106 effectively shields government employees from
personal liability for common law tort claims under Texas law committed in the scope of
employment. Note this does not protect employees from state law statutory claims or claims under
federal law (e.g., federal Civil Rights Act claims).
But who are "employees"? Under the Act, an employee is defined as "a person, including
an officer or agent, who is in the paid service of the governmental unit. " While section 101.106
immunity now clearly applies to regular, paid employees of a city, it probably does not apply to
appointed or elected officials of a city when they are not in the "paid service" of the city (i.e., they
receive no money in exchange for their service). There is a case where a city council member was
held to be an "employee," but there, it was undisputed the council member was in the "paid service"
'Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 101.106 (Vernon 2008) (emphasis added).
'Franka, 2011 WL 182198, at *2.
'This was how the phrase was interpreted in an older version of section 101.106 before it was amended in 2003,
Dallas Co. Mental Health & Mental Retai v. Bossley, 968 S.W.2d 339, 343 -44 (Tex. 1998) (applying former
section 101.106 where facts did not "fit" within waivers of immunity found in tort claims act), Nebvrnan v. Obersteller,
960 S.W.2d 621, 622 -23 (Tex. 1997) (applying the former version of section 101.106 to defeat intentional tort claims
that do not fall within tort claims act wavier), and more recently in the current subsection (e). Mission Consolidated
Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Garcia, 253 S.W.3d 653 (Tex. 2008). Section 101.106 was substantially revised in 2003 as part of
a comprehensive tort reform bill commonly referred to as House Bill 4. Villasan v. O'Rourke, 166 S.W.3d 752, 758
(Tex. App. — Beaumont 2005, pet. denied).
Franka, 2011 WL 182198, at *9..
a Id. And if a government employee is sued in their official capacity, it is the same thing as suing the
government entity and thus, governmental immunity would apply.
9 In Franka, the supreme court did not dismiss the suit against the resident because it was not clear she was an
"employee" of the public hospital. Franka, 2011 WL 182198, at *3 -4.
10 Tex, Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 101.001(2) (Vernon 2008) (emphasis added).
February 25, 2011
Page 3
of the city."
Many cities do allow or require, either by charter or ordinance, payment of a small amount
or stipend to city councilor board members, usually on a per meeting basis. One purpose of this
letter is to suggest that we examine these various offices to determine whether they are in the "paid
service" of the City such that they are immune under Franke from personal liability for tort claims
arising from the official's service on the council or a board. If they are not, I would suggest the city
consider paying them to help insulate them from personal tort liability. I do not believe the "paid
service" bar is very high, and even a small payment per meeting is probably enough to extend section
101.106 immunity to elected and appointed city officials. I understand council members voting
themselves a "salary," however small, might be politically tricky given the fiscal challenges most
local governments are currently facing. But again, I think the amount can be very small (e.g., $5.00
per meeting), and I am aware of cities where the officials customarily donate that amount back to
the city.
matter.
Please do not hesitate to give me a call if you have any questions or concerns about this
FWQ: as
cc: Amethyst Cirmo
City of Kennedale
405 Municipal Drive
Kennedale, Texas 76060
" Texas Bay Cher►y Hill, L.P. v. Cary offort Worth, 257 S.W.3d 379, 398 (Tex. App. —Fort Worth, no pet.).
"Note however, that there are some state statutes that prohibit compensation to certain types of board members.
See, e.g., Tex. Loc. Gov't Code Ann. § 363.104 (Vernon 2008) (stating board members of a crime control and prevention
district board must serve without compensation).
Date: April 14, 2011
Agenda Item No: Work session
Subject: Consider making application to Tree City USA
Originated by: Kelly Cooper
Summary: Tree City USA is a program sponsored by the Arbor Day Foundation in cooperation with
the USDA Forest Service that provides direction, technical assistance, public attention, and national
recognition for urban and community forestry programs.
A municipality may become a Tree City USA city by meeting the following standards:
1. Establishing a Tree Board
2. Adopting a Tree Care Ordinance
3. Funding $2 per Capita for a community Forestry Program
4. Observing Arbor Day to include a proclamation
Ordinance 268, was adopted by City Council February 4, 2004 naming the Tree Board as the
Planning and Zoning Commission and includes most of the items necessary for the tree care
requirements. The current budgeted funding level is $71,000 which meets the minimum $2.00 per
capita requirement.
The Arbor Day observance and proclamation is the only standard criterion that "officially" being met in
our community. The required observance can be anything from a brief simple tree planting event to a
grand planned tree - related festival or award ceremony. The City provides for tree plantings each
year and has been a part of replanting trees along 3r street and TownCenter to save them from
construction in other areas. This year, TXU donated two 65 gallon live oaks planted in the
TownCenter Park in celebration of Art in the Park. This in fact would meet the fourth standard for the
Tree City USA designation. Once the City meets these four standards, application is made to the
program for designation. Then each year, the city must continue to resubmit for the designation
through continued participation in the program.
There are many benefits to being designated a Tree City USA. First, the established board is able to
encourage better care of community forest, provide education to the community through assistance
from the forestry and Arbor Day Foundation, increases a positive public image of the city, builds
cooperation, contributes to community pride, can be helpful in securing grant money for tree
beautification projects within the city, and what better way to say, "You're here, Your home" than with
a commitment to tree preservation and beautification.
Should City Council wish to move forward with the application process, staff would suggest revising
the ordinance to include KKB as members of the Tree Board with the purpose of organizing and
planning the Arbor Day observance and any other educational activities including preparation of the
proclamation for the Mayor to make at the next Council meeting to include the most recent tree
planting in TownCenter Park.
It should be noted that the application for this is due no later than December 31 each year and
includes recognition of the work completed by the community during the calendar year. This means
that the City would receive the actual designation, if approved, in 2012.
Attachments: Ordinance 268, Tree City USA application and a brochure - Why your city should
become a Tree City USA Community.
• Reduce Costs for energy, storm water man-
agement, and erosion control. Trees yield up to three
times their cost in overall benefits to the city, averag-
ing $273 per tree.
• Cut energy Consumption by up to
25%. Studies indicate that as few as three additional
trees planted around each building in the United
States could save our country $2 billion, annually, in
energy costs.
• Boost property values across y our
community. Properly placed trees can increase
property values from 7 -21 % and buildings in wooded
areas rent more quickly and tenants stay longer.
• Build stronger ties to your neighbor-
hood and community. Trees and green spaces directly
correlate to greater connections to the neighborhood
and neighbors.
• Honor your community and demon-
strate your commitment to a healthier environment
through Arbor Day celebrations and Tree City USA
recognition.
j.
Ar bor Dav Founda
* 10
ORDINANCE NO. 268
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF KENNEDALE ESTABLISHING
CRITERIA AND REGULATIONS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF TREES;
PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR PERMIT
REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING A REVIEW PROCESS; PROVIDING FOR
TREE PROTECTION AND REPLACEMENT; PROVIDING FOR
RESTRICTIONS ON PRUNING AND PLANTING OF TREES; PROVIDING
ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES; PROVIDINGA CUMULATIVE CLAUSE;
PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR
VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Kennedale, Texas, is a home rule City acting under its
charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas
Constitution, and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, trees are a valuable amenity to the urban environment and serve to
create greater human comfort by providing shade, cooling the air, and otherwise tempering
the effect of summer heat, thereby reducing the requirements for air conditioning and the
subsequent depletion of scarce energy resources; and
WHEREAS, trees purify the air by filtering pollutants and dust and release oxygen
into the air; and
WHEREAS, trees provide a natural habitat for many species of small animals; and
WHEREAS, trees protect land and structures by reducing run -off, binding soil and
minimizing flood damage; and
WHEREAS, trees are known to add dollar value to residential and commercial
property and to increase income levels and tax revenues by attracting new business,
industry and residents by improving a city's image; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kennedale has determined that tree
preservation is necessary to adequately protect the public health, safety and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KENNEDALE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
Chapter 16 of the Kennedale City Code is hereby amended by creating a new
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 1
*
Article VI "Natural Resources Management', which shall read as follows:
ARTICLE VI. NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
Sec. 16-70. Title.
This Article shall be known as and may be referred to as the Natural Resources
Management Ordinance.
Sec. 16 -71. Purpose and Intent.
The purpose of this Article is to promote site planning which furthers the
preservation of mature trees and natural areas, to protect trees during construction, to
facilitate site design and construction which contribute to the long term viability of existing
trees and to control the removal of trees when necessary. It is the further purpose of this
Article to achieve the following broader objectives:
(1) Prohibit the indiscriminate clearing of property.
(2) Protect and increase the value of residential and commercial properties
within the city.
(3) Maintain and enhance a positive image for the attraction of new business
enterprises to the city.
(4) Protect healthy quality trees and promote the natural ecological,
environmental and aesthetic qualities of the city.
Sec. 16-72. Definitions.
Forthe purpose of this Article, the following definitions shall apply unless the context
clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. Words and terms used in this Article, but
not defined in this Article, shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the zoning ordinance
or other ordinances of the city. Words and terms defined in two ordinances shall be read
in harmony unless there exists an irreconcilable conflict in which case the definition
contained in this Article shall control.
Agricultural Use means the use of land to produce plant or animal products, such
as the growing of crops, raising and pasturing of livestock or farming. It does not include
the processing of plant or animal products after harvesting or the production of timber or
forest products.
Buildable Area means that portion of a building site exclusive of the required yard
areas on which a structure or building improvements may be erected and including the
actual structure, driveway, parking lot, pool and other construction as shown on a site plan.
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 2
r
Building Pad means the actual foundation area of a building and the area within six
feet of the foundation that is used for construction and grade transition.
Clear Cutting means the removal of all of the trees or a significant majority of the
trees within an area.
Critical Root Zone (CRZ) means the area of undisturbed natural soil around a tree
defined by a concentric circle with a radius equal to the distance from the trunk to the
outermost portion of the dripline. (See Appendix A.)
CutlFill means areas where the natural ground level has been excavated (cut) or fill
brought in.
Drip Line means a vertical line run through the outermost portion of the canopy of
a tree and extending to the ground. (See Appendix A.)
Landscape Administrator means the Director of Public Works or his /her designated
representative.
Limits of Construction means a delineation on the graphic exhibit which shows the
boundary of the area within which all construction activity will occur.
MunicipallPublic Domain Property means, for example, City Hall, public parks,
county property, Corps of Engineers property, State of Texas R.O.W., library, fire stations,
water tower sites or similar properties.
Protective Fencing means chain link fence, wire fence, orange vinyl construction
fencing, snow fencing or other similar fencing with a four foot approximate height.
Selective Thinning means the removal of selected trees from within a densely
forested area.
Tree means any self- supporting, woody, perennial plant which will attain a trunk
diameter of two inches or more when measured at a point four and one -half feet above
ground level and normally an overall height of at least 15 feet at maturity, usually with one
main stem or trunk and many branches. It may appear to have several stems or trunks as
in several varieties of oaks.
Tree Board means the City Tree Board, which is hereby created and established.
This Board shall be the Planning and Zoning Commission unless otherwise appointed by
City Council.
Tree, Marginal means a tree which the city has determined may or may not be
worthy of preservation depending on the individual characteristics of the tree. (See
Appendix C.)
W: \Kennedale \ORDINAN M`rreeOrdinancempd (02/12/04)
Page 3
Tree, Park means trees in public parks and all areas owned by the city to which the
public has free access to as a park.
Tree, Protected means:
i) a quality tree that has a diameter of six inches or greater;
ii) an understory tree that has a diameter of two inches or greater; and
iii) a marginal tree that has a diameter of six inches or greater that the
Landscape Administrator has determined should be saved due to
individual characteristics and /or location of the tree.
Tree, Quality means a tree which the city has determined typically has significant
positive characteristics worthy of preservation. (See Appendix C.)
Tree, Street means a tree, or any part of the tree trunk located on land lying within
the public Right -of -Way.
Tree Topping means the severe cutting back of limbs to stubs larger than three
inches in diameter within the tree's crown to such a degree so as to remove the normal
canopy and disfigure the tree.
Tree, Understory means a tree which the city has determined has significant positive
characteristics worthy of preservation and that does not typically attain great size. (See
Appendix C.)
Sec. 16 -73. Tree Removal Permit Required.
No person, directly or indirectly, shall cut down, destroy, remove, move or effectively
destroy through damaging any protected tree situated on property regulated by this Article
without first obtaining a tree removal permit unless otherwise specified in this Article.
Sec. 16 -74. Authority for Review.
The Landscape Administrator shall be responsible for the review and approval of
all requests for tree removal permits submitted in accordance with the requirements
specified herein.
(a) Deferrals. The Landscape Administrator may defer the approval of a tree
removal permit to the Tree Board at his discretion.
(b) Appeals. Any decision made by the Landscape Administrator may be
appealed to the Tree Board.
Any decision made by the Tree Board may be appealed to the City Council. The
decision of the City Council shall be final.
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 4
Sec. 16 -75. Submittal Requirements.
The Landscape Administrator shall establish administrative procedures necessary
to facilitate the implementation and enforcement of this Article.
(a) Tree removal permit. A request for a tree removal permit must be submitted
and approved prior to the removal of any protected tree in the city unless the tree is exempt
under a provision of this Article.
(b) Fees. All tree removal permits shall be accompanied by a payment made to
the city in the amount specified by City Council.
(c) Required documents. A tree survey, submitted in accordance with the
requirements of appendix D, and a construction plan, in accordance with appendix E, shall
be required and must include the items referenced in this Article and its appendices.
(d) Permit expiration. Permits for tree removal issued in connection with a
building permit or site plan shall be valid for the period of that building permit's or site plan's
validity. Permit(s) for tree removal not issued in connection with a building permit or a site
plan shall become void 180 days after the issue date on the permit.
Sec. 16 -76. Action on Permit Application.
The issuance of a tree removal permit shall be based on the following criteria:
(1) Whether or not a reasonable accommodation or alternative solution can be
made to accomplish the desired activity without the removal of the tree.
(2) The cost of preserving the tree.
(3) Whether the tree is worthy of preservation. Trees listed as marginal trees in
Appendix C are usually not considered worthy of preservation but shall
depend upon the individual characteristics of the tree.
(4) The effect of the removal on erosion, soil moisture, retention, flow of surface
waters and drainage systems.
(5) The need for buffering of residential areas from the noise, glare and visual
effects of nonresidential uses.
(6) Whether the tree interferes with a utility service.
(7) Whether the proposed tree replacement pursuant to the tree replacement
requirements hereof adequately mitigates the removal of the tree.
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 5
(8) Whether the removal affects the public health, safety or welfare.
Sec. 16 -77. Clear Cutting.
The clear cutting of land as defined in this Article is prohibited.
Sec. 16 -78. Selective Thinning.
The removal of selected trees from within a densely forested area, when done in a
professionally accepted manner, shall be allowed as a single permit upon approval by the
Landscape Administrator. Approval will only be granted when the Landscape Administrator
determines that the selective thinning is being done in a manner that would enhance the
environment and likelihood of survival for the remaining trees.
Sec. 16 -79. Ground Level Cuts.
Where protected tree removal is allowed through an exemption or pursuant to a tree
removal permit and the root system is intertwined with protected trees which are intended
to be saved, the tree shall be removed by flush cutting with the natural level of the
surrounding ground. Where stump removal is also desired, stump grinding shall be
allowed, or upon approval of the Landscape Administrator, a trench may be cut between
the two trees sufficient to cut the roots near the tree to be removed, thereby allowing
removal of the remaining stump without destruction of the root system of the saved tree.
Sec. 16 -80. New Developments.
All new developments that have not yet made application to the City for
development or plat approval as of the effective date of this Article shall be subject to the
requirements for tree protection and replacement set forth herein.
(a) Residential Developments. All areas within street rights -of -way, utility or
drainage easements as shown on an approved final plat, and areas designated as cut/fill
on the construction plan approved by the Landscape Administrator shall be exempt from
the tree protection and replacement requirements specified herein. The developer may
request the Landscape Administrator to allow trees within potential building pad areas to
be included in the exemption described herein. All other area shall be subject to these
requirements.
(b) Nonresidential Development. All areas within street right -of -ways, utility or
drainage easements as shown on an approved final plat, areas designated as cut/fill on
the master construction plan approved by the Landscape Administrator, plus fire lanes,
parking areas and building pad as shown on an approved site plan shall be exempt from
the tree protection and replacement requirements specified herein.
(c) Permit Requirements. Atree removal permit shall not be required for removal
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 6
of a protected tree within an area noted in subsections (a) and (b) of this section. However,
a permit must be obtained prior to the removal of any other protected tree on the property.
(d) Landscape Administrator Review.
(1) Residential Development. A developer shall be required to furnish a tree
survey showing all proposed improvements (for example, right -of -ways,
easements, lot patterns, cut/fill and the like) with the submittal of a site plan,
development plan, preliminary plat or final plat, whichever occurs first. The
tree survey shall submitted in accordance with the requirements set forth in
appendix D hereof and shall be prepared on a sheet drawn to the scale of
one inch equal to 100 feet (1:100) or on a computer disk in the format of a
commonly used Computer -Aided Design (CAD) program.
(2) Nonresidential Development. A developer shall be required to furnish a tree
survey showing all proposed improvements (for example, right -of -ways,
easements, lot patterns, cut/fill, fire lanes, parking areas and building pads
and the like)with the submittal of a site plan, development plan, construction
plan, plot plan or building permit application, whichever occurs first. The tree
survey shall submitted in accordance with the requirements set forth in
appendix D hereof and shall be prepared on a sheet drawn to the scale of
one inch equal to 100 feet (1:100) or on a computer disk in the format of a
commonly used Computer -Aided Design (CAD) program.
(3) It is highly recommended that the developer consult with the Landscape
Administrator and submit the required tree survey for review as early as
possible so as to minimize changes in preliminary or final plats and to
determine that there is adequate area for the proposed improvements after
tree protection and replacement have been taken into consideration.
(4) The Landscape Administrator will evaluate the required tree survey to
determine whether the developer has made a good -faith effort to save as
many protected trees as possible. The Administrator will forward review
comments to the Planning and Zoning Commission for consideration
regarding denial or approval of the development. If the review involves a
document that normally does not require the approval of the Planning and
Zoning Commission, the Administrator will follow the procedures in §§ 16 -74
through 16 -76.
(e) Parking Area. When a nonresidential development consists of extra parking
spaces beyond 110% of the minimum parking spaces required by the zoning ordinance,
the developer shall be required to replace a percentage of the trees removed or make a
payment into the Tree Restoration Fund. The replacement trees shall be calculated by
multiplying the total diameter of trees removed in all parking spaces by the percentage of
the extra parking spaces to the total number of parking spaces (total diameter of trees
W: \Kennedale \ORDINAN MTreeOrdinancempd (02/12/04) Page 7
removed x extra parking spaces _ total parking spaces). The replacement trees shall be
provided in accordance with § 16 -84.
Sec. 16 -81. Residential and Agricultural Property.
(a) Homestead. The owner of property that is used for an individual residence
or homestead shall be exempt from the tree protection and replacement requirements
specified herein.
(b) Property Owned by Home Builder. All areas within the building pad,
driveway, sidewalks, patios, septic tank and lateral lines, parking area, pool and associated
deck area as shown on a tree survey approved by the Landscape Administrator shall be
exempt from the tree protection and replacement requirements specified herein. All other
areas of the lot shall be subject to these requirements.
(1) Permit requirements. A tree removal permit shall not be required for removal
of a protected tree within an area noted above; however a permit must be
obtained prior to the removal of any other protected tree on the property.
(2) Landscape Administrator review. A tree survey showing all proposed
improvements shall be required with the submittal of a building permit
application. The tree survey shall be submitted on a sheet drawn to a scale
as required by the Landscape Administrator or on a computer disk in the
format of a commonly used Computer -Aided Design (CAD) program.
(c) Agricultural Property. The owner of property actively used for agricultural
purposes shall be permitted to remove up to seven protected trees per calendar year
without obtaining a permit. Protected trees removed in excess of seven will require permits.
It is not the intent of this Article to prohibit the clearing of land for legitimate, agricultural
use. The property owner shall request the Landscape Administrator to make an on -site
inspection of the property to be cleared and provide the Landscape Administrator the
purpose for the clearing. If the Landscape Administrator determines the clearing of land
to be for a legitimate, agricultural reason, he /she will issue a tree removal permit.
Sec. 16 -82. Municipal /Public Domain Property, Rights -of -way and Easements.
All construction and maintenance activities within municipal /public domain property,
right -of -ways or easements held by the city, franchise utility companies or other entities
shall be subject to the requirements for tree protection and replacement specified as
follows.
(a) Removal of a Protected Tree. A tree removal permit shall not be required for
removal of a protected tree. However, no construction or maintenance activity that may
cause the removal of a protected tree shall begin until construction plans showing
protected trees to be removed and the location of replacement trees have been approved
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 8
by the Landscape Administrator. Pruning activities by a utility shall be governed by the
provisions of § 18 -86.
(b) Tree Board Responsibilities. It shall be the responsibility of the Tree Board
to study, investigate, counsel and develop and /or update periodically and administer a
written plan for the care, preservation, pruning, planting, replanting, removal or disposition
of trees in parks, along streets and in other public areas. The plan shall be presented to
the City Council and when adopted shall represent the comprehensive tree plan for the
city.
(c) Acceptable Trees. The Landscape Administrator shall maintain a list of trees
acceptable for planting along streets and within parks and other public areas. Trees other
than those listed as acceptable may only be planted upon approval of the Landscape
Administrator.
(d) Street Tree Spacing. The spacing of street trees shall be in accordance with
recommendations of the Landscape Administrator. Closer spacing or group plantings may
be approved by the Landscape Administrator in unique situations and when recommended
by a registered Landscape Architect.
(e) Public Tree Care. The city shall have the right to plant, prune and maintain
street trees and park trees within the lines of all streets, alleys, avenues, lanes, squares
and public grounds, as may be necessary to insure public safety or to preserve or enhance
the symmetry and beauty of the public properties. The city may remove, cause or order to
be removed any tree or part thereof which is in an unsafe condition, or which by reason of
its nature is injurious to sewers, electric power lines, gas lines, water lines or other public
improvements, or which is affected with any injurious fungus, disease, insect or other pest.
Sec. 16-83. Exemptions.
A tree removal permit and tree protection and replacement requirements shall not
be required under any of the following circumstances. The burden of proof of a qualified
exemption is upon the remover of a tree. It is highly recommended that qualification as an
exemption be determined with the Landscape Administrator prior to removal of any tree.
(a) Preexisting Conditions. All construction activities for which final construction
plans and building permit applications have been submitted prior to the effective date of
this Article shall be exempt.
(b) Diseased Trees. The tree is diseased, damaged beyond the point of
recovery or in danger of falling as determined by the Landscape Administrator prior to the
removal of the tree. The removal of a diseased tree by the city or an individual is required
to reduce the chance of spreading the disease to adjacent healthy trees.
(c) Public Safety. The tree endangers the public health, welfare or safety and
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 9
immediate removal is required.
(d) Utility Service Interruption. The tree has disrupted a public utilityservice due
to a tornado, storm, flood or other act of God. Removal shall be limited to the portion of the
tree reasonably necessary to reestablish and maintain reliable utility service.
(e) Landscape Nursery. All licensed plant ortree nurseries shall be exempt from
the requirements of this Article as they pertain to those trees planted and growing on the
premises of the licensee that are so planted and growing for the sale or intended sale to
the general public in the ordinary course of the licensee's business.
Sec. 16 -84. Tree Replacement Requirements.
(a) Tree Replacement. In the event that it is necessary to remove a protected
tree as specified in §§ 16 -81 through 16 -82, the party (other than franchise utility
companies) removing the tree shall be required to replace the protected trees being
removed with quality trees as defined herein. A sufficient number of trees shall be planted
to equal or exceed the diameter (measured at four and one -half feet above ground level)
of each tree removed. This mitigative measure is not meant to supplant good site planning.
Tree replacement will be considered only after all design alternatives which could save
more existing trees have been evaluated and reasonably rejected. The replacement trees
shall be a minimum of three inch diameter (measured at one foot above ground) and seven
feet in height when planted.
(b) Replacement Procedures. At the time of review, the time of replacement and
the location of the new trees will be determined by the Landscape Administrator. The
replacement trees shall be located on the subject site whenever possible. However, if this
is not feasible, the Landscape Administrator has the authority to allow the planting to take
place on another property, including public property. Franchise utility companies shall be
exempt from this requirement. If the Landscape Administrator approves the planting of
replacement trees more than 30 days after the removal of protected trees, the applicant
shall provide the Landscape Administrator with an affidavit that all replacement trees will
be planted within six months. Any replacement tree required by this Article must be
covered by a one -year warranty that is acceptable to the Landscape Administrator.
(c) Tree Reforestation Fund. In a densely forested area, the applicant, upon
approval of the Landscape Administrator, may make a payment into the Tree Reforestation
Fund in lieu of planting the replacement tree on the subject site. The funds shall be used
only for purchasing and planting trees on public property or acquiring wooded property
which shall remain in a naturalistic state in perpetuity. The amount of the payment required
for each replacement tree shall be calculated based on a schedule published annually by
the Landscape Administrator which sets forth the average cost of a quality tree added to
the average cost of planting a tree.
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 10
Sec. 16 -85. Tree Protection.
A major purpose of this Article is to protect all protected trees which are not required
to be removed to allow approved construction to occur. The following procedures are
required.
(a) Construction Plan Requirements. All construction plans shall include the
requirements set forth in Appendix E.
(b) Prohibited Activities. The following activities shall be prohibited within the
limits of the critical root zone of any protected tree subject to the requirements of this
Article.
(1) Material Storage. No materials intended for use in construction or waste
materials accumulated due to excavation or demolition shall be placed within
the limits of the critical root zone of any protected tree. However, this
restriction shall not apply to material storage in areas exempt from the tree
protection and replacement requirements (for example, building pad,
driveway, patio, parking lot and the like.)
(2) Equipment Cleaning /Liquid Disposal. No equipment shall be cleaned or
other liquids deposited or allowed to flow overland within the limits of the
critical root zone of a protected tree. This includes, without limitation, paint,
oil, solvents, asphalt, concrete, mortar or similar materials.
(3) Tree Attachments. No signs, wires or other attachments, other than those
of a protective nature shall be attached to any protected tree.
(4) Vehicular Traffic. No vehicular and /or construction equipment traffic or
parking shall take place within the limits of the critical root zone of any
protected tree other than on an existing street pavement. This restriction
does not apply to single incident access within the critical root zone for
purposes of clearing underbrush, establishing the building pad and
associated lot grading, vehicular traffic necessary for routine utility
maintenance or emergency restoration of utility service or routine mowing
operations.
(5) Grade Changes. No grade changes shall be allowed within the limits of the
critical root zone of any protected tree unless adequate construction methods
are approved by the Landscape Administrator or if grading is as directed by
the city's drainage inspector.
(6) Impervious Paving. No paving with asphalt, concrete or other impervious
materials in a manner which may reasonably be expected to kill a tree shall
be placed within the limits of the critical root zone of a protected tree except
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \Treeordinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 11
as otherwise allowed in this Article.
(c) Preserved Tree. A protected tree shall be considered to be preserved only
if a minimum of 75% of the critical root zone is maintained at undisturbed natural grade and
no more than 25% of the canopy is removed due to building encroachment.
(d) Priorto Construction. The following procedures shall be followed on all types
of construction projects (including residential subdivisions, commercial, multi family,
industrial developments, residential builders and municipal /public).
(1) Tree Flagging or Marking. Trees that are approved by the Landscape
Administrator for removal shall be flagged with bright fluorescent orange vinyl
tape wrapped around the main trunk or marked with bright fluorescent
orange paint at a height of four feet or more such that it is very visible to
workers operating construction equipment. This shall not include the flagging
or marking of all protected trees adjacent to right -of -ways within approved
residential subdivisions during the construction of the roadway. Trees that
are not flagged or marked shall be saved and protected by fencing in
accordance with the requirements in subsection (d)(2).
(2) Protective Fencing. In those situations where a protected tree is so close to
the construction area that construction equipment might infringe on the root
system or is within 20 feet of the construction area, a protective fencing shall
be required between the outer limits of the critical root zone of the tree and
the construction activity area. Four feet high protective fencing shall be
supported at a maximum of ten feet intervals by approved methods. All
protective fencing shall be in place prior to commencement of any site work
and remain in place until all exterior work has been completed.
(3) Bark Protection. In situations where a protected tree remains in the
immediate area of intended construction, the tree shall be protected by
enclosing the entire circumference of the tree with 2" x 4" lumber encircled
with wire or other means that do not damage the tree. The intent here is to
protect the bark of the tree against incidental contact by construction
equipment.
(e) Permanent Construction Methods.
(1) Boring. Where it is not possible to trench around the critical root zone of a
protected tree, boring of utilities under the protected tree shall be required.
The length of the bore shall at least be the width of the critical root zone and
the depth of the bore shall at least be 24 inches.
(2) Grade Change. In situations where the grade change within the critical root
zone of a protected tree exceeds the limits noted in subsection (b) of this
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANQTreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 12
section, the procedures noted in the city standard detail sheet shall be
required.
(3) Trenching. All trenching shall be designed to avoid trenching across the
critical root zone of any protected tree. Although this section is not intended
to prohibit the placement of underground services such as electric, phone,
gas and the like, the placement of these utilities is encouraged to be located
outside of the critical root zone of protected trees. Irrigation system trenching
shall be placed outside of the critical root zone with only the minimum
required single head supply line allowed within that area placed radially to
the tree trunk.
(4) Root Pruning. All roots two inches or larger in diameter which are exposed
as a result of trenching or other excavation shall be cut off square with a
sharp medium tooth saw and covered with pruning compound within two
hours of initial exposure.
Sec. 16 -86. Tree Pruning Restrictions.
(a) General. No protected tree should be pruned in a mannerwhich significantly
disfigures the tree without proper cause or in a manner which would reasonably lead to the
death of the tree.
(b) Permit Requirements. All franchise utility companies shall be required to
maintain at the city a set of pruning specifications (updated annually) to be followed by all
pruning contractors working for the company within the city. Prior to beginning any pruning
not requested by the owner of the tree, the contractorfor a nonfranchise entity shall submit
to the city an application for a pruning permit for approval. Utility companies may prune
trees as necessary to maintain safe and reliable service or to reestablish disrupted electric
service without obtaining a permit.
(c) Allowed Pruning. The Landscape Administrator may approve pruning of a
protected tree in cases where protected trees must be strategically pruned to allow
construction or demolition of a structure. When allowed, all pruning shall be in accordance
with § 16- 85(c), approved Arboricultural techniques and the recommendations of Appendix
F. This section is not intended to require a tree permit for reasonable pruning performed
or contracted to be performed by the owner of the tree when unrelated to construction
activity.
(d) Required Pruning. The owners of all trees adjacent to public right -of -ways
shall be required to prune the trees, including any adjacent street trees, to maintain a
minimum clearance of ten feet above the sidewalk or curb of a public street. The owners
shall also remove all dead, diseased or dangerous trees, or broken or decayed limbs which
constitute a menace to the safety of the public. The city shall also have the right to prune
trees overhanging within public rights -of -way which interfere with vehicular traffic or the
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 13
proper spread of light along the street from a street light or interfere with visibility of any
traffic control device or sign or as necessary to preserve the public safety.
(e) Tree Topping. It shall be unlawful as a normal practice for any person, firm
or city department to top any street tree, park tree or other tree on public property. Trees
severely damaged by storms or other causes, or certain trees under utility wires or other
obstructions where other pruning practices are impractical may be exempted from this
Article at the determination of the Landscape Administrator.
Sec. 16 -87. Tree Planting Restrictions.
(a) Overhead Lines. Any required replacement trees shall not be planted within
an area such that the mature canopy of the tree will be within ten feet of overhead utility
lines.
(b) Proximityto Utilities. Any required replacement trees or streettrees shall not
be planted within five feet of electrical facilities (underground or surface), public utility lines,
including water lines, sewer lines, transmission lines or other utilities. No trees shall be
planted within ten feet of a fire hydrant. Shrubs will be permitted outside of the minimum
clearance of surface electrical facilities established by the franchise electrical company.
(c) Street Corners. No tree shall be planted closer than 25 feet of any street
comer, measured from the point of nearest intersecting curbs or curblines.
Sec. 16 -88. Additional Duties and Authorities of the Tree Board.
The Tree Board shall have the responsibility to review and grant a tree removal
permit for the following land use:
(1) Any public or recreational use that is deemed acceptable to the Tree Board.
(2) Any private use that is deemed acceptable to the Tree Board that usually
requires large areas of open space.
(3) In granting the tree removal permit, the Tree Board is authorized to impose
whatever conditions of approval that are deemed necessary by the Tree
Board.
Sec. 16 -89. Building Permit.
No building permit shall be issued unless the applicant signs an application or permit
request which states that all construction activities shall meet the requirements of this
Article. The Building Official shall make available to the applicant a copy of this Article or
a condensed summary of the relevant aspects pertaining to the type of permit requested.
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 14
Sec. 16 -90. Acceptance of Improvements.
No acceptance of public improvements shall be authorized until all fines for
violations of this Article have been paid to the city or otherwise disposed of through the
Municipal Court. No acceptance of public improvements shall be authorized until all
replacement trees have been planted, appropriate payments have been made to the Tree
Reforestation Fund, or an affidavit has been submitted in accordance with the
requirements set forth in Section 16- 84(b).
Sec. 16 -91. Certificate of Occupancy.
No certificate of occupancy shall be issued until all fines for violations of this Article
have been paid to the city or otherwise disposed of through the Municipal Court. No
certificate of occupancy shall be issued until all replacement trees have been planted,
appropriate payments have been made to the Tree Reforestation Fund, or an affidavit has
been submitted in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 16- 84(b).
Sec. 16 -92. Fiscal Security.
Notwithstanding the provisions of §§ 16 -89 through 16 -91, public improvements may
be accepted and certificate of occupancy may be issued before all trees have been
replaced if a fiscal security is posted in an amount equal to the prevailing rate for installed
trees with a one year guarantee, plus 15% to cover administrative costs.
Sec. 16 -93. Park Trees.
No person shall prune, treat or remove park trees without the express written
consent of the Landscape Administrator.
Sec. 16-94. Penalty.
(a) Any person, firm, corporation, agent or employee thereof who:
i) cuts down, destroys, removes, moves or effectively destroys through
damaging any protected tree without first obtaining a tree permit from the
City, where required;
ii) does so in violation of the tree permit; or
iii) fails to follow the tree replacement procedures set forth in Section 16-84,
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined One
Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per diameter inch of the tree(s) removed or
damaged, not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) per incident. The
unlawful replacing, cutting down, destroying, removing, moving or effectively
destroying through damaging of each protected tree shall constitute a
separate offense and each offense shall subject the violator to the maximum
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.wpd (02/12104) Page 15
penalty set forth herein for each tree.
(b) Any person, firm, corporation, agent or employee thereof who violates any
other provisions of this Article shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction hereof
shall be fined not to exceed $500 for each incident.
SECTION 2.
This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances and the Code of
the City of Kennedale, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct
conflict with the provisions of such ordinances and Code, in which event the conflicting
provisions of such ordinances and Code are hereby repealed.
SECTION 3.
It is hereby declared to be the intention ofthe City Council that the phrases, clauses,
sentences, paragraphs, and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase,
clause sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional
by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such
unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences,
paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by
the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional
phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section.
SECTION 4.
The City Secretary of the City of Kennedale is hereby directed to publish in the
official newspaper of the City of Kennedale the caption, penalty clause, publication clause
and effective date clause of this ordinance as provided by Section 3.10 of the Charter of
the City of Kennedale.
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC\Treeordinance.wpd (02/12/04) Page 16
SECTION 5.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and
publication as required by law, and it is so ordained.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 12 DAY OF FEBRUARY , 2004.
U° ;' '• _ MAYOR
s • 1
• j /� T
v� = ATTEST:
COON
��
CITY SECRE ARY
EFFECTIVE: 2 -Z0- 04
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
W ka&=
CITY ATTORNEY
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinancwApd (02/12/04) Page 17
APPENDIX A
Natural Resources Management
TREE EXHIBIT
Critical Root Zone (CRZ): The area of undisturbed natural soil around a tree defined by a
concentric circle with a radius equal to the distance from the trunk to the outermost portion of the
dripline.
Drip Line: A vertical line run through the outermost portion of the canopy of a tree and
extending to the ground.
APPENDIX B
Natural Resources Management
UtREGULAR SWELLING
(requires discretion by
Landscape Administrator)
MULTI -TRUNK TREE LEANING TREE
Source: COA
Diameter Measurement: The diameter of a tree shall be measured as shown above. The
diameter of a tree shall be the total diameter of the largest trunk plus half the diameter of each
additional trunk.
ON A SLOPE
Common Name
Pecan
Cedar Elm
Shumard Red Oak
Texas Red Oak
Live Oak
Bur Oak
Post Oak
Black Jack Oak
Lacebark Elm
APPENDIX C
Quality Trees
Botanical Name
Carya illinoensis
Ulmus crassifolia
Quercus shumardii
Quercus texana
Quercus virginiana
Quercus macrocarpa
Quercus stellata
Quercus marilandica
Ulmus parvifolia
Chinese Pistache
Plstacia chlnensls
Sweetgum
Liquidambar styraciflua
Austrian Pine
Pinus nigra
Chinquapin Oak
Quercus muhlenbergii
Southern Magnolia
Magnolia grandiflora
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.Exhibit C.wpd
Identification Notes
Pecan fruit,
compound leaves
Deciduous, 1"-2"
dark green leaves
Deep pointed lobes
in leaves
Vertical multi -mink
shape
1 ' / 2 " dark green
pointed leaves
Large acorn, leaf
border at end
Deep lobes, rounded
tip on leaf
Leathery 3 " -7" leaf,
no lobes
Small dark serrated
green leaves
3" sickle leaflets, fall
color
Star shaped leaf
Two needles
Oblong 4 " -6"
serrated leaf
Large evergreen
leaf, white flower
Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum Feather -like foliage,
fall color
Caddo Maple Acer barbatum 'Caddo' Five -lobed leaf
Texas Hickory Carya texana Five leaflets, V-2"
nut
Western Soapberry Sapindus drummondii 18" compound leaf,
' /2 " clear fruit
Red Cedar Juniperus: virginiana Native, pyramidal
shape
Marainal Trees
Common Name
Botanical Name
Identification Notes
Cottonwood
Populus deltoides
Deep fissures in
bark heart shape
leaf
Mesquite
Prosopis glandulosa
Lacy open foliage,
10" bean fruit
American Elm
Ulmus americana
"V" shaped main
branching
Slash Pine
Pinus elliotti
Tall cylindrical shape
Honeylocust
Gleditsia triacanthos
Lacy foliage ,
thornless variety
only
Japanese Black Pine
Pinus thunbergii
Twisted growth, dark
green needles
Deodar Cedar
Cedrus deodara
Large p y r a m i d a l
evergreen
Understory Trees
Common Name Botanical Name Identification Notes
Redbud Cercis canadensis Purple /white flower
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.Exhibit C.wpd
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.E)Oibit C.wpd
in spring
Mexican Plum
Prunis mexicana
White flower,
exfoliating bark,
thorns
Possumhaw Holly
Ilex decidua
Showy orange /red
fruit, deciduous
Golden Raintree
Koelrutaria paniculata
Yellow flower,
panicled fruit
Yaupon Holly
Ilex vomitoria
Evergreen, light bark
red fruit
Cherry Laurel
Prunus caroliniana
Glossy evergreen
foliage, shrubby
River Birch
Betula nigra
White flaky bark
Eves Necklace
Sophora aff inis
D u I I g r e e n
tear - dropped shape
leaf
Persimmon
Diospyros virgininana
Thin, smooth, pale
grey bark
Rusty Blackhaw
Viburnum nufidulum
Glossy, dark green
leaved white flowers
Wax Myrtle
Myrica cerifera
Light olive -green
leaves, pale blue
berries
W:\ Kennedale \ORDINANC \TreeOrdinance.E)Oibit C.wpd
APPENDIX D
List of Items Required on Tree Survey:
1. Appropriate title (for example, Tree Removal Exhibit or Tree Survey).
2. Title block, including street address, lot and block, subdivision name, city and date
of preparation.
3. North arrow, graphic and written scale in close proximity.
4. Scale at a size no larger than 1 " =100 for residential development; scale to be
determined by the Landscape Administrator for nonresidential and home building
activities.
5. Name, address and phone of owner and person preparing the document.
6. Location of all right -of -way lines and public easements.
7. Location of all buildings, structures, pools, parking and other improvements which
are existing or intended on the lot.
8. Areas of cut/fill with amount of each shown and flow lines shown.
9. Existing and proposed spot elevations, grades and major contours, along with
existing landscaping, streams, ponds and major natural features.
10. Areas of no disturbance labeled as "No Disturbance Area." This area must be
clearly marked on the plan and surrounded with protective fencing on the ground.
A single incidence removal of underbrush and vines is allowed. '
11. All protected trees shown individually on the plan. Canopy Trees six inches or
greater in size and Understory Trees two inches or greater in size. Trees in close
proximity that all have a caliper of less than four inches may be designated as a
group of trees with quantity of quality, marginal and understory trees shown. (See
Appendix C)
12. The location of protected trees must be tied by horizontal control (including
dimensions from lot lines or placed through coordinates determined via survey.)
13. All protected trees shown with diameter (four and one -half feet from the ground),
common name and condition.
14. Any proposed replacement trees shown with caliper size, common name of tree and
mature size.
W:\ Kennedale \Ordinanc \TreeOrdinance.Exhibit D.wpd
15. Graphic representations distinguishing protected trees that will be saved versus
those that will be removed.
16. Phasing of tree survey along with phasing of the development is permitted.
Notes:
The Landscape Administrator shall have the authority to designate areas as "no
disturbance" areas where a survey would not be required due to no intended construction.
2 An area may be designated as a "No Disturbance Zone" on the plan when approved
by the Landscape Administrator and trees within that zone are not required to be
individually identified on the plan.
3 The Landscape Administrator shall have the authority to exempt any of the above
items that he /she deems to be not applicable.
W:\ Kennedale \Ordinanc \TreeOrdinance.Exhibit D.wpd
l
APPENDIX E
Construction Plan Requirements
The following shall be required as a part of all construction plans submitted to the
city when tree removal or tree protection is required during any phase of site work or
construction.
1. A Tree Preservation Detail Sheet shall include the following at a minimum.
a. The requirements of § 16 -85 (b) through (d) shall be noted.
b. A graphics legend to be used throughout the plans for the purposes of
showing the following: trees to be flagged, protective fencing, trees requiring
bark protection, boring, areas of cut and fill impacting protected trees.
C. Graphic tree exhibit showing the features of a tree to include the critical root
zone, trunk, canopy, drip line and method of diameter measurement (per
Appendices A & B).
d. Graphic exhibits showing methods of protection to include snow fences,
boarded skirts and the like.
e. Graphic exhibits showing construction methods to include grade changes,
boring, trenching and the like.
f. Graphic exhibit showing appropriate pruning practices (per Appendix F)
2. All practices which will be employed in meeting the requirements of this Article shall
be shown graphically on all applicable sheets within the construction plans.
3. Documents as required in Appendix D herein.
WA Kennedale \ORDINANOTreeOrdinance.Exhibit E.wpd
APPENDIX F
Natural Resources Management
TREE PRUNING RECON&U NDATIONS
branch INo Yes
bark ridge
lr
collar
When removing a branch, always cut outside the
branch bark ridge and collar. Do not make a flush
cut.
collofttinent
stems
/No
4 0'
•*
bark
ridge Yes
vim
Branches that do not have a distinct collar
should be cut at a right angle to the branch
outside the branch bark ridge.
1 4 ti i, 2. remove limb
collar 1. under cut
3. out stub
outside of collar
Trees may have codominant stems, as shown on the When removing heavy limbs, first make an
left. If a codominant stem must be removed, cut at an undercut several inches outside of the collar. Then
angle outside of the bark ridge as shown in the insert at remove limb by a second cut an inch or so outside
right. Avoid leaving any stub, of the first cut. Remove stub with a third cut just
outside of the collar. (Feucht, 1985)
Staff Report
To the Mayor and Council Members
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Work Session
Subject: National League of Cities Service Line Warranty Program (see attached
information)
Originated by: Bob Hart, City Manager
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
Disposition by Council:
To sfrengfhen
and promote
cities as centers
of opportunity,
leadership, and
Dear City Official:
governance.
The National League of Cities (NLC) is pleased to partner with Utility Service Partners,
- Inc. (USP) in offering the NLC Service Line Warranty Program. Our Service Line
Warranty Program is an,affordableahome froteatio"olution for your.waidents to help
them deal with the finaneial burden atunantioipated utility line repair and replacement
National League of cities costs that are not the city's responsibility to repair. Some additional program benefits are:
1301 PennsylvoNa Am. N.W.
woshingion, D.C. 2ao04 -176 a No cost for cities to participate
202 o Aff rates for residents
FO)e 202 -620M • Repairs trade by trusted local contractors
www,rdc.org
e Reduces local officials' frlcsttation
foss OMlewn Increases citizen satisfaction
President
We-selected this program because of two outstanding features. First, by endorsing the
R«ww 0. Lov eMga
n4ovGr or NLC Service Line Warranty Program, the city generates extra revenue. USP will pay the
Riverside. C(lrornio : city a royalty on every dollar collected. The Program generates an on- going, sustainable
First Vice PleAdenl source of revenue for the city. Second, the rogram helps stimulate the local economy.
«� 1 +o USP uses contractors to complete the repairs, which helps keep money in the local
Chadolle. North Carok)o
economy.
Second Vrce President
Lester J. ••Les° HMke
mayor Some other things to consider in evaluating our Service Line Warranty Program are: 1)
wtfrnnr, AA4yrlesQtQ -
USP pays for the repairs, not your residents, 2) all repairs are performed to local code, 3)
immediate Post President
_ Joam C. Hunt customers are provided with a 24n customer service repair hotline, and 4) USP is
CGUncimerginlo re for all aspects of the p rog ra m including marketi billing, customer service,
c+kxkstyurg.wFUlvirginla P p P $m g g g
Executive Director and performing all repairs.
Donald J. Rorul . ..
I
The Warranty Program came to the attention of the NLC through a grass roots effort that
began in West Virginia, Illinois, Oklahorna'and Texas. Participating cities have been
delighted with the program and eagerly endorsed it to the NLC.
When you participate in an MC- endorsed program, you have the satisfaction of knowing
that the NLC staff is working with the service provider to offer superior service. We are
here to help cities participate in the program and make sure the program works for you. I
strongly encourage you to consider NLC for solutions, serrvice and savings.
For more information about the NLC Service Line Warranty Program, contact Denise
Selser, NLC Program Director, at bel'ser@nlc:org or (202) 626 -3425. 1 also invite you to
visit the Enterprise Programs section of NLC's website at www.nlc.or.
Sin ,
dui
Donald L Eo
Executive Director
' Poll fyesideaD: John Delledano, A., Mayor. New HOW M *WdMiCW • Mm i. 4YiklS eounda M r Mad*Wia. P.a &&fio Dir"fors: rxylN! L A,ddiso4 Jr. CaMSCirsyanba. corm Rouge. toudana
Darla Faker. Maio . Xw rwo. Wodrisglon • Geogrey C. Seek" rxety" OPdCIa. Mossora Mils Mwic" AneCtarar . AA MMOC(el Poles. Con"*s1* M , Lw4wli noAda • Charles A. Flarrgo.
/Jderrrsat NeiHOwOM CpMpCiCW • MOM O.'Mr Frocks, Maya. 6eRe kk.Pk?6do • Rennegs K OWleck E><OCUire oftlo. wohte"w of CRlesendlowm •M Ayad, Jr, Moyar. Pfdirre. Plobomo
Gay W. Campbe% Coy OfreclwN" Moyer. Fad SmHh MOM% • Sheri 09pebmt Coo Wfta "r, Aa^giOft Teaas • NarcY G. Corky. Coueab Mornber, Chortolle. North Caroline • kad Cob. Mayo.
Ca bonddle. iloh • &calm C".2ey. Comcl Member, MiMOWpo9%MWSesoto • JoM F. Cook Maya, EI Pisa Texas • Miared C. NOW Jersey • Jae DOy6, N., AJderrwl,
MMrot"o. Whtarodn • CrelcMa dike; Moyoc Sarre. M Hgm • terry G. bong. &4pCV*eQ C4aClo. Mnoh MW*4d 0 tOOPW • Dan NsWdo. Carex#nemher, Co M"k Colonic • Jo/n A Garner. B.
OMMP.O Mack(. PenroydrorrW league al cam and Mwk*Xff"s • owl M. omsham C,:r4 Ombe. CenucAft. Oleo • Alktcm Hdk. raemil,* Bodo. hOmYipoi AssocicRon of Soath Cordon • Rap
nontls. Cound Alerribet Ralwood ONO • Terry R Rendersen, MvyorPro Tam, W Qlirl0. CCYpNO + Lilco &arch JaClgelt Mayor PrO•YaNMdemwn of�age, Sawmah Geor¢o • DeMh Ravonvogk
Cowscwwnbet Mesm Jubora • Greg temke. Council MMmba. MopdWodk AWmesela • George tewk P1eCVrre E*ecW A.Bss sW Mu*00 LOOgw • Myron towery. CouneF Member, M0mph4
TOmMMO • MICK061 MCCmrky, ExeCUrre Wecfo4 teogue oil Oregon Cies • James F. Ago. ECecvira ORMCia, league of A4rre30ro dies • Mao MkbQft Corwcrmernber, Tempe. ibborw • Gonel 1.
nwetsk Moyo. Cddwet kw* • Ron neinslry. Coun*wmbe. Dabs. Tern • loved W. PnBgoFl COWKbMO~- WMlrplon, MD4M Comma • R""n W. h h"% CounaR Mernber, "WodoSpings..
Cokxodo • Ed P. Rayes.COUrsolnembMr, tw AngefOS. Colfoara •Gene Schaller, AldermaM1 CAtcogo, irioR • JoM 9pAng. A.kya, r3sAr+cy, iwi • Shmyn T.TOTmw. CousNo. Pakenbug. Weir VrgYSa
NswapaperHandWq
Vowma 33, NuMarm 41 1 NovlMBIA 1, 20io
New NLC "Program Reduce erMce Line Repair Costs
by Denke Belser and Cathy Spain
Cities can now help their rest-
dents cope with the high cost of
external water and sewer line
repairs by participating in a now
NLC Service Tine Warranty
Program. .
Homeowners in participating
cities are eligible to purchase these
low-cost warranties, which provide:
repairs for broken or leaking utility
lines up to $4,000 for each occur-
Fence. These repairs may range from
$1,200 to over $3,500 and can ere-
ate a significant financial hardship
for the unprepared. Warranties pro-
vide peace of mind for homeowners
by transferring the risk of costly
repairs.
Many residents become frustrat-
ed when they are told that the city
is not responsible for a service line
repair. The homeowner must con-
tract with a plumber and pay the
repair costs if the damage occurs
between the city's main pipe and
the.water meter or the connection
to the home. Cities that participate
in the warranty program can
enhance Ac city's image by reduc-
ing the homeowner cost and snak-
ing reputable plumbers readily
available.
The service line repair work is
performed by local, professional
plumbers chosen by Utility Service
Partners Inc., (LISP) the company
that administers the program. Once
USP receives a call about a service
line problem from a resident who
has purchased a warranty, a plumber
is assigned to the claim and is
required to contact the customer
'his program has been available to Clarksburg 's residents for 18
months, and it is a meat winner. Res dent satisfaction is high and it's a lot
easier to tell citizens about this gtea't new service rather than explain why
they are on the hook for costly repairs.
— James C. Runt, counellmember Clarksburg, WV%, and NLC immediate past president
within one hour of receiving the job
assignment from USP. lypically,
repairs are completed within 24
hours.
The national program is modolod
after oxisting . programs in
Oklahoma and West Virginia and
sponsored by the state municipal
leagues. Cities in these states may
continue to contact their state
league on NLC for Information
about the program.
"This program has been available
to Clarksburg's residents for 18
months, and it is a real winner," said
James C. Hunt, councllmember,
Clarksburg, W.Va., and NLC imme-
diatc past president. "Resident sat-
isfaction is high and it's a lot easier
to tell citizens about this great now
service rather than explain why they
are on the hook for costly repairs."
Starting up the program is easy
and there is no cost for the city..
Once the decision is made to move
forward, the city agrees to co -brand
the program by signing a one -page
marketing service agreement with
USP. This permits USP to use the
city's name and logo in mailings
sent to residents and in advertising.
Then the city approves a press
release and a solicitation letter and
sends the city logo artwork and
other information to USP for the let-
ters that are mailed to residents pro-
moting the program,
Several marketing campaigns are
undertaken to promote the service
in the city. The city has the right to
prior review and approval of any
materials prepared by USE
Participation increases with subse-
quent campaigns and word -of-
mouth communications from trusted
friends and neighbors.
NLC and USP will roll out the.
program over an 18- month period at
six -month interval's as various state
regulatory requirements are met and
contractor networks are established
and vetted by USP in the 48 con-
tiguous: states. (See the map to
determine the program's availability
in your state.)
The benefits of this program are
shared throughout the community. It
is extremely affordable between
$4 and $6 for each warranty a
month. Citizen frustration is
reduced, city officials have fewer
complaints to handle from resi-
dents, there is no cost to the city for
this value -added program and the
city even receives a share of the
revenues collected. All repairs are
performed to code and the money
stays in the community because
local plumbers are engaged.
Furthermore, USP monitors con-
tractor performance to ensure quali-
ty work and a customer repair hot-
line is available 2417. The progra
also contributes to a city's "green
initiatives. Leaking water pipes
waste millions of gallons of treated
water and leaking sewer lines pol-
lute groundwater and land.
This NLC Service Line Warranty
Program is a home protection solu-
tion for city residents arranged by
NLC Enterprise Programs, an initia-
tive bringing solutions and savings
to cit os. cities participate in
an MC-endorsed program, they
have the satisfaction of knowing
that the NLC staff is working with
the program administrator to offer
superior service.
Details: For more information
about this program, visit www nlc.
org/enterpriseprograms or contact
Denise 13elser, NLC program direc-
tor, at belser@nlc.org or (202) 626-
3028.
If you are attending the Congress
of Cities in Denver, stop by the
USP/NLC Service Line Warranty
booth in the NLC Pavilion to begin
the process of bringing this program
to your city residents.
O
L!'itlury SIMCI..@A RTN Iis
How Being has the company been in bcrs ressi
The company was ortginollyformed in 1498 within Columbia Energy to
provide service line warranties for its utility customers. USP was formed in
September 2003 to purchase Cofumbto Service Partners from Columbia
Energy. USP continues to expand the product offerings and grow the
business through city and utility partnerships, USP is a proud member
of the Better Business Bureau. 'I-
Is this program crvaibbie everywhere$
The NLC Servlce trine Warranty Program will be introduced' throughout the
contiguous United States in phases over the next 16 months. Please see
our National Roll:Out Schedule map for details regarding your stale.
How are our citizens nom of the pmgramIll
USP molls epch resident a campaign letter which outlines the cities'
endor ;menl, followed by a reminder letter two weeks later to ensure
the highest response rate. USP only solicits through direct mail'— no
telemarkeling is ever employed, Al homeowners will have the option to
enroll in the program, regardless of the age of their residence.
Wl mt cooperali0n will be waded from Ow cities$
USP desires to enter into a co-branded marketing services agreement with
'each city. The agreement provides for the use of the city name /logo, in
conjunction wilh USP's Pogo, on marketing materials sent to citizens. The
city Is endorsing USP as the service provider for the warranty program.
When & you solicit residents?
Through the years, we have found The optimal 'times to invite citizens to
participate are in the Spring and Fall of each year.
Does I`il'C or USP sell or rent the personal inlormatkm
of residents that enroll in the prim?
No. Neither the N!C nor USP will sell or rent The names of prospective
customers or participants.
How mucl does the resident pay for this servicet
Each warranty is sold! seporotely and the price range is generally between
$4 and $5 a month per product.
Howe mulch VAN residents we by using the wacronity
pmqr=V I
While costs for water line and sewer line repairs con vary, the. average
cost of repairing o broken water line or sewer line may range from
$1,200 to over $3,500.
Will this program cast the city any monwfl
Not or cent. USP pays for all marketing materials and program
administration. Furthermore, USP will pay the city a royally for every
resident that participates in the programl
What berrBRf does the city receive fr< a endorsing
These pragrams$
By endorsing the USP programs, the city is able to reduce residenrs
frustration over utility line failures by bringing Ihem IOU-MI, service
options. 96% of survey respondents say that their image of the city is
enhanced because the warranty program Is:Afered as.a service by the
oily. These programs also generate extra revenue for the city through the
royol'ly that is paid: by USP to the city. Finally our programs help to
stimulate the focal' economy. USP any uses local contractors to complete
the repairs which: helps to keep the dollars .ln the lacaTcommunity.
Who administers the program$
Utility Service Partners (USPi. adlministers the program and Is responsible
for ell, aspects of the program inctvding marketing, billing, customer
service, and performing all repairs to local code.
What art's the cil-"$ responsibilities?
We ask each city to work with USP to provide the following; 1) a copy of
the city seal, if available, for the solicitation letterhead 2) the cihfs return
address for outer envelope (this ensures a high "open - role ') 31 the name,
title and signature sample of the designated solicitation signor and 4) the
appropriate zip codes of the city to allow USP to purchase a mailing fist
of the residents.
Why does the city ham to provide a city seal address
and signature$'
We have found that while the loner is written in such a manner os to leave no
doubt that it is ar USP program (the USP logo is on the enrollment form), the
city address drives a very high "open-rate and the city seal and signature
lend credibility to the offer, thus driving a much higher enrollment rate.
U
W4 we get a 61 of calls from citizens when they get Who reams escaping if damaged?
Ole low USP will, provide basic restoration to the sito.Th.ls indudes filling in the
A p ress,rnleaso provided by.05? and issued prior to the first mailing will hales, mc+undingl tho lrench [togllow for settling), and tCI ing and seeding
help alleviate citt en concerns, which should result in nominal calls to the affected area. Resiorotion ' does not include replacing trees or shrubs q�,•.
cry hall. repairing private paved /concrete surfaces. This is outlined in the terms
& conditions sent to the customer.
PRODUM
How vwiff citizens know what is cowed?
Alt customers receive a set of terms and conditions upon: enrollment in a
utility warranty program. They have 30 days from the date of enrollment to
cancel' and receive a full refund.
MOW items are included'. as part of dw wow
kne warmno
The externatwoter warranty covers the underground, service line from the
point of connection to the city main line to the water meter. It also covers
the underground: service line between the water mater and the exterior
foundation of the home. If any part of the line is broken and leaking, LISP
Will repair or replace the fine in order to restore the s®rvice. Coverage caps
listed in the terms & conditions are per occurrence os follows- $000 plus
an additional' $ 500 for public sidewalk cutting, if necessary.
M hems, am indto&d as part of to sewer
fine utrant'
The external sewer kne warranty covers the underground service line from the
pointof connecHon to the city math line to the point of entry to the home. if
any part of the line is broken and leaking, US? will, repair or replace the line
In, order to restore the service. Coveroge Caps listed in the terms &.condlHons
are per occurrence as follows: $4,000 Plus an additional $4,000 for public
street culling, if necessary.
4
The Covwia�e Go 64s odegw* 'bat is *tare sat
annual or M iirne restrielion on how mVfh Your VA pay
llo repair?
No. Unlike some otherworronHes ova.i:lable, we provide you with: the full
coverage per Incident. We will pay up to your coverage amount eoch and
every time you need us. We do not deduct prior repair expense from your
coverage cap or limit the amount we will pay annually.
DoOMI Hmmmmes 6wrame saver this t ype
Of r@paw?
Typically, no. Most homeowner policies will pay to repair the damage
created by failed utility lines but they generally do not pay to repair the
actual broken pipes or lines. We encourage you to call your insurance
company to determine your actual, coverage.
Wit. building codes vrid yw Adhere
If the Hne Is broken and leaking, US? will repair or replace the looking
poriton of the line according to the current code. However,-USP is not
responsible for bringing working lines up to code that are not in need
of repair, y
fill a citizen have at forth hold time when repordr
a claim?
No. Repair calls receive the highest priority and are answered 24/7.
Repair calls are connected: to a live agent through a voice recognition
unit (VRUi.
"1 116 ankaw 06K" at five Operator 1tv6m
C.4il ,
Yes, Customers are directed to select to speak with either a service or claims
agent and' W11: then be directed to a live Agent.
What is the cfair" KaGersso
Program participants call a toll free USP number to file a claim.
USP selects the contractor, who Is required to contact the customerrwithin .
one hour:of receiving the lob to schedule a time tobegin the repairs. _
Typically, repairs are completed within 24 hours, Emergencies receive
priority handling,
perform *W .f4 pck Woo
USP retains local, professional plumbers to perform all the service line
repair work.
i'44' -4( 4;4
USP only selects contractors who share our commitment to excellence in
customer service. Scorecords are maintained for each contractor, tracking
the customer satisfaction rating for work performed. Customer feedback is
shored with our contractors and any contractor with a tow customer
satisfaction rating Is removed from the network.
Is sod movement due to 9ma d shifhi dared$
Yes, ground shifting is one of the major causes for water line breaks. If the
line is broken and leaking, the repoir Is covered under the warranty.
Impleroentat on Process
1. Upon approval from city council (if applicable), execute one -
contract provided b USP on contract execution USP
page p Y (upon ,
will imm ediately begin to recruit and screen local contractors)
2. Approve Press Release provided by : USP (general .notice
to eliminate resident confusion /city calls) and if desired,
distribute to local media and /or post to the city website
�ft 3. Send the following to USP for the creation of the citizen
solicitation letter:
• City Seal artwork, if available
• Name/Title of designated' signior plus signature
• City Address for outer envelope
• ,Zip +4 list of city territory
Nod
4. Approve Solicitation letter provided by USP
5. Access Monthly Reporting via the web
6. Receive Annual Payment NATIONAL
LEAGUE
of CITIES
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Reports and Announcements
Subject:
1. 2011 Warrant Roundup
2. Fire Department Award from Boy Scouts of America Troop 35
Originated by: Bob Hart, City Manager
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
Disposition by Council:
Warrant Round Up 2011
Highlights:
- 253 warrants cleared
- More appearance bonds posted for case disposition than in previous year:
0 23% of total warrants cleared were a result of bonds being posted
($17,840.30)
o Revenue for these outstanding bonds to be seen in coming months
- Over 250 addresses updated as a result of skip- tracing efforts
- State of economy
- More participation from Kennedale officers serving warrants during their time off
than in previous years
- Court had more strict requirements in order to set -up payment plans, resulting in
higher down payments and more PR (Personal Recognizance) and Appearance
Bonds in hopes of reducing re- issued warrants.
2010
Cost to Participate:
$1,940.11
- Overtime for Police Officers ($1,659.11)
- Postcards ($68.00)
- Postage ($112.00)
- Kennedale News Notice ($101.00)
Net Revenue: $35,258.71
Costs due to State: Approx. 31% ($10,930.20)
Cost: $1,940.11
City Kept: $24,328.51
2011
Cost to Participate:
$3,052.15
- Overtime for Police Officers ($2,872.15)
- Postcards ($68.00)
- Postage ($112.00)
Net Revenue: $29,705.04
Costs due to State: Approx. 31% ($9,208.56)
Cost: $3,052.15
City Keeps: $20,496.48
Cleared
Collected
Collection
Rate
Amt. of
Warrants
2006
$11,241.20
$2,024.10
18%
53
2007
$85,510.70
$29,108.70
34%
260
2008
$62,208.30
$31,962.37
51%
197
2009
$98,177.22
$41,469.70
42%
315
2010
$72,143.68
$37,198.82
52%
216
2011
$75,069.45
$32,757.19
44%
253
2010
Cost to Participate:
$1,940.11
- Overtime for Police Officers ($1,659.11)
- Postcards ($68.00)
- Postage ($112.00)
- Kennedale News Notice ($101.00)
Net Revenue: $35,258.71
Costs due to State: Approx. 31% ($10,930.20)
Cost: $1,940.11
City Kept: $24,328.51
2011
Cost to Participate:
$3,052.15
- Overtime for Police Officers ($2,872.15)
- Postcards ($68.00)
- Postage ($112.00)
Net Revenue: $29,705.04
Costs due to State: Approx. 31% ($9,208.56)
Cost: $3,052.15
City Keeps: $20,496.48
Troop 35
Kennedale, Texas
Tejas District
Longhorn Council
Boy Scouts of America
Tejas District Eagle Scout and Adult Volunteer Recognition Banquet in March 2011
A number of Troop 35 members were recognized
Chris Fountain Eagle Scout
Sam Yeary Eagle Scout
Austin Glovier Eagle Scout
Jeff Cullum Eagle Scout
Austin Glovier Tejas District Scout of the Year 2010
On 4128111, Jim Fountain will be a recipient of the Silver Beaver Award.
Scouting's highest award that a local area council can bestow on a volunteer
Previously Kennedale High School was awarded the 2007 Tejas District
Organization of the Year for hosting the Tejas District Merit Badge College and
has hosted the event since 2005
Tejas District Organization of the Year 2010 was awarded to the
Kennedale Fire Department
A Plaque will be presented to Kennedale Firefighters by Troop 35 Eagle Scouts
Firefighters and Troop 35 teamed up for a number of projects
Smoke Detector Installation
Construction of a fire training prop at the fire station
First Aid Merit Badge training
Career Exploration Ride -outs
Troop 35 Annual Flag Retirement Ceremony
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Consent - A
Subject: Consider approval of meeting minutes: Regular meeting dated March 10 2011
Originated by: Amethyst Cirmo, City Secretary
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
Disposition by Council:
405 Municipal Drive, Kennedale, Texas 76060
www.citvofl
MINUTES
KENNEDALE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING —MARCH 10, 2011
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
WORK SESSION — 5:30 PM
REGULAR SESSION — 7:00 PM
L WORK SESSION — 5:30 PM
Mayor Bn-an Lankhorst called the Nvork session to order at 5:38pm.
Bob Hart addressed the council on the subject of city governance. A council work session on the
subject will be held on June 18
A. Discuss and review any item on the agenda, if needed.
1. Discuss independent auditor's report for year ended September 30 "', 2010.
Auditor Greg Schropshire from Pattillo, Brovm, and Hill LLP Certified Public
Accountants presented the annual audit report. Discussion was held on 2010 -2011
city assets, debts, statement of activities, balance sheet, proprietary funds, Nvater and
Nvastewater funds, enterprise funds, and cash flow. It Nvas noted that most of the
difference in fund balance as compared to last year can be attributed to capital
projects. Loss to the general fund Nvas less than expected. Overall the city stayed
Nvell Nvithin budgeted amounts. Councilmember Clark and Mayor Lankhorst posed
questions regarding the Texas Municipal Retirement System, which Nvere answered
and discussed by the city manager and the finance director. It was noted that overall,
the city is doing Nvell.
2. Item B on the consent agenda (budget amendments) Nvas brought fonvard for
discussion. Salcura Moten- Dedrick presented information and answered questions
pertaining to the mid -year budget amendment process. Item discussed included
building maintenance, TML offset, EDC funding, operating funds, and ongoing
capital project fund status.
3. Discuss Police Department crime reporting
Police Chief Tommv Williams demonstrated w w.crimereports.com, the new Nveb-
based crime reporting software that allows citizens to explore regional crime data
through a spatial Nveb application.
4. Discuss draft ends and sub -ends
City Manager Bob Hart addressed the council regarding city goal and priority setting,
citing that extensive discussions on city governance Nvill begin on June 18"
5. Discuss item G on the consent agenda.
Bob Hart noted a change of Nvording from gas service to electric service and to
indicate that the amount be written in as $1000,00.
6. Discuss removal of item J on the regular agenda.
This process has already been completed and a contract is no longer necessary. City
Manager Bob Hart discussed retrieving the steel for the 9/11 memorial. A small
ceremoriv Nvill be held on Monday morning, March 14 "' at loam.
II. CALL TO ORDER
III. ROLL CALL
CITY STAFF PRESENT:
PRESENT
ABSENT
MAYOR, BRYAN LANKHORST
x
MAYOR PRO TEM
JOHN CLARK
x
COUNCILMEMBER BRIAN JOHNSON
x
COUNCILMEMBER .TERRY MILLER
x
COUNCILMEMBER KELLY TURNER
x
COUNCILMEMBER LIZ CARRINGTON
Ix
CITY STAFF PRESENT:
Page 2 of 7
PRESENT
ABSENT
CITY MANAGER BOB HART
x
CITY SECRETARY AMETHYST CIRMO
x
CITY ATTORNEY WAYNE K. OLSON
x
JAMES COWEY BUILDING OFFICIAL
x
POLICE CHIEF TOMMY WILLIAMS
x
FIRE CHIEF MIKE MCMURRAY
x
DIR. OF FINANCE SAKURA MOTEN- DEDRICK
x
DIR PUBLIC WORKS LARRY LEDBETTER
x
PLANNER RACHEL ROBERTS
x
HUMAN RESOURCE DIR KELLY COOPER
x
Page 2 of 7
*NOTE: Pursuant to Section 551.071, Texas Government Code, the City Council reserves the rMit to adiouru
into Executive Session at any time durinz the work session or the regular session to discuss Posted executive
session items or to seek lezal advice from the City Attorney ou any item Posted ou the agenda.
REGULAR SESSION - 7:00 PM
Mavor Lankhorst called the regular meeting to order at 7:12pm.
IV. INVOCATION
The meeting invocation Nvas lead by a student from Fellowship Academy.
V. UNITED STATES PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge Nvas lead by a student from Fellowship Academy.
VI. TEXAS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
"Honor the Texas Flag, I Pledge Allegiance to Thee, Texas, One State under God, One and
Indivisible."
VII. VISITOR/CITIZENS FORUM
At this time, any person Nvith business before the Council not scheduled on the agenda may speak
to the Council. No formal action can be taken on these items at this meeting.
Three citizens requested to speak:
1. Pat Doescher, President of the Kennedale Chamber of Commerce discussed the Texas
Independence Day parade. She expressed gratitude to all city employees, school participants,
the Veterans Board, sponsor Chesapeake Energy, and community members who helped make
the parade and surrounding events a great success. There Neill be an after event meeting on
Saturdav, March 12 2011.
2. Greg Hudson, Executive Director of the Kennedale Chamber of Commerce Greg also
expressed his thanks for the amount of interagency cooperation for the parade event. Mr.
Hudson announced two upcoming events:
a. March 16 " event to be held at Life Fellowship Church, speakers Nvill address health
care legislation issues and concerns and the event Nvill be catered by Angela's
Mexican Restaurant.
b. April 12 " business after hours at mike's burger box
C.
Felipe Gutierrez from the Arts and Culture Board and Art in the Park Committee thanked the
councilmembers and the city for their continued support of the arts. The art in the hallwa -,T
project Nvas a great success and Nvas attended by 209 community members. Art in the Park is
gearing up and Nvill be held on April 8, 9, and 10. Vendors and sponsor applications are still
being accepted, and the 5k Nvill be held on Saturday morning. The Youth Advisory Council
Nvill be organizing the children's area this Near.
VIII. REPORTS /ANNOUNCEMENTS
In addition to any specific matters listed below, the city council may receive a report about items
of community interest, including but not limited to recognition of individual officials, citizens or
departments, information regarding holiday schedules, upcoming or attended events, etc.
Page 3 of 7
A. Mavor
B. Citv Council
1. Councilmember Clark thanked Pat Doescher for her commitment and dedication to the
parade event.
2. Councilmember Johnson thanked to Felipe Gutierrez for his Nvork on the Hallwa -,T Art
Project.
3. Councilmember Turner mentioned hearing thank -�Tous from several citizens in regard
to the parade event.
4. Mavor Lankhorst echoed the sentiments of the other councilmembers, and expressed
also general thanks concerning the parade, City Open House, and Hallwa -,T Art Project.
He again stated that the World Trade Center steel is on its Nvav to Kennedale, and
Monday morning at loam there Neill be a small ceremony
C. City Manager
Bob Hart announced the Mach 21" comprehensive land use plan meeting to be held at
6:30pm at the Kennedale Community Center. He encouraged citizens to attend this event
as the cit -,T is looking for community input.
IX. CONSENT AGENDA
All matters listed under consent agenda have been previously discussed, require little or no
deliberation, or are considered to be routine by the council. If discussion is desired, then an item
Nvill be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately.
A. Consider approval of meeting minutes: Regular meeting dated February 10 "', 2011
B. Consider approval of Ordinance 474, amending the Fiscal Year 2009 -2010 budget
C. Consider approval of Police Department agreement Nvith the city of Arlington regarding
mutual aid during special events
D. Consider approval of Resolution 353, authorizing the Police Department to submit for a
Justice Assistance Grant to fund updates to outdated video recording technology
E. Consider approving extension of interlocal agreement Nvith the Fort Worth Transportation
Authority regarding administrative funding for the senior transportation program
F. Consider approval of Change Order No. 4 for Bovman Springs Road
G. Consider approval of Resolution 355 to support the legislative activities of the alliance of
ONCOR Cities during the 82nd session of the Texas legislature as they affect electric
utility ratemaking
A motion to accept the consent agenda as presented Nvas made by Brian Johnson, second by Liz
Carrington. Motion passed 5 -0.
Page 4 of 7
X. REGULAR ITEMS
H. Discuss and consider approval of independent auditor's report for Near ended September
30th, 2010
Greg Schropshire and Finance Director Sakura Moten- Dedrick presented the
comprehensive annual financial report.
A motion to approve the independent auditor's report for Near ended September 30 "', 2010
Nvas made by Brian Johnson, Second by Liz Carrington. Motion passed 5 -0.
Discuss and consider Resolution 354, expressing official intent to reimburse costs of city
projects from tax- exempt obligations to be issues by the city of Kennedale and other
matters related thereto
Bob Hart presented background information on the reimbursement resolution, explaining
that the resolution deals Nvith expenses that are incurred prior to actual obligation of debt.
This resolution Nvill assist the city Nvith necessary purchases such as a fire truck, ambulance,
and large capital projects. Councilmember Clark asked if these initial expenses Nvould be
paid out of the general fund, Nvhich Nvas answered by Bob Hart in the affirmative.
A motion to approve and accept Resolution 354 Nvas made by John Clark, second by Kelly
Turner. Motion passed 5 -0.
Consider authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract Nvith FTW and Melton
Trucking for retrieval and transport of World Trade Center steel beam from the New York
Citv Port Authoritv
This action item Nvas removed from the regular agenda during the Nvork session. No action
Nvas necessary.
K. Consider approval to aNvard the 36 "' Near CDBG contract to Texas Re- Excavation
Construction Company for seNver rehabilitation projects on New Hope Road
Larry Ledbetter presented project background information to the council, stating that the
project Nvent out to bid by the county, and that Texas Re- Excavation company came in Nvith
the loNvest bid and great references.
A motion to approve aNvarding the 36 "' Near CDBG project on New Hope Road to Texas
Re- Excavation company in the amount of $125,235.00 Nvith the $42362.00 difference in
costs to be covered by City funds Nvas made by Kelly Turner, second by Jerry Miller.
Motion passed 5 -0.
L. Consider Resolution 356 supporting proposed legislation to provide for the transition of
municipal sales tax from one use to another and authorizing council members and staff to
actively support its passage
Page 5 of 7
Bob Hart presented background information on this item. The pending legislation allows
for the swapping out of percentages of dedicated taxation from one item to another. It does
not raise the tax cap. If passed, cities Nvill be allowed the option of phasing in taxation that
Nvill allow for transportation or other necessary funding, by bringing it for a citizen vote.
A motion to approve support of Resolution 356 to provide for the transition of municipal
sales tax from one use to another and authorizing council members and staff to actively
support its passage Nvas made by Brian Johnson, second by Kelly turner. Motion passed
5 -0.
M. Consider award of bid for 10 acres site out of lots 19, 20, 21A & 21B, block 1, Woodlea
Acres Addition to the Fellowship Academy
The land out for bid is surplus right of Nvay that Nvas purchased during the process of
acquiring right of Nvay for the Bovman Springs project. 3.29 acres have been held back in
hopes of a boys and girls club, or future fellowship expansion Nvill occur.
Monica Collier from the Fellowship Academy presented preliminary architectural
renderings of the proposed building. A fickoff fundraiser NN be held on April
Motion to approve awarding the bid for 10 acres site out of lots 19, 20, 21A & 21B, block
1, Woodlea Acres Addition to the Fellowship Academy Nvas made by Kelly tuner, second
by Liz Carrington. Motion passed 5 -0.
Mavor Lankhorst announced that Council Nvould close the regular session and enter executive session at
8:09pm.
XI. EXECUTIVE SESSION
A. The City Council will meet in closed session pursuant to Section 551.074 to deliberate the
appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal in
regards to personnel matters for the folloNving:
1. Personnel — Annual evaluation of the City Manager
B. The City Council Nvill meet in closed session pursuant to Section 551.072 of the Texas
Government Code to deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property for
the folloNving:
1. 5414, 5421,5420, and 5424 High Ridge Road
2. 6708 and 6704 Lindale Road
3. 6713 and 6701 Oak. Crest Drive
4. 900 Sublett Road
5. 400, 824, 623, 913, and 917 Little School Road
6. 838 Woodland Court
7. 209 New Hope Road
C. The City Council Neill meet in closed session pursuant to Section 551.087 of the Texas
Government Code to deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business
prospect Nvith which the city is conducting economic development negotiations.
Page 6 of 7
1. 1000 E. Kennedale Parkway
XII. RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION, AND TAKE ACTION NECESSARY PURSUANT
TO EXECUTIVE SESSION, IF NEEDED.
N. Consider approval of Resolution 357, AUTHORIZING LEGAL COUNSEL TO PROCEED
WITH CONDEMNATION OF LOTS 2 AND 3, BLOCK 1, LAZY "M" ESTATES
REVISED, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF KENNEDALE, TARRANT COUNTY,
TEXAS, BY PLAT RECORDED IN CABINET A, SLIDE 11668, PLAT RECORDS,
TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
A motion to authorize approval of Resolution 357, AUTHORIZING LEGAL COUNSEL TO
PROCEED WITH CONDEMNATION OF LOTS 2 AND 3, BLOCK 1, LAZY "M"
ESTATES REVISED, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF KENNEDALE, TARRANT
COUNTY, TEXAS, BY PLAT RECORDED IN CABINET A, SLIDE 11668, PLAT
RECORDS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS Nvas made by John Clark, second by Liz
Carrington. Motion passed 5 -0.
Other action taken pursuant to discussion in executive session:
A motion to authorize the City Manager to pursue purchase of IRS property on Lindale and
120 Nvithin the prices discussed during executive session Nvas made by John Clark, second by
Liz Carrington. Motion passed 5 -0.
A motion to authorize the City Manager to negotiate for the purchase of 209 New Hope Road
Nvithin the price range discussed in executive session Nvas made by John Clark, second by Liz
Carrington. Motion passed 5 -0.
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
A motion to adjourn the meeting Nvas made by Brian Johnson, second by Jerry Miller. Motion passed 5 -0.
The regular meeting Nvas adjourned at 9:20pm.
APPROVED:
Mavor, Baran Lankhorst
ATTEST:
Amethvst G. Cirmo, City Secretary
Page 7 of 7
Date: April 14, 2011
Agenda Item No: Consent - B
Subject: REVIEW AND CONSIDER ACTION REGARDING A NOTICE FROM
THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION (PUC) OF TEXAS FOR A
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI) ADJUSTMENT TO MUNICIPAL
TELECOMMUNICATIONS RIGHT -OF -WAY ACCESS LINE RATES
Originated by: Sakura Moten - Dedrick
Summary:
HB 1777 went into effect on Sept 1, 1999. As of March 1, 2000, all telecommunications
franchise fees in Texas are required to be based on a fee -per- access line method. The PUC, in
October 1999, established three categories of access lines - residential, non - residential, and
point -to- point. Each city was required to submit its 1998 base amount and allocation of the base
amount to the PUC by Dec. 1, 1999. All CTPs were required to submit a city -by -city, December
31, 1998 access line count to the PUC by January 24, 2000. The PUC then calculated
maximum access line rates for the three categories of access lines, for each city. The rate for
each category, when multiplied by the number of lines in that category in a city, should equal
that city's base amount.
In March, 2000, the PUC established maximum initial access line rates for 1106 cities. These
cities were then allowed to 1) exempt life -line customers, 2) choose lower rates, and 3) update
base amounts and allocation formulas. CTPs were allowed to update line counts and petition
unreasonable initial allocations. In response to this input from cities and CTPs, the PUC
established final access line rates in April, 2000. CTPs were allowed to begin implementing
these rates for the 2nd quarter of 2000 (April, May, June), but were required to begin
implementing the rates by the 3rd quarter 2000 (July, August, September).
State law allows a city to change its rates once a year given the Consumer Price Index, and its
allocation once every 2 years. These changes must be initiated by the city each September and
become effective the following January. CTPs may also petition the commission on
unreasonable allocations in September of each year. The PUC will also annually adjust the
access line rates by half of the increase in the Consumer Price Index starting in 2002. Should
Council wish to accept this upward adjustment, we are not required to respond. Council is only
required to respond via attached memo no later than April 30, 2011 should it wish to actually
keep the access line rates at current levels (i.e.. 2010 remain unchanaed).
Access Line Type 2010 (Current) 2011 (Proposed)
(Difference)
Residential $1.58 $1.60 $0.02
Non - Residential $1.45 $1.47 $0.02
Point -To -Point $1.62 $1.64 $0.02
2011
Recommended Motion: Authorize upward adjustment as proposed by the PUC given
approximately a 0.84% increase in Consumer Price Index and direct staff to take no action CPI
increase will automatically go into effect on April 30, 2011.
Disposition by Council:
r � j j j j Fj util jl /�y�
i
-
1701 N. Congress Ave., PO Box 13326, Austin, TX 78711 -3326
2011 CONSUMER PRICE INDEX ADJUSTMENT TO MUNICIPAL
TELECOMMUNICATIONS RIGHT -OF -WAY ACCESS LINE RATES
March 28, 2011
PURPOSE
This letter is to notify you that your city's 2010 maximum access line rates have increased by 0.84% due
to inflation, as measured by the CPI. This adjustment has been made pursuant to Chapter 283 of the
Local Government Code (House Bill 1777)
DEFAULT RATES FOR 2011: INCREASE
Based on the choices made by your city in April 2010, your city's 2011 rate will either be adjusted for
inflation, or will remain the same as your 2010 rate. According to our records, when similar CPI
adjustments were made in April 2010, your city chose the MAXIMUM allowable CPI - adjusted rates.
Therefore, your 2011 rates will reflect an increase of 0.84% from your 2010 rates. You have the option to
decline this increase in rates by taking the action explained below.
ACTION BY CITY: TO REFUSE THE INCREASE
(1) You do not have to respond to accept the increased access line rates. (2) Respond ONLY if you want
to DECLINE the increase in access line rates. (3) To decline, notify the PUC using page 2 of this letter
no later than April 30, 2011. (4) The PUC does not require City council authorization; however, if your
city charter requires it, please do so immediately. (5) Verify your contact information and highlight any
changes. (6) Make a copy of this document.
WHAT HAPPENS IF A CITY DOES NOT RESPOND BY APRIL 30,2011?
If a city does not respond by April 30, 2011, the rates for your city will increase from 2010 levels. The
next opportunity to adjust your rates will be September 1, 2011.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
The PUC will notify telephone companies of your desired rates and you will be compensated accordingly
no later than July 1, 2011.
FUTURE REVISIONS TO CPI
The access line rates will be revised annually in March depending on whether the CPI changes for the
previous year. If the CPI changes for the year 2011, you will receive a similar letter in March 2012,
See over...
CITY OF KENNEDALE
Section 1: Your 2010 city preferred rates are as follows:
Residential $1.58 Non - Residential $1.45 ' Point- to- Poirrt $1.62
Section 2: Your default rates for 2011 are as follows. Note: These are higher than the 2010
rates due to the CPI inflation adjustment.
Residential $1.60 Non - Residential $ 1.47 Point -to -Point $1.64
To decline your default increase in rates, notify the PUC by completing the section below. You
can mail or fax this page to the PUC. To accept rates in Section 2, no action is required.
I , Title , am an authorized representative for
the City/Town /Village of . The City declines to accept the default rates
indicated in Section 2 above. Instead, we choose the following Fates: Residential ;
Non - Residential ; Point—to—Point
Date:
Signature:
Other Comments:
HOW TO RESPOND
Mail: Stephen Mendoza
Public Utility Commission
P.O. Box 13326
Austin, Texas 78711 -3326
OR FAX TO Stephen Mendoza at: 512 - 936 -7428
CITY CONTACT INFORMATION
INQUIRIES
Inquiries only. NOT for sending your response.
HB 1777 @puc.state.tx.us
Phone No: 512 - 936 -7394
Please notify us if the contact information we have on file for your city has changed. Thank you.
Phone No. 1 _ ( 817) 985 -2110
Phone No. 2_
Fax No: 817 483 -072
Email: sdeddck @cltyotkenneda
Address
SAKURA MOTEN DEDRICK DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
or current city official responsible for right -of -way issues
CITY OF KENNEDALE
405 MUNICIPAL DRIVE
KENNEDALE TX 76060
Date: April 14, 2011
Agenda Item No: Consent — C
Subject: Consider approval of Resolution 358, listing the City Manager as the authorized official
for the Justice Assistance Grant application.
Originated by: Police Chief Tommy Williams
Summary: Attached for council consideration is a revised Justice Assistance Grant (JAG)
resolution. This resolution is required as part of a JAG application for a Digital Mobile Video
network. The resolution passed in the last council meeting listed the incorrect person as the
authorized official for the application. It should have listed the City Manager rather than our grant
manager.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approving the resolution.
C: \Documents and Settings\ cbrown \mydocuments \samplestaffreport
RESOLUTION NO. 358
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF KENNEDALE, TEXAS
DESIGNATING AN OFFICIAL AS BEING RESPONSIBLE IN DEALING
WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION OF THE STATE OF TEXAS
FOR THE PURPOSE OF PARTICIPATING IN A GRANT FOR A
DIGITAL MOBILE VISION SYSTEM; CERTIFYING THAT THE CITY OF
KENNEDALE IS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE PROGRAM ASSISTANCE;
AND CERTIFYING THAT THE CITY OF KENNEDALE WILL PROVIDE
ANY MATCHING FUNDS REQUIRED FOR THE GRANT.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kennedale finds it in the best
interest of the citizens of Kennedale that the Digital Mobile Vision be operated for
the 2011 -2012 year; and
WHEREAS, the City Council agrees to provide applicable matching funds
for the said project as required by the Justice Assistance Grant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council agrees that in the event of a loss or misuse
of the Criminal Justice Division funds, the City Council assures that the funds will
be returned to the Criminal Justice Division in full; and
WHEREAS, the City Council designates the City Manager as the
grantee's authorized official. The authorized official is given to power to apply
for, accept, reject, alter, or terminate the grant on behalf of the recipient agency.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF KENNEDALE, TEXAS approves submission of the grant
application for Digital Mobile Vision to the Office of the Governor, Criminal
Justice Division.
PASSED, APPROVED and EFFECTIVE this 14th day of April, 2011.
Grant Number: 2446401
Mayor, Bryan Lankhorst
ATTEST:
Amethyst G. Cirmo, City Secretary
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Consent - D
Subject: Consider authorizing City Manager to execute an Interlocal Agreement with Tarrant
County for services pertaining to the reconstruction of Mistletoe Drive.
Originated by: Bob Hart, City Manager
Summary: See attached Contract.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
Disposition by Council:
THE STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF TARRANT
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
BACKGROUND
This Interlocal Agreement is between County of Tarrant ( "COUNTY "), and
the City of Kennedale ("CITY');
Sections 791.001 -- 791 .029 of the Texas Government Code provide legal
authority for this Agreement;
During the performance of the governmental functions and the payment
for the performance of those governmental functions the parties will make the
performance and payment from current revenues legally available to that party;
and
The Commissioners Court of the COUNTY and the City Council of the
CITY each find:
a. This Agreement serves the common interest of both parties;
b. This Agreement will benefit the public;
C. The division of costs fairly compensates both parties to this
Agreement; and
d. The CITY and COUNTY have authorized their representative to
sign this Agreement.
The Parties therefore agree as follows:
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. COUNTY RESPONSIBILITY
COUNTY will furnish the labor and equipment for the following project:
The reconstruction of Mistletoe Drive at a width of 26.5 feet for a length of
approximately. 16 miles from Magnolia Drive to Crestview Drive. This
reconstruction will include:
1.1 Stabilize and compact sub -grade at a depth of eight inches;
1.2 Apply asphalt emulsion prime coat;
1.3 Place and compact three inches of Type B Hot Mix Asphalt
Concrete;
1.4 Place Geosynthetic Petromat material;
1.5 Place and compact two inches of Type D Hot Mix Asphalt
Concrete.
CONTRACT: Kennedale (Mistletoe Drive) 1
2. CITY RESPONSIBILITY
2.1 CITY will pay all trucking charges and furnish all materials for the
project including stabilization materials, hot mix asphalt, asphalt
emulsion, geosynthetic material and flexible base.
2.2 CITY will furnish a site for dumping waste materials generated
during this project.
2.3 CITY will furnish all rights of way, plan specifications and
engineering drawings.
2.4 CITY will furnish necessary traffic controls including Type A
barricades to redirect traffic flow to alternate lanes during the
construction phase of the project.
2.5 CITY will provide temporary driving lane markings.
2.6 If a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan is required, the CITY will
be responsible for the design and development of the Plan. CITY
will pay for all cost (including subcontractor materials, labor and
equipment) associated with the implementation and maintenance of
the Plan.
2.7 CITY will ensure that the project is cleared of obstructions which
could damage county equipment during construction.
2.8 CITY will verify the location of all utility locations, mark those
locations and then remove the utilities that will interfere with the
progress of the project.
2.9 CITY will provide a stockpile site for materials used for this project.
2.10 CITY will provide soil lab testing for this project.
3. PROCEDURES DURING PROJECT
COUNTY retains the right to inspect and reject all materials provided for this
project. CITY will provide quality assurance inspection for the project. If the CITY
has a complaint regarding the construction of the project, the CITY must
complain in writing to the COUNTY within 30 days of project completion. Upon
expiration of 30 days after project completion, the CITY becomes responsible for
maintenance of the project.
4. NO WAIVER OF IMMUNITY
This agreement does not waive COUNTY rights under a legal theory of sovereign
immunity. This agreement does not waive CITY rights under a legal theory of
sovereign immunity.
5. OPTIONAL SERVICES
5.1 If requested by CITY, the COUNTY may apply permanent striping;
5.2 If necessary, COUNTY may furnish flag persons;
5.3 If required, the CITY will pay for engineering services, storm water
run -off plans, and continuation of services and plan;
5.4 If a Storm Water Prevention Plan is provided by CITY, COUNTY
will be responsible for the implementation and maintenance of the
Plan during the duration of the project.
CONTRACT: Kennedale (Mistletoe Drive) 2
CITY will give the COUNTY notice to proceed at the appropriate time. However,
COUNTY is under no duty to commence construction at any particular time.
7. THIRD PARTY
The parties do not enter into this agreement to protect any specific third party.
The intent of this agreement excludes the idea of a suit by a third party
beneficiary. The parties to this agreement do not consent to the waiver of
sovereign immunity under Texas law to the extent any party may have immunity
under Texas law.
8. JOINT VENTURE & AGENCY
The relationship between the parties to this agreement does not create a
partnership or joint venture between the parties. This agreement does not
appoint any party as agent for the other party.
9. EFFECTIVE DATE
This agreement becomes effective when signed by the last party whose signing
males the agreement fully executed.
COUNTY OF TARRANT
COUNTYJUDGE
Date:
CITY OF KENNEDAL.E
Authorized City Official
Date:
Attest:
APPROVED AS TO FORM`
Attest:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGALITY
ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
*By law, the District Attorney's Office may only advise or approve contracts or legal documents on
behalf of its clients. It may not advise or approve a contract or legal document on behalf of other
parties. Our review of this document was conducted solely from the legal perspective of our
client. Our approval of this document was offered solely for the benefit of our client. Other
parties should not rely on this approval and seek review and approval by their own
respective attorney(s).
CONTRACT: Kennedale (Mistletoe Drive) 3
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Consent - E
Subject: Consider authorizing City Manager to execute an Interlocal Agreement with Tarrant
County for services pertaining to the reconstruction of Bolen Road.
Originated by: Bob Hart, City Manager
Summary: See attached Contract.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
Disposition by Council:
THE STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF TARRANT
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
BACKGROUND
This Interlocal Agreement is between County of Tarrant ( "COUNTY "), and
the City of Kennedale ( "CITY ");
Sections 791.001 — 791.029 of the Texas Government Code provide legal
authority for this Agreement;
During the performance of the governmental functions and the payment
for the performance of those governmental functions the parties will make the
performance and payment from current revenues legally available to that party;
and
The Commissioners Court of the COUNTY and the City Council of the
CITY each find:
.a. This Agreement serves the common interest of both parties;
b. This Agreement will benefit the public;
C. The division of costs fairly compensates both parties to this
Agreement; and
d. The CITY and COUNTY have authorized their representative to
sign this Agreement.
The Parties therefore agree as follows:
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. COUNTY RESPONSIBILITY
COUNTY will furnish the labor and equipment for the following project:
The reconstruction of Bolen Road at a width of 24 feet for a length of
approximately .20 miles from the 1 -20 Service Road to Bowman Springs Road.
This reconstruction will include:
11 Stabilize and compact sub -grade at a depth of ten inches;
1.2 Apply asphalt emulsion prime coat;
1.3 Place and compact four inches of Type B Hot Mix Asphalt
Concrete;
1.4 Place Geosynthetic Petromat material;
1.5 Place and compact three inches of Type D Hot Mix Asphalt
Concrete; and
1.6 Place flexible base on shoulders at roadway edges.
CONTRACT: Kennedale (Bolen Road) 1
2. CITY RESPONSIBILITY
2.1 CITY will pay all trucking charges and furnish all materials for the
project including stabilization materials, hot mix asphalt, asphalt
emulsion, geosynthetic material and flexible base.
2.2 CITY will furnish a site for dumping waste materials generated
during this project.
2.3 CITY will furnish all rights of way, plan specifications and
engineering drawings.
2.4 CITY will furnish necessary traffic controls including Type A
barricades to redirect traffic flow to alternate lanes during the
construction phase of the project.
2.5 CITY will provide temporary driving lane markings.
2.6 If a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan is required, the CITY will
be responsible for the design and development of the Plan. CITY
will pay for all cost (including subcontractor materials, labor and
equipment) associated with the implementation and maintenance of
the Plan.
2.7 CITY will ensure that the project is cleared of obstructions which
could damage county equipment during construction.
2.8 CITY will verify the location of all utility locations, mark those
locations and then remove the utilities that will interfere with the
progress of the project.
2.9 CITY will provide a stockpile site for materials used for this project.
2.10 CITY will provide soil lab testing for this project.
3. PROCEDURES DURING PROJECT
COUNTY retains the right to inspect and reject all materials provided for this
project. CITY will provide quality assurance_ inspection for the project. If the CITY
has a complaint regarding the construction of the project, the CITY must
complain in writing to the COUNTY within 30 days of project completion. Upon
expiration of 30 days after project completion, the CITY becomes responsible for
maintenance of the project.
4. NO WAIVER OF IMMUNITY
This agreement does not waive COUNTY rights under a legal theory of sovereign
immunity. This agreement does not waive CITY rights under a legal theory of
sovereign immunity.
5. OPTIONAL SERVICES
5.1 If requested by CITY, the COUNTY may apply permanent striping;
5.2 If necessary, COUNTY may furnish flag persons;
5.3 If required, the CITY will pay for engineering services, storm water
run -off plans, and continuation of services and plan;
CONTRACT: Kennedaie (Bolen Road) 2
5.4 If a Storm Water Prevention Plan is provided by CITY, COUNTY
will be responsible for the implementation and maintenance of the
Plan during the duration of the project.
6. TIME PERIOD FOR COMPLETION
CITY will give the COUNTY notice to proceed at the appropriate time. However,
COUNTY is under no duty to commence construction at any particular time.
7. THIRD PARTY
The parties do not enter into this agreement to protect any specific third party.
The intent of this agreement excludes the idea of a suit by a third party
beneficiary. The parties to this agreement do not consent to the waiver of
sovereign immunity under Texas law to the extent any party may have immunity
under Texas law.
8. JOINT VENTURE & AGENCY
The relationship between the parties to this agreement does not create a
partnership or joint venture between the parties. This agreement does not
appoint any party as agent for the other party.
9. EFFECTIVE DATE
This agreement becomes effective when signed by the last party whose signing
makes the agreement fully executed.
COUNTY OF TARRANT CITY OF KENNEDALE
COUNTYJUDGE
Date:
Authorized City Official
Date:
Attest:
APPROVED AS TO FORM*
Attest:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGALITY
ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
*By law, the District Attorney's Office may only advise or approve contracts or legal documents on
behalf of its clients. It may not advise or approve a contract or legal document on behalf of other
parties. Our review of this document was conducted solely from the legal perspective of our
client. Our approval of this document was offered solely for the benefit of our client. Other
parties should not rely on this approval and should seek review and approval by their own
respective attorney(s).
CONTRACT: Kennedale (Bolen Road) 3
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Regular - F
Subject: Review and consider action to accept the Certificate of Unopposed Candidates and
approval of Ordinance 475, canceling the May 14 2011 General Election.
Originated by: Amethyst Cirmo, City Secretary
Summary: As soon as possible after the deadline for declaration of write -in candidacy (March
2 nd 2011), if no candidate in the election is opposed on the ballot or by a declared write -in
candidate, the city secretary must deliver to the City Council a certification that each candidate
is unopposed. Upon receiving the certification, the City Council may, by order or ordinance,
declare the unopposed candidates elected to office, in which case the election is canceled. At
large elections in a place system may be canceled if: (1) a candidate is unopposed in an
election for an at -large seat that is designated by place; (2) there are no other places covering
the same territory with opposed candidates; and (3) no proposition is to appear on the ballot.
If City Council determines not to hold the election, the order or ordinance declaring the
unopposed candidates elected must be posted on Election Day at each polling place that
would have been used in the election.
Also, a Certificate of Election is to be issued to each candidate declared elected to office in
the same manner and at the same time as provided for a candidate elected at the election.
Candidates elected through cancellation must also qualify for office and take the oaths of
office the same as candidates elected at an election. This must be done during the
canvassing state, which can be accomplished no earlier than 3 days and no later than 11 days
of the date of the election (May 14 2011). Certification of Election along with Oaths of Office
will be administered during the regularly scheduled meeting on May 12 2011.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
Disposition by Council:
405 Municipal Drive, Kennedale, Texas 76060
www.cityofkennedale.com
CERTIFICATION OF UNOPPOSED CANDIDATES
I, Amethyst G. Cirmo, certify that I am the City Secretary of the City of
Kennedale, Texas and the authority responsible for preparing the ballot for the May 14
2011 City of Kennedale General Election. I further certify that no proposition is to
appear on the ballot at the election, no person has made a declaration of write -in
candidacy and all of the following candidates are unopposed:
Council Place 1 — John Clark
Council Place 3 — Brian Johnson
Council Place 5 — Frank Fernandez
Amethyst G. Cirmo,
City Secretary
SEAL City of Kennedale
April 14 2011
Date
ORDINANCE NO. 475
AN ORDINANCE CANCELING THE MAY 14 2011 GENERAL
ELECTION AND DECLARING EACH UNOPPOSED CANDIDATE
ELECTED TO OFFICE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL
BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Kennedale is a home rile city acting under its charter adopted
by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the
Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with law a general election has been ordered for May 14
2011 for the purpose of election council members to serve on the city council in the City of
Kennedale; and
WHEREAS, no proposition is to appear on the ballot in that election; and
WHEREAS, the city secretary has certified in writing that each candidate on the ballot
us unopposed for election to office; and
WHEREAS, the filing deadlines for placement on the ballot and declaration of write -in
candidacy have passed; and
WHEREAS, in these circumstances Subchapter C of Chapter 2 of the Election Code
authorizes a governing body to declare each unopposed candidate election of office and cancels
the election.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF KENNEDALE, TEXAS, THAT:
SECTION 1.
The following candidates, who are unopposed in the May 14 2011 general election, are
hereby declared to office, and shall be issused a certificate of election at the time prescribed in
the Election Code for canvassing of votes:
John Clark Council Place 1
Brian Johnson Council Place 3
Frank Fernandez Council Place 5
SECTION 2.
The general election previously ordered for May 14 2011 for the purposed of election
councilmember to serve on the city council in the City of Kennedale is hereby canceled.
SECTION 3.
The city secretary is directed to post a copy of this ordinance at each designated polling
place on May 14 2011.
SECTION 4.
This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of
Kennedale, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the
provision of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are
hereby repealed.
SECTION 5.
It is hereby declared to be the intention of the city council that the phrases, clauses,
sentences, paragraphs, and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause,
sentence, paragraph, or section of this ordinances shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid
judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not
affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, and sections of this
ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the city council without the incorporation
in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, or section.
SECTION 6.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, and it is so
ordained.
PASSED AN APPROVED ON THIS 14 DAY OF APRIL, 2011.
Mayor, Bryan Lankhorst
ATTEST:
Amethyst G. Cirmo, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
Wayne K. Olsen, City Attorney
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Regular - G
Subject: Conduct a public hearing, discuss and consider approval of Ordinance No. 476
regarding CASE # PZ 11 -02 to receive comments and consider a request by Anarkali
Enterprises, Inc. for a zone change of approximately 1 acre at Triangle Business Park Addn
Blk 1 Lot 8R1 (739 W Kennedale Pkwy) from "I" Industrial to "Cl" Restricted Commercial.
Originated by: Rachel Roberts, City Planner
Summary:
Anarkali Enterprises owns the property at 739 W Kennedale Parkway, where a small
retail business is located. City staff would classify this business as a convenience store, a use
recently added to the city's Schedule of Uses and permitted only in "C -1" Restricted
Commercial zoning districts. The property is zoned Industrial, and the owner is applying to
rezone the property to "C -1 ".
The properties on either side of the subject site are zoned Industrial (see attached
excerpt from the zoning map), but these Industrial zoned properties are sandwiched between
Commercial zoned properties on Kennedale Parkway (see map).
Comprehensive plan.
Staff reviewed the request for compliance with the comprehensive plan. The future
land use plan shows this area as Commercial. While from one perspective granting a request
for rezoning might be considered spot zoning because the properties around it are zoned
Industrial, the Future Land Use Map of the comprehensive plan indicates the properties in this
area should be rezoned or redeveloped as "Commercial." Rezoning to commercial would
therefore be in compliance with the Future Land Use Plan. Both C -1 and C -2 uses fit the
Commercial designation. (The Future Land Use Map does not designate different levels of
Commercial; all commercial /retail properties are classified the same way.) The Future Land
Use Map may be considered somewhat flexible, but it gives an illustration of the vision
contained in the rest of the comprehensive plan. Staff's interpretation of the comprehensive
plan is that this part of Kennedale Parkway is intended to become more commercial in terms
of land use.
Past Action and Recommendation.
We mailed letters to owners of real property within 200 feet of 739 W Kennedale Pkwy.
The owner of a nearby business came to the planning offices to ask about the case. The
owner was concerned that a C -1 zoning classification would allow the business on the subject
property to sell alcohol, which could compound problems he'd had with theft and with
customers of the convenience store leaving trash behind around the property.
The Planning & Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this case during its
March meeting. While the Commission was generally in favor of recommending approval
because Commercial zoning at this location is in compliance with the comprehensive plan, the
members were concerned that rezoning this property could be considered spot zoning. The
Commission recommended approval on condition that city staff check with the city attorney to
verify that it would not be considered spot zoning.
I spoke with Wayne Olson, and he said there were several factors the Supreme Court
considers when determining whether a zoning decision has led to spot zoning. The first factor
is whether the zoning decision respects the comprehensive plan, as long as the
comprehensive plan is still valid. Our comprehensive plan's Future Land Use map identifies
this area as commercial, rather than industrial. Although our comprehensive plan is in the
process of being updated, a new plan has not yet been adopted, and we are still operating
under the existing plan. In addition, no comments received so far during the update process
provides any indication that the community would prefer this property to be industrial in the
future instead of commercial.
Another factor considered is how the zoning decision adversely affects surrounding
properties. Commercial zoning is generally considered less intense than industrial zoning,
and usually will not produce nuisance issues that would be a detriment to surrounding
industrial properties. Moreover, a commercial zoning designation on this site will not prohibit
surrounding properties from being used for industrial purposes.
A third factor is whether current zoning is reasonable or suitable. This property is
already being used for commercial purposes, and surrounding uses are commercial or
industrial. The property is close to residential areas, but the C -1 zoning districts are more
compatible with residential areas than are Industrial districts.
We have not seen traffic problems, noise issues, or any other problems to indicate that
commercial zoning would be unsuitable at this location. We have received some complaints
about the business, but the complaints have been about how the business is run, not against
the presence of a retail or commercial business in general.
We cannot make a legal recommendation, but city staff believe a rezoning to C -1
would not be considered spot zoning and would be suitable for this location.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
CITY OF KENNEDALE
ORDINANCE NO. 476
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 40, AS AMENDED,
THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
KENNEDALE; BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF KENNEDALE, BEING
APPROXIMATELY 1 ACRE ENCOMPASSING LOT 8R1 BLK 1
TRIANGLE BUSINESS PARK ADDN; FROM "I" INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT TO "C -1" RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT;
PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAP TO REFLECT SUCH CHANGES; PROVIDING THAT THIS
ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES;
PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Kennedale, Texas is a home rule city acting under its charter
adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5, of the Texas Constitution and Chapter
9 of the Local Government;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has
adopted a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings,
other structures and land for business, industrial, residential or other purposes, for the purpose of
promoting the public health, safety, morals and general Nvelfare, all in accordance Nvith a
comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of the property listed below Nvas
requested by a person or entity having a proprietary interest in said property, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing Nvas duly held by the Planning and Zoning Commission of
the City of Kennedale on March 17, 2011 and by the City Council of the City of Kennedale on
April 14, 2011, Nvith respect to the zoning change described herein; and
WHEREAS, all requirements of law dealing Nvith notice to other property ovriers,
publication and all procedural requirements have been complied Nth in accordance Nvith Chapter
211 of the Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Kennedale, Texas does hereby deem it advisable and in the
public interest to amend Ordinance No. 40, as amended, as described herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF KENNEDALE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
Ordinance No. 40, as amended, is hereby amended so that the permitted uses in the
hereinafter described area shall be altered, changed and amended as shoN -,n and described below:
Approximately 1 acre, being described as Lot 8R1 Bllc 1 Triangle Business Park
Addn, Tarrant County, Texas, on the illustration attached hereto as Exhibit "A"
c: citvsee council ord zonecha03- 02(06- 05 -03) Page 1
and incorporated herein for all purposes of this ordinance, is hereby rezoned from
"I" Industrial District to "C -1" Restricted Commercial District.
SECTION 2.
The zoning districts and boundaries as herein established have been made in accordance
Nvith the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general
Nvelfare of the community. Thev have been designed to lessen congestion in the streets, to secure
safety from fire, panic, flood and other dangers, to provide adequate light and air, to prevent
overcrowding of land, to avoid undue concentration of population, to facilitate the adequate
provisions of transportation, Nvater, sewerage, parks and other public requirements. They have
been made after a full and complete hearing Nvith reasonable consideration among other things of
the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses allowed and Nvith a
view of conserving the value of the buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land
throughout the community.
SECTION 3.
The City Secretary is hereby directed to amend the official zoning map to reflect the
changes in classifications approved herein.
SECTION 4.
The use of the property hereinabove described shall be subject to all the applicable
regulations contained in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and
pertinent ordinances of the City of Kennedale, Texas.
SECTION 5.
This Ordinance shall be cumulative of Ordinance No. 40, as amended, and all other
Ordinances of the City of Kennedale affecting zoning and land use, and shall not repeal any of the
provisions of such ordinances except in those instances where provisions of such ordinances are
in direct conflict Nvith the provisions of this ordinance.
SECTION 6.
All rights or remedies of the City of Kennedale, Texas are expressly saved as to any and
all violations of Ordinance No. 40 or of anv amendments thereto that have accrued at the time of
the effective date of this Ordinance and as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation,
both civil and criminal, same shall not be affected by this Ordinance but may be prosecuted until
final disposition by the Courts.
SECTION 7.
It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses,
sentences, paragraphs, and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause,
sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid
judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not
affect anv of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance,
since the same Nvould have been enacted by the City Council Nvithout the incorporation in this
ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section.
Page 2
SECTION 8.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and it is so
ordained.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 14 day of April 2011.
Mayor, Bn-an Lankhorst
ATTEST:
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
City Attornev
Page 2
Exhibit A, Case PZ 11 -02, Ordinance No. 476
0 60 120 240
Feet N
Property boundary data from the Tarrant Appraisal District
Case PZ 11 -02
739 W Kennedale Pkwy
Legend 240 120 0 240 Feet
- 739 W Kennedale Pkwy N
- property within 200' of rezoning request
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Regular - H
Subject: Conduct a public hearing, discuss and consider approval of Ordinance No. 477
regarding CASE # PZ 11 -03 to review, receive comments, and consider action on a request
for a change in zoning from "C -1" Restricted Commercial to "C -2" General Commercial" for
approximately 2.5 acres located at 716 E Kennedale Pkwy, Kennedale, Tarrant County,
Texas, more particularly described as C.A. Boaz Subdivision of J B Renfro Survey, Blk Lot
14R4. The rezoning is requested by See Eang Eng.
Originated by: Rachel Roberts, City Planner
Background:
In 2007, a lighting company wanted to open a showroom and retail store at this
location and requested a rezoning of the property. At that time, the property was zoned C -2
and R -3. The applicant requested the property be rezoned so that all the property would be C-
2. The city council approved a rezoning in May 2007 but granted a C -1 zoning instead of the
requested C -2, possibly due to a concern from a residential property owner who lives on
Mansfield Cardinal. Because a business of this kind is permitted in both C -1 and C -2 districts,
city council was able to approve rezoning to C -1 without prohibiting the lighting business from
moving forward. In the end, the lighting company was not able to work out access with
TxDOT, and the plans fell through.
See Eang Eng is co -owner of P.U. Tech Spoiler, a company that manufactures and
distributes spoilers nationally and internationally. His company would like to open a 35,000
square feet distribution center at this location (no manufacturing would take place).
Kennedale's Schedule of Uses permits large distribution centers (defined as a distribution
centers larger than 5,000 square feet) in C -2 zoning districts with a special exception. Mr.
Eng is also applying for the required special exception; the special exception process is
intended to ensure that operations, if permitted, would be compatible with surrounding uses.
The properties on this part of Kennedale Parkway are all zoned C -2 General
Commercial. Immediately behind the subject property on Mansfield Cardinal are properties
zoned R -3 Residential.
Comprehensive Plan Review.
The Future Land Use Map shows this area as commercial but does not provide a
description of the intensity of commercial uses, indicating that any of the city's commercial
zoning designations would comply with this part of the comprehensive plan.
The city's comprehensive plan describes the Kennedale Parkway Commercial Corridor
but does not describe the type of commercial development envisioned for this area. Goal 2 of
the plan is to "[e]ncourage the establishment of new commercial businesses and the
expansion of existing businesses "; according to the comprehensive plan, this goal should be
achieved by encouraging retail along Kennedale Parkway. However, the plan does not rule
out non - retail commercial uses. In addition, this property is close to the Industrial -zoned
properties along the southeastern end of Kennedale Parkway; C -2 uses can provide a buffer
between Industrial uses and more retail- oriented commercial uses farther up the Parkway.
This kind of buffer is recommended in the comprehensive plan.
Staff believes the requested rezoning would comply with the comprehensive plan.
Other Factors to Consider.
If the city approves the requested rezoning but the business decides not to buy the
property, then any business allowed in C -2 zoning districts will be permitted at this location.
City code requires screening between incompatible zoning districts, with the
responsibility for installing and maintaining the screening resting with the owner of property in
the less restrictive zoning district. For example, in this case, the owner of the property in
question under Case PZ 11 -03 would be required to screen the property where it abuts the R-
3 zoned property to the rear at the time of development and prior to the business receiving a
certificate of occupancy. An excerpt from the city code governing screening of incompatible
uses is provided here for your reference.
Sec, 17 -425 [amended 2010]. Screening requirements.
(a) Screening required between incompatible zoning districts. Insofar as practical
screening must be erected placed grown and maintained along the common
boundary line of incompatible zoning districts before any use is made of the
property. This screening requirement shall be the responsibility of the owner of the
less restrictive district with the agricultural and single family residential districts
(AG, R -1, R -2, and R -3 districts) being the most restrictive and the industrial district
being the least restrictive district...
Such screening shall not be less than six (6) feet in height nor greater than eight
(8) feet in height. However, no fence wall or hedge on a corner lot shall have a
height in conflict with the regulations governing visibility at intersections as
prescribed in section 1746(c)(5) of this article.
The comprehensive plan describes how commercial development along Kennedale
Parkway should be pursued. It says: "The City of Kennedale should aggressively pursue the
corridor principles. The corridor principles of shared access, increased landscaping and
coordination of building facades will transform these existing commercial areas into more
aesthetically pleasing spaces which will encourage repeat business and improve the
economic viability of the businesses." City staff have met with TxDOT and with the engineer
hired by the applicant; we discussed the required shared access and developed a plan for
proceeding. Owners of property on Kennedale Parkway within 100' of the subject property will
be notified that TxDOT may require them to have a shared access point and that we would
like to work together to develop a shared access plan. As to the principle of increased
landscaping for commercial development, the applicant has hired a landscape architect to
design the required landscaping (see enclosed concept site plan).
Past Action and Recommendation.
We mailed letters to affect property owners and received inquiries from two property
owners. One person sent an email asking for more information, and one person stopped by
city hall to ask for more information about the case.
The Planning & Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this case during its
March meeting. The property owner behind the site attended the meeting and expressed
concerns about his home abutting a C -2 district. After discussions, the Commission voted 3 -2
to deny the request for rezoning. The Commissioners who voted to recommend denial had
varying concerns about rezoning. The city council had previously voted to rezone the property
C -1, and since this appeared to be the will of the council, the Commission did not want to vote
contrary to the council's decision. In addition, several Commissioners had concerns about the
intensity of a C -2 use abutting residential areas. One of the Commissioners who voted to
recommend approval remarked that the business owner could simply move over one property,
and could operate the business without a rezoning, even though it would also be next to
residential. Other Commission members noted that while this was true, they did not feel
comfortable recommending a rezoning for the property in question.
In terms of compatibility, uses permitted in C -2 districts are generally more intense
than those permitted in C -1 districts, but even in C -1 districts, uses are permitted that may
seem intrusive to residential areas. For example, any of the following uses are permitted by
right in C -1 zoning districts:
• Retail appliance store (for example, Conn's)
• Athletic or fitness club (for example, LA Fitness)
• Auto parts store
• Bowling alley
• Business or professional office
• Department store (for example, Kohl's)
• Retail furniture store
• Hardware store
• Grocery store
• Movie theater (indoor)
• Office supply store (for example, Office Depot)
• Drive -in restaurant
In reality, this lot is probably too small for some of the uses listed above, but it is
possible that a business could open at this site that would be equally intrusive on surrounding
properties.
A C -2 zoning designation would not conflict with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan,
and city staff maintain that C -2 zoning would be compatible with the surrounding uses on
Kennedale Parkway. In order for the applicant to use the property for a distribution center, he
will also need to receive a special exception, which is intended to ensure the use will be
compatible with the existing uses nearby. The Board of Adjustment considered this case
during its April meeting and granted the special exception with two conditions: (1) that the city
council also approve the rezoning, and (2) that the applicant screen the rear property line with
evergreen trees of a minimum 3" caliper suitable for screening.
Summary:
• Planning & Zoning Commission recommends denial of the request for rezoning.
• The Board of Adjustment granted the requested special exception with conditions
meant to ensure compatibility with the surrounding residential properties.
• Staff recommends approving the request for rezoning.
o A C -2 zoning classification is suitable for this section of Kennedale Parkway.
o Rezoning to C -2 does not conflict with the comprehensive plan.
o Because the Board of Adjustment granted a special exception for this property,
plans for the structure and site have been designed with compatibility in mind.
In a worst case scenario, if this business moves to another location after a few
years, a compatible site design will already be in place.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
CITY OF KENNEDALE
ORDINANCE NO. 477
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 40, AS AMENDED,
THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
KENNEDALE; BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF KENNEDALE, BEING
APPROXIMATELY 2.5 ACRES ENCOMPASSING LOT 14R4 OF THE
C.A. BOAZ SUBDIVISION OF J B RENFRO SURVEY; FROM "C -1"
RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO "C -2" GENERAL
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF
THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REFLECT SUCH CHANGES;
PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF
ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING
A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Kennedale, Texas is a home rule city acting under its charter
adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5, of the Texas Constitution and Chapter
9 of the Local Government;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has
adopted a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings,
other structures and land for business, industrial, residential or other purposes, for the purpose of
promoting the public health, safety, morals and general Nvelfare, all in accordance Nvith a
comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of the property listed below Nvas
requested by a person or entity having a proprietary interest in said property, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing Nvas duly held by the Planning and Zoning Commission of
the City of Kennedale on March 17, 2011 and by the City Council of the City of Kennedale on
April 14, Nvith respect to the zoning change described herein; and
WHEREAS, all requirements of law dealing Nvith notice to other property ovriers,
publication and all procedural requirements have been complied Nth in accordance Nvith Chapter
211 of the Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Kennedale, Texas does hereby deem it advisable and in the
public interest to amend Ordinance No. 40, as amended, as described herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF KENNEDALE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
Ordinance No. 40, as amended, is hereby amended so that the permitted uses in the
hereinafter described area shall be altered, changed and amended as shoN -,n and described below:
Approximately 2.5 acres, being described as Lot 14R4 of the C.A. Boaz
Subdivision of J B Renfro Survev, Tarrant County, Texas, on the illustration
c: citvsee council ord zonecha03- 02(06- 05 -03) Page 1
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein for all purposes of this
ordinance, is hereby rezoned from "C -F Restricted Commercial to "C -2"
General Commercial" District.
SECTION 2.
The zoning districts and boundaries as herein established have been made in accordance
Nvith the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general
Nvelfare of the community. Thev have been designed to lessen congestion in the streets, to secure
safety from fire, panic, flood and other dangers, to provide adequate light and air, to prevent
overcrowding of land, to avoid undue concentration of population, to facilitate the adequate
provisions of transportation, Nvater, sewerage, parks and other public requirements. They have
been made after a full and complete hearing Nvith reasonable consideration among other things of
the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses allowed and Nvith a
view of conserving the value of the buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land
throughout the community.
SECTION 3.
The City Secretary is hereby directed to amend the official zoning map to reflect the
changes in classifications approved herein.
SECTION 4.
The use of the property hereinabove described shall be subject to all the applicable
regulations contained in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and
pertinent ordinances of the City of Kennedale, Texas.
SECTION 5.
This Ordinance shall be cumulative of Ordinance No. 40, as amended, and all other
Ordinances of the City of Kennedale affecting zoning and land use, and shall not repeal any of the
provisions of such ordinances except in those instances where provisions of such ordinances are
in direct conflict Nvith the provisions of this ordinance.
SECTION 6.
All rights or remedies of the City of Kennedale, Texas are expressly saved as to any and
all violations of Ordinance No. 40 or of anv amendments thereto that have accrued at the time of
the effective date of this Ordinance and as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation,
both civil and criminal, same shall not be affected by this Ordinance but may be prosecuted until
final disposition by the Courts.
SECTION 7.
It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses,
sentences, paragraphs, and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause,
sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid
judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not
affect anv of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance,
Page 2
since the same would have been enacted by the CitA- Council without the incorporation in this
ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section.
SECTION 8.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and it is so
ordained.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 14 day of April 2011.
Mayor, Bn-an Lankhorst
ATTEST:
Citv Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
Citv Attornev
Page 2
Exhibit A, Case PZ 11 -03, Ordinance No. 477
0 75 150 300
Feet N
Property boundary data from the Tarrant Appraisal District
_�_ � �,�. r _ _ . a
r � >
� _ �-
�, � � � � _
1
�, F �,�.o
. ,.
#`
M1 ��
���;
, � }
��
.� }�
`� }
� \,
} � � � � �: \ {/ <�
I j
\ � � ��
\ �� ' \ ` v �
IvIll
FA
LA
6.
�� \ \ \
13
. \�!
'Jill
� f
� ^ ��
17; . IN
A
�� \
Sq
, \
nu
� � \)�\
cn
vv
U
o<
Y)
c)
4-J
Q)
` A
I
V)
7:3
M
I
H
cn
L.-
Q)
V)
.—
o)
0
I
t
,�
,, �
_ -
�
t
�� W
�i ��
�Q a
k'
�i
� «
. � .. ,� � � � w
� � � j� �
2� }' �
1 .
� /�
� \ \ <.
.
^ / � \
� :
..
.
� \�
�
��\ ���/
� § �
� � :
� � s,
�
/�
` /
�f�
}v
\ %
{ \
\ �
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Regular -I
Subject: Conduct a public hearing, discuss and consider approval of Ordinance No. 478
regarding CASE # PZ 11 -04 to review, receive comments, and consider action on a proposed
ordinance vacating and abandoning a portion of Gilman Road in the City of Kennedale,
Tarrant County, Texas, and declaring that such property is unnecessary for use as a
public right -of -way; and reserving a public utility easement. Roadway to be vacated
and abandoned is more particularly described as a 0.255 acre strip of land in the David
Strickland Survey, A -1376, being a portion of a tract of land conveyed to the City of Kennedale
by deed recorded in Volume 10552, Page 1622, Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas, said
strip of land being used as right -of -way for Gilman Road. The land is adjacent to property with
physical address 1384 Gilman Road.
Originated by: Rachel Roberts, City Planner
Background and Overview.
The city owns a strip of land at the end of existing Gilman Road (see attached
exhibits). This strip is unpaved right -of -way and was originally intended to become an
extension of Gilman Road toward the Fort Worth Tower property as part of a subdivision that
was abandoned. CMC Rebar owns Rebar Lane, a private access lane extending from the
end of built /existing Gilman Lane to the frontage road for 1 -20. The city has an opportunity to
extend Gilman Road along this private road instead of along the existing right -of -way, which
would be a much more useful connection. As it is built now, Gilman Road is not a through
street; the only public access is where Gilman Road meets Kennedale Parkway. Once the
city builds Rebar Lane as part of Gilman Road, then Gilman Road will become a through
street, having public access from both Kennedale Parkway and the 1 -20 frontage road. CMC
Rebar has agreed to dedicate Rebar Lane as a public street, and the city would vacate the
approximately 0.26 -acre unbuilt section of Gilman Road depicted in the attached exhibits.
Past Action and Recommendation.
The Planning & Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this case during its
March meeting and voted to recommend approval of abandoning /vacating the right -of -way
described above, with all members voting in favor
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
ORDINANCE NO. 478
AN ORDINANCE VACATING AND ABANDONING A PORTION
OF GILMAN ROAD IN THE CITY OF KENNEDALE, TARRANT
COUNTY, TEXAS; DECLARING THAT SUCH PROPERTY IS
UNNECESSARY FOR USE BY THE PUBLIC; RETAINING A
PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF
THE CITY OF KENNEDALE TO EXECUTE A QUITCLAIM DEED;
RELEASING PUBLIC OWNERSHIP, INTEREST AND CONTROL
OF THIS RIGHT -OF -WAY; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the City of Kennedale Texas is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by
the electorate pursuant of Article XI Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the
Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kennedale, after careful study and consideration, has
determined that the right -of -way located in a portion of Gilman Road is not being used by, nor
useful or convenient to the public in general; therefore, it constitutes a public charge without a
corresponding public benefit, and the public would be better served and benefitted by its
vacation and abandonment; and
WHEREAS, in connection with the vacation of said right -of -way, the City Council desires to
retain a public utility easement within the area being vacated to accommodate existing and
future utilities; and
WHEREAS, in order to remove any question as to the continued interest or ownership of the
public in said right -of -way the City desires to execute a quitclaim deed releasing all title
ownership and control in said right -of -way to the owner of the abutting property.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KENNEDALE TEXAS
SECTION 1
That portion of Gilman Road described in Exhibit A attached hereto is vacated and abandoned
as public property subject to the reservation of a public utility easement to be located in the
portion to be vacated and abandoned. The right -of -way so vacated and abandoned shall revert
in fee simple to the owner of the abutting property.
SECTION 2
The Mayor of the City of Kennedale Texas is hereby authorized and directed to execute a
quitclaim deed to the abutting property owner releasing all claims to title ownership or control of
the right -of -way on behalf of the City of Kennedale Texas subject to the reservation of a public
utility easement. A copy of this quitclaim deed shall be presented for filing with the County Clerk
of Tarrant County Texas by the office of the City Secretary.
SECTION 3
The vacation approved herein shall be effective upon the passage of this ordinance.
SECTION 4
It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences,
paragraphs, and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence,
paragraph, or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment
or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of
the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, and sections of this ordinance since
the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this
ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, or section.
SECTION 5
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and it is so ordained.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS DAY OF 2011.
APPROVED:
Mayor Bryan Lankhorst
ATTEST:
Amethyst Cirmo, City Secretary
EXHIBIT A
RIGHT -OF -WAY VACATION
A strip of land situated in the David Strickland Survey, Abstract No. 1376, Tarrant
County, Texas, being a portion of a tract of land conveyed to the City of Kennedale by
deed recorded in Volume 10552, Page 1622, Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas,
said strip of land being used as right -of -way for Gilman Road and being more
particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:
Beginning at a 1/2 inch iron rod with cap stamped "Mizell RPLS 1967" found at the
northwest corner of said City tract also being the southwest corner of a tract of land
conveyed to CMC Steel Fabricators, Inc. by deed recorded as Instrument No.
D208154488 in said Deed Records;
Thence North 88 °51'35" East, with the north right -of -way of said Gilman Road, same
being the south line of said CMC Steel tract, a distance of 222.13 feet to a 5/8 inch iron
rod with cap stamped "TNP" set for corner;
Thence South 01'04'36" East, a distance of 50.00 feet to an "X" cut in concrete set on
the south right -of -way line of said Gilman Road, same being the north line of Lot 1,
Block 1, Rebar Services Addition, an addition to the City of Kennedale, Tarrant County,
Texas, shown by plat recorded in Cabinet B, Slide 2078, Plat Records of Tarrant
County, Texas;
Thence South 88 °51'35" West, with said right -of -way line, a distance of 222.12 feet to
the southwest corner of said City tract, same being the northwest corner of said Lot 1,
from which a 3 inch steel fence post bears South 55 °35'30" West, 0.48 feet;
Thence North 01'04'50" West, a distance of 50.00 feet to the Point of Beginning and
containing 0.255 acre of land, more or less.
Bearings are based on the Texas State Plane Coordinate System, North Central Zone (NAD83).
See Exhibit B for sketch.
Lawrence E. Allee, RPLS
Texas Registration No. 4570
Date: December 2, 2010
L: \PROJECTS \KEN10275 \dots \ROW Vacation.doc
EXHIBIT "B"
INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 20
(VARIABLE WIDTH R.O.W.)
I 1
I
DAVID STRICKIAND SURVEY
I
AGUE AMU AND PERKINS
Civil Engineering I Surveying I Landscape Architecture I Planning
� 1100 Macon Street, Fort Worth TX 76102
ABSTRACT NO. 1376
( z
I
I Q
O� 0)
c� z
CIVIC STEEL FABRICATORS, INC.
nva O o
INST. N0. D208154488
0
o
D.R.T.C.T.
r
W 0 U
0O
Q 0 F-
15
U
0 �
I � o0
ol°
O
o
I ��
C'
O
° a
In
az
—000 W
Y F M Z
Q
0 Q M v
mQ�ci I
�v I
I zQa
I
1-- m
— j
L-
I
6 � ,
0.255 ACRE
Q� I
RIGHT -OF -WAY
�
VACATION
,.��
POINT OF
BEGINNING \�
N88'51'35 "E 222.13'
L
80.00 1�
3
LO
`o GILMAN ROAD
0
o
CITY OF KENNEDALE'
0 0 VOL. 10552, PG. 1622, D.R.T.C.T.
P (50' R.O.W.) LO
0
Z
S88'51'35 " W 222.12'
"X" CUT IN CONC. SET
3" STEEL FENCE POST
BEARS S55'35'30 "W 0.48 LOT 1, BLOCK 1
REBAR SERVICES ADDITION
NOTES:
CAB.
B, SLD. 2078
P.R.T.C.T.
1. Bearings are based on the Texas
State Plane Coordinate System,
North Central Zone (NAD83).
0 30 60 120
2. Integral parts of this survey.
0. 255 ACRE
a. Legal Description
b. Sketch
SCALE: 1" = 60
RIGHT-OF-WAY
VACATION
Situated in the
LAWRENCE E. ALLEE, R.P.L.S.
�� ...
...:.
David Strickland Survey
TEXAS REGISTRATION NO. 4570
LAWRENCE E. ALLEE
..... ��4570��
.. .....�
Abstract No. 1376
DECEM 2, 2
�.a "t
��''�• °Fess�° ?POD
City of Kennedale
DATE:
9N � • S 'j
Tarrant County, Texas
JOB NO. KEN10275
AGUE AMU AND PERKINS
Civil Engineering I Surveying I Landscape Architecture I Planning
� 1100 Macon Street, Fort Worth TX 76102
._}
�k
a S�" .,��. '4
,
Date: April 14 2011
Agenda Item No: Regular - J
Subject: Consider approval of Resolution 358, AUTHORIZING THE CITY
ATTORNEY TO BRING A CONDEMNATION PROCEEDING FOR THE PURPOSE
OF OBTAINING FEE SIMPLE TITLE, DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ON A PORTION OF LAND SITUATED WITHIN THE
J.M. LILLY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 980, AND BEING A PORTION OF THAT
CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED TO W. EDDIE PATTERSON AND WIFE,
TAMMY K. PATTERSON BY DEED RECORDED IN VOLUME 9268, PAGE 1477,
DEED RECORDS OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, FOR A PUBLIC ROADWAY
AND /OR OTHER PURPOSES PERMITTED BY LAW
Originated by: Bob Hart, City Manager
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
Disposition by Council:
RESOLUTION NO. 358
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF KENNEDALE, TEXAS
AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO BRING A CONDEMNATION
PROCEEDING FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING FEE SIMPLE
TITLE, DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
EASEMENT ON A PORTION OF LAND SITUATED WITHIN THE J.M.
LILLY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 980, AND BEING A PORTION OF
THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED TO W. EDDIE
PATTERSON AND WIFE, TAMMY K. PATTERSON BY DEED
RECORDED IN VOLUME 9268, PAGE 1477, DEED RECORDS OF
TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, FOR A PUBLIC ROADWAY AND /OR
OTHER PURPOSES PERMITTED BY LAW
WHEREAS, the City of Kennedale ( "the City ") desires to acquire fee simple title,
drainage easement and temporary construction easement to the properties described
below in order to construct certain municipal improvements, specifically a public
roadway and /or other public purposes permitted by law, in order to serve existing and
future developments in the City and the citizens of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City made an initial offer to the property owners to purchase the
said property; and
WHEREAS, the City has provided to the property owners a copy of the Land
Owner's Bill of Rights, as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City and the owners of the said property have been unable to
reach an agreement on the acquisition of this property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now deems it necessary to authorize the City
Attorney to initiate condemnation proceedings in order to acquire fee simple title to such
property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF KENNEDALE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
The City Council of the City of Kennedale, Texas, hereby finds and determines
that the recitals made in the preamble to this Resolution are true and correct, and
incorporates such recitals herein.
Page 1
SECTION 2.
The City Council of the City of Kennedale, Texas, hereby finds and determines
that a public necessity exists for the City of Kennedale, Texas to acquire the following:
Fee Simple: Being a 0.364 of an acre tract of land situated within the J.M. Lilly
Survey, Abstract No. 980, and being a portion of that certain tact of land
described to W. Eddie Patterson and wife, Tammy K. Patterson by deed
recorded in Volume 9268, Page 1477, Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas;
Drainage Easement: Being a 0.037 of an acre tract of land situated within the
J.M. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 980, and being a portion of that certain tact of land
described to W. Eddie Patterson and wife, Tammy K. Patterson by deed
recorded in Volume 9268, Page 1477, Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas;
and
Temporary Construction Easement: Being a 0.091 of an acre tract of land
situated within the J.M. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 980, and being a portion of that
certain tact of land described to W. Eddie Patterson and wife, Tammy K.
Patterson by deed recorded in Volume 9268, Page 1477, Deed Records of
Tarrant County, Texas,
as described and depicted on the attached Exhibits "A" through "F" for a public
roadway and /or other public purposes permitted by law.
SECTION 3.
The City Manager and City Attorney are authorized to comply with the statutes of
the State of Texas with reference to the necessary legal prerequisites existing or
relating to the exercise of eminent domain to appropriate said property for the purpose
of a public roadway and /or other public purposes permitted by law.
SECTION 4.
The owners claiming an interest in said property are W. Eddie and Tammy K.
Patterson whose mailing address is 400 Kennedale Little School Road, Kennedale,
Texas 76060.
Page 2
SECTION 5.
The City Council finds that such acquisition in this condemnation action is
necessary in order to serve the public health, safety and welfare.
PASSED, APPROVED and EFFECTIVE this 14th day of April, 2011.
Mayor, Bryan Lankhorst
ATTEST:
Amethyst G. Cirmo, City Secretary
Page 3
EXHIBIT "A"
Being a 0.364 of an acre tract of land situated within the J.M_ Lilly Survey, Abstract
No. 980, and being a portion of that certain tract of land described to W. Eddie
Patterson and wife, Tammy K. Patterson by deed recorded in Volume 9268, rage 1477,
Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas, and being more particularly described by
metes and bounds as follows:
BEGINNING at a p.k. nail found for the west common comer of said Patterson tract
and a tract of land described to Thomas A_ Lalonde, Jr. and wife, Tammy Lalonde by
deed recorded as Instrument No. D208371623, of said Deed Records, and being on the
approximate centerline of Little School Road, also known as County Road 2013 (a
variable width right -of -way);
THENCE North 89 °00'43" East, with the common line of said Patterson and Lalonde
tracts, a distance of 45.03 feet to a 5/8 inch capped iron rod stamped "TNP" set for
comer;
THENCE South 00 °14'01" East, over and across said Patterson tract, a distance of
350.62 feet to a 5/8 inch capped iron rod stamped "TNP" set for corner on the south
line of same, and being also the north line of a tract of land described to Cheryl E.
Abbott by deed recorded in Volume 16903, Page 118, of said Deed Records, from
which a 5/8 inch iron rod found for the northeast comer of said Abbott tract bears
North 89 °00'43" East, 180.60 feet;
THENCE South 89 11 0043" West, with the common line of said Patterson and Abbott
tracts and passing at 19.45 feet a pipe found for reference, in all a total distance of
45.33 feet to a point for the southwest comer of said Patterson tract, and being on the
approximate centerline of said Little School Road;
THENCE North 00 0 11'07" West, with said approximate centerline, a distance of 350.62
feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 0.364 of an acre of land, more or
less, of which 0.203 of an acre appears to lie within the existing right -of -way of said
Little School Road, leaving a net area of 0.161 of an acre of land, more or less.
iccy L Gentry, R.P.L.S.
Texas Registration No. 5519
Date: November 11, 2009
1 0.... R�
RICKY L GEIJTRY
A «.• 55f 9 ...
Notes: v
1. Bearings and coordinates shown hereon are based upon
the Texas State Plane Coordinate System (NAD83; CORS96)
Epoch 2002.00 Texas North Central Zone.
2. Integral parts of this survey:
A. Legal Descriptions
B. Sketch
PARCEI.10
EXHIBIT
Sheet 1 of2
r
AVC
LOT 2
F� — POINT OF
�m BEGINNING
�ww�
EXHIBIT "B"
THOMAS A. LALONDE, JR.
AND WIFE, TAMMY LALONDE
INST. No. D206272603
D.R.T.C.T.
N89'00'43 "E
/45.03'
a
VZUn
I
F W
O a:
20
•ri�
"4
0
gn yQ�
Q
o n
w
Y
F-'
rn
c Q i w F
O 2 U
ofU I
z
z
NOTES:
M I
f"
LOT 1
Ln
d
° 0¢ 0
C
LOT 1
11
3
cro
LOT 2
En
w ,
I
F W
RIVER ROCK DRIVE
O. w }-
0
Q
(50' R.O,W.)
o n
w
x
0m
F-'
rn
c Q i w F
O 2 U
LOT 3
z
z
NOTES:
Q.
0a
I \ 0
CD
a
Ln
d
° 0¢ 0
C
LOT 1
11
3
cro
o
II
LOT 2
En
w ,
I
F W
rc
O. w }-
Q
I
U z
o a �"-
m V?
nC
x
0m
F-'
0 U
m
LOT 3
z
z
NOTES:
o�
x�
X
�o
IL
a
0 _1
J.
Q•Or
X x VI
�o
a
g�:{r 1 8D.bD'
x':45
889 43 w
45,33' CHERYL E. ABBOTT
VOL. 16903, PG. 118
1 D.R.T.C.T.
1. Bearings shown hereon are based upon the Texas
State Plane Coordinate System (NAD133; CORS96)
Epoch 2002.00 Texas North Central Zone.
2. Integral parts of this survey:
a. Legal Description
b. Sketch
/_L1 4.
A
ki�l L. entry, R.P.L.S.
Texas Registration No. 5519
November 11, 2009
Date:
� •p'• � 1STERF G 9�
RICKY L GENTRY
..y ..........
t o 5519 i
l�HDFS u
0 25 50 100
SCALE:
EXHIBIT SHOWING
0.364 ACRE
Situated in the J.M. Lilly Survey
Abstract No. 980
City of Kennedale
Tarrant County, Texas
Civil Engineering I surveying I Landscape Architecture I Planning
INC. 1i00 Macon Streei Fort WortA TX 7'6102
'- /RY7Y QQjQ -9774 SHEET 2 OF 2
is
W. EDDIE PATTERSON AND
WIFE, TAMMY K. PATTERSON
VOL. 9268, PG. 1477
D.R.T.C.T.
J
C7 .
rc
If1 U
MZ
�I
nC
0
F-'
4� La
La
z
z
P=�
Q.
�z
a°�i
�
d
° 0¢ 0
C
11
rn t`?
do
a
E
C):
a.rn
z
Q
o�
x�
X
�o
IL
a
0 _1
J.
Q•Or
X x VI
�o
a
g�:{r 1 8D.bD'
x':45
889 43 w
45,33' CHERYL E. ABBOTT
VOL. 16903, PG. 118
1 D.R.T.C.T.
1. Bearings shown hereon are based upon the Texas
State Plane Coordinate System (NAD133; CORS96)
Epoch 2002.00 Texas North Central Zone.
2. Integral parts of this survey:
a. Legal Description
b. Sketch
/_L1 4.
A
ki�l L. entry, R.P.L.S.
Texas Registration No. 5519
November 11, 2009
Date:
� •p'• � 1STERF G 9�
RICKY L GENTRY
..y ..........
t o 5519 i
l�HDFS u
0 25 50 100
SCALE:
EXHIBIT SHOWING
0.364 ACRE
Situated in the J.M. Lilly Survey
Abstract No. 980
City of Kennedale
Tarrant County, Texas
Civil Engineering I surveying I Landscape Architecture I Planning
INC. 1i00 Macon Streei Fort WortA TX 7'6102
'- /RY7Y QQjQ -9774 SHEET 2 OF 2
is
W. EDDIE PATTERSON AND
WIFE, TAMMY K. PATTERSON
VOL. 9268, PG. 1477
D.R.T.C.T.
J
f�
If1 U
MZ
nC
0
4� La
La
U
o!
(n Z
J
u
�
F-
_m
W
��t
EXHIBIT "A"
DRAINAGE EASEME NT
Being a 0.033 of an acre tract: of land situated within the J.M. Lilly Survey, Abstract
No. 980, and tieing a portion of that certain tract of land described to W. Eddie
Patterson and wife, Tammy K. Patterson by deed recorded in Volume 9268, Page 1477,
Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas, and being more particularly described by
metes and bounds as follows:
BEGINNING at a 519 inch capped iron rod stamped "TNP" found on the proposed east
right -of -way line of Little School Road, also known as County Road 2013 (a variable
width right -of -way), fi-om which a p.k. nail found for the west common corner of said
Patterson tract and a tract of land described to Thomas A. Lalonde, Jr. and wife,
Tammy Lalonde by deed recorded as Instrument No. D209371623, of said Deed
Records, and being on the approximate centerline of said Little School Road bears
Sot b 89 °00'43" West at 45.03 feet;
THENCE North 89 East, continuing with said common line, a distance of 30.00
feet;
THENCE South 00 °14'01" East, over and across said Patterson tract, a distance of
53.48 feet;
THENCE South 89° 45'59" West, continuing over and across said Patterson tract, a
distanceof30.00 feet;
THENCE North 00 °14'01 West, a distance of 53.08 feet to the POINT O
BEGINNING and containing 0.037 of an acre of land, more or less_
Date; August 20, 2010
to L. entry, R -RL
Texas Registration No. 5519
RICXY L GENTRY
A
No(=
I. Bearings and eoordinales shown hereon are based upon
the Texaq State Plane Coordinate Systeca (NAD83; CORS96)
Epoch 2902:00 Texas North Central Zone.
2. integral parts of this survey
A. Legal Dvseriptiom
B_ sketch
PARCEL 10(2)
Sheet 1 of 2
EXHIBIT
mralm
30�
J.
rb .
SFkM A L"' ND E -JR,
4iFE, TAMMY E PA'RMON
�
llkf Wd I��ok 726075
- - ---._- �j
O F a9
1}'�/'.M i�kF]y��j1.}11/4ryryry5,,,, E
"
r�'RTFi
�]]
It l'Ld.l
•-
67
W
I
C
M
". r
oi
30�
J.
rb .
4iFE, TAMMY E PA'RMON
�
�1
67
W
I
C
M
". r
oi
t�x.• 33` ��
�
O t
w z
i
1'4 C' I
¢ i
LOT 2
°¢�
C> 1
Wa
d
� ^
C
IE
am
? �
:2
mW�[�
NCa�
xpo=
N
vzwt-
Ga d a:
E
E
a� J
ax 1
z
a [[77 tG y 419
LOT 3.
S 4Vl y+i»
NOTES:
30�
J.
4iFE, TAMMY E PA'RMON
�
67
W
I
C
M
". r
w
q•II^_
iL
CHERYL E, MOOTT
VOL,, 104s, PG;. '11.8 4 �.
0' WIT f
1. $earings shown hereon are =.based upon the Texts
State plane Coardinate SysEetrs. (NAQ83;', GORSD6)
Epoch 20010.0' Texas North, C9i3tral Zone.
2. Integral parts. of this survey:
a. Legal Description.
b-. Sketch
~P¢ G 1 ST o
y . L. ntry; R i�.L.S. .� �'•
TeRoa. 1Registratlon t�o. 5919 RKXY L Ga1W
. .....................
a 5519
August 20, 2010- � . °Fe s st c
Date? 4�A SUFt
p: 25 50 too.
SCE`
EXHOT SHOWING'
0 .037 AC
DRMNAGE EASEMENT
Situated in the J.M. Lilly Survey
Abstract No. 980
City of Kennedc€le
Tarrant County, Texas
FEAMAMUAMPERiM
Civil Engineering I Surveying [ Landscape Architecture I p
xC 17.00 Macdn Street, Fort Worth, TX 76702
OF 2
m
XX
L�
EXHIBIT "XI
T'EMPORAR'Y' CONSTRCICTION EASEMENT
Being a 0.091 of an acre tract of land situated within the J.M. Lilly Survey, Abstract
No. 980, and being a portion of that certain tract of land described to W_ Eddie
Patterson and wife, Taznmv K. Patterson by deed recorded in Volume 9268, Page 1477,
Deed Records of Tarrant County, 'Texas, and being more particularly described by
metes and bounds as follows:
BEGINNING at a point, from which a p1. ndl found for the west common corner of
said Patterson tract and a tract of laird described to Thomas A. Lalonde, Jr. and wife,
Ta i nny Lalonde by deed recorded as Instrument No. D208371623, of said Deed
Records, and being oa the approximate centerline of said Little School Road, bears
Soutl3 89 °00'43" West at 74.88 feet;
THENCE North 89 °017'43" Fast, with the north of said Patterson tract, a distance of
27.37 fret;
THENCE over and across said Patterson tract, the fallowing calls and distances:
THENCE South 00 °14'I3" Fast, a distance of 97.58 feet;
THENCE South 89 °4559" West, a distance of 57.38 feet;
THENCE Nnrtlt 00° 14'01" West, a distance of 44.27 feet;
THENCE North 89 °45'59" East, a distance of 30.00 feet;
THENCE North 00 °14'01 " West, a distance of 53.48 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNIWG and containing 0.091 of an acre of land, more or less.
Date: August 20, 2010
y L. C try, RI'.L.S
Te as Registration No. .3519 �p�
E�.�,
HYCKY L GQJFRY
a »•• 5549 • _�
Notcs;
1. Bearings and coordinates shown hereon are based upon
the Texas State Plane Coorduaate System (NAD83; CORS96)
Epoch 20o2.0o Texas Nab Central Zone.
2. Integral parts oftlus survey,
A. Legal Descriptions
B. Skweh
PARCEL 10(2)
EXHIBIT
r
Sheet l o €2
�.
LOT 2,'
MAS AI LAILONnZ .1R.
1 . WIFE, FA.t�0 4AiOND .
INS 'Nd 13 06 21803,... V
i
Na �. .
lOt'
a�
"iasx,��"
l
V37
��i
3
O
EL
O
a
�-4 1 � i
!
LOT 2
Q
°¢�
"}
Wcv
}C.,.q
:4 it J
O
IU
Z7
a .
o a
fe
0 . 7-
<It
a 19.45'
LOT 3
I x �
S89- 00'43"
o
Qo
¢5.53
NOTES
<
1
1. Bearings shown hereon are based upon the Texas
State Plane Coordinate System (RAO$3; CORS95)
Epoch 2002.00 Texas North Central Tone.
2. Integral parts of this survey_
a, Legcl Desariptlon
b. Sketch
,t;� 05 ReglsEratron No.. 5599
At g et. 20, 2010
EXHIBIT SHOWING
0. 091 ACR
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
FAMO T
Situated IZ the J.M. Lilly Survey
Abstract No. 980
City of Kerinedale
Tarrant County, Texas
Ci Engineering I Surveying) Landscape Architecture I Planning
1.100 Macon. .S°trooe, Fort Worth, TX 76102
fix T
J
Q
a
J TCMP , 0aA= GoNsT
d1b # r�V I�. PATTERSON
xna �zi;r r ix7 7 .
t m
I O
x�
D �o
CHERYL E. ABBOTT
VOL. 18903, PG. 1
M.T.C.T.
0 25 50 1 00:
SCALE: f" = 50'