HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 24, 2000 Agenda AGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
October 24, 2000
Aoenda Item . -, ·
After determining that a quorum is present and convening m an Open Meeting, the City Council of the
C~ty of Denton, Texas will convene m a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, October 24, 2000 at 5 15 p m ~n the
Cie/of Denton Council Work Session Room, Denton City Hall, at 215 East McK~nney, Denton, Texas to
consider specific items when these ~tems are hsted below under the Closed Meeting section of th~s
agenda Whan ~tems for considerat~on are not hsted under the Closed Meeting section of the agenda, the
City Councfil vall not conduct a Closed Meeting at 5 15 p m and will convene at the t~me listed below for
~ts regular er special called meeting The C~ty Council reserves the right to adjourn into a Closed Meeting
on any ~tem on ~ts Open Meeting agenda cons~stant wnh Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, as
amended, as set forth below
1 Closed Meeting
A Consultation with Attorney - Under TEX GOVT CODE Section 551 071
D~scuss and consider strategy and settlement proposal w~th the
Cxty's attorneys ~n ht~gat~on styled Ctty of Denton v Texas Utthttes
Company, et al, Cause No 2000-60109-393 currently pending m the
393~u D~stnct Court of Denton County, and d~scuss legal ~ssues
concerning th~s htlgat~on w~th the attorneys where to d~scuss these
matters m public would conflict w~th the duty of the C~ty's attorneys
to the C~ty Council under the Texas D~sc~phnary Rules of
Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas
ANY FINAL ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE ON A MATTER DELIBERATED IN A CLOSED
MEETING, WILL ONLY BE TAKEN IN AN OPEN MEETING THAT IS HELD IN COMPLIANCE
WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT SUCH FINAL
ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE IS TAKEN IN THE CLOSED MEETING IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 551 086 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE (THE "PUBLIC
POWER E;~(CEPTION") THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO A
CLOSED MEETING OR EXECUTIVE SESSION AS AUTHORIZED BY TEX GOV'T CODE,
SECTION~ 551 001, ET SEO (THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT) ON ANY ITEM ON ITS OPEN
MEETING AGENDA OR TO RECONVENE IN A CONTINUATION OF THE CLOSED MEETING
ON THE CLOSED MEETING ITEMS NOTED ABOVE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS
OPEN MEETINGS ACT, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION SECTIONS 551 071-551 086 OF
THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT
Special Called Session of the C~ty of Denton C~ty Council on Tuesday, October 24, 2000 at 6 00
p m ~n th~ Council Chambers at C~ty Hall, 215 E MelQnney Street, Denton, Texas at which the
following ~tems will be considered
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Hold a pubhc heanng regarding the ~nvoluntary annexation and serwce plan for
approximately 1,370 acres of land located m the southwestern section of the C~ty of
Denton extratemtonal jurisdiction (ETJ) (A-lO1 Ryan Road/Country Club Road
, nnexat on)
a I Tract #1 approximately 1,365 5 acres of land located on the southwestern s~de of
the C~ty of Denton's extratemtonal jurisdiction east of U S Highway 377, south of
Regency Court on each stde of Country Club Road, west of Montec~to along Ryan
Road and mostly north of Brash Creek Road
City of Denton Clty Council Agenda
October 24, 2000
Page 2
2
b
Tract #2 approximately 3 6 acres of land located on the southwestern side of the
City of Denton's extratemtonal jurisdiction west of Monteclto, south of E1 Pasco
and east of Santa Momca
Hold a public heanng regarding the lnvoluntal~ annexation and servme plan for 1,711
acres of land located in the southwestern section of the C~ty of Denton extratemtonal
jtmsdmtmn (ETJ) (A-lO2 US 377/I-35WAnnexatton)
a
Tract #1: approximately 504 acres of land located m the southwestem s~de of the Caty
of Denton's extratemtonal jurisdiction west ofU S Highway 377, south of Allred and
north of Johnson Road
b
Tract #2: approximately 1032 acres of land located m the southwester side of the
City of Denton's extratemtonal jurisdiction east of Interstate H~ghway 35 West and
west of the Kansas City Southern Railway Company, extending south along Bonme
Brae to the west side ofU S Highway 377
c Tract #3. apprommately 1 7 acres of land located northeast of the intersection of
Corbm and Bonme Brae
d Tract g4: approxtmately 173 acres of land located east of U S Highway 377 (Fort
Worth Drive) and north of Brash Creek Road and west of Country Club
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
3
Consider adoption of an ordinance to annex an approximately 37 8 acre tract of land
located southeast of the comer of Teasley Lane and Hickory Creek Road m the
extratemtonal junschetlon of the City of Denton, Texas, to approve a service plan for the
annexed property, to provide a severabfllty clause and to provide for an effective date
First reathng ofor&nance (A-lO0, Forester TracO
4
Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Section 26-126 1 of the Denton Code of
Ordinances to reqmre that no wastewater tap fee would be required under carcumstances
where a tap fee was not required prior to the enactment of the tap fee regulatmns,
ratifying prewous actions, requmng the property owner to present ewdence concerning
the circumstances, promchng a sawngs clause and an effective date
5
Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, creating a role
probabltmg the carrying of a concealed handgun an a city braiding or port~on of a mty
building, makxng compliance with the rule prohabltmg the carryang of a concealed
handgun m a mty bullchng or portion of a caty bmkhng, a condltaon of the use of c~ty
bu~khngs, providing for a severabfllty clause, and providing for an effective date
Following the completion of the Special Called Session, the Council will convene anto a Work
Session m the City Council Work Sessaon Room at winch the followang atems wall be
considered
City of Denton Clty Council Agenda
October 24, 2000
Page 3
NOTE A Work Session is used to explore matters of anterest to one or more City Council
Members or the City Manager for the purpose of giving staff darection anto whether or not such
matters should be placed on a future regular or special meetang of the Councal for citizen anput,
Caty Council dehberataon and formal City action At a Work Session, the City Councal generally
receives informal and preliminary reports and informataon from Cay staff, officials, members of
C~ty committees, and the ~ndavldual or orgamzat~on proposang councal action, af ~nvlted by City
Council or Ctty Manager to participate m the session Part~capation by ~nd~viduals and members
of orgamzat~ons mwted to speak ceases when the Mayor announces the sessaon as beang closed to
pubhc input Although Work Sessions are pubhc meetangs, and C~tlzens have a legal right to
attend, they are not pubhc hearings, so cmzens are not allowed to partaeipate In the sessaon
unless ~nvited to do so by the Mayor Any citizen may supply to the Caty Council, prior to the
beganmng of the session, a written report regarding the eatazen's opanion on the matter being
explored Should the Council direct the matter be placed on a regular meeting agenda, the staff
wall generally prepare a final report defining the proposed action, which will be made avmlable
to all catlzens prior to the regular meeting at which cat,zen Input is sought The purpose of th~s
procedure is to allow citizens attendang the regular meeting the opportunaty to hear the v~ews of
their fellow eatizens without having to attend two meetangs
1 Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff d~rect~on regardmg s~gnage
Receive a report, hold a (hscusslon, and give staff direction regarding a request from the
C~ty of Krum to release approxxmately 7 acres, from the caty's extratemtonal j unsdlct~on
generally located south of FM 1173 and east of Masch Branch Road (SI-13, Knhm
Release of ET J)
Receive a report and give staff direction regarding a request from the Clt~/of Sanger to
release apprommately 670 acres, from the city's d~vls~on II extratemtonal jurlsdictaon
generally located west of FM 2164 and north of Nmholson Road (SI-19, Sanger Release
of ETJ)
V~ew the wdeo ~ntroduct~on to C~ty Council Meetings and provide staff d~rectaon on how
to proceed
Receive a presentation concerning Stormwater Phase II regulations as they relate to the
C~ty of Denton and its operatmns
Recexve a presentation concermng the Umted States Army Corps of Engineers' recent
Environmental Assessment for Lake Lew~svalle and related lawsuits
7 Receave a report regarding redastnetmg for 2001
Recexve a report, hold a discussion and g~ve staff directaon regardang conveyang real
property to Denton Housang Authority for affordable housing (SI-00-05) Denton
Housmg Authority, 713 Wilson Street & 104 E Prame Street)
A 715 Wilson Street The 0 54+ acre property as located at the southwest comer
of Alexander and Wilson Street
C~ty of Denton C~ty Council Agenda
October 24, 2000
Page 4
1043 E Prame Street The combined 0 76+ acre parcels are located north of
Prame Street, west of the Phoemx Apartments and south of the Pec-4 drmnage
channel
CERTIFICATE
I certify that the above not,ce of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the
City of D~nton, Texas, on the day of ., 2000 at o'clock (a rn )
(pm)
CITY SECRETARY
NOTE THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ROOM IS ACCESSIBLE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT THE CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN
LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS 1N
ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349-
8309 OR USE TELECOIVlMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800-RELAY-TX
SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY
SECRETARY'S OFFICE
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
Agenda No
Agenda Item --
Date 1 Q - .,~,~- oo
AGENDA DATE'
DEPARTMENT:
CM/DCM/ACM:
October 24, 2000
Planmng Department
David Hill, 349-8314
SUBJECT- (A-101) (RyanRoad/CountryClubRoadAnnexat~on)
Hold a pubhe heanng regarding the tnvoluntary annexation and servme plan for approximately 1,370
acres of land located m the southwestern sectton of the City of Denton extratemtonal junsdmtion
(ETS)
Tract #1: approxtmately 1,365 5 acres of land located on the southwestern stde of the Ctty of
Denton's extratemtonal jurisdiction east of U S Highway 377, south of Regency Court on
each side of Country Club Road, west of Montemto along Ryan Road and mostly north of
Brush Creek Road
b
Tract #2: approximately 3 6 acres of land located on the southwestern stde of the Ctty of
Denton's extratemtonal junschctlon west of Montemto, south of E1 Pasco and east of Santa
Momca
BACKGROUND
An lnvoltmtary annexation proceeding is betng considered by the Ctty of Denton for approxtmately
1,370 acres of land located generally south of Ryan Road and east of Country Club Road A map of
the area being considered for annexation ~s provided tn Attachment #1 Annexations are governed by
state law, and during the October 24th meetmg, City Council will conduct the first of two reqmred
public hearings to hear public comments regarthng the proposed annexatton and service plan The
current schedule (provided as Attachment #2) ldentffies other steps in the process as required by state
law
The issue of~annexat~on of fins area was first raised as a result of a voluntary annexation petlUon filed
by the Denton Independent School District (DISD) on July 18, 2000 to request annexatton of an 18 1-
acre elementary school site City staff presented the information to Ctty Council at the August 8, 2000
work sesslog Council discussed development interest tn the general vmlmty and instructed staff
promde further information regardtng a broader annexation actton Dunng the August 22, 2000 work
session, staff was instructed to institute involuntary annexatton proceedings encompassing the area
currently under consideration because of mfrastmcture availability and tmpendlng development
pressure
Annexation of ETJ areas is the highest level of protection afforded to reties to manage growth and
coordinate mtmlclpal services Once reside the mty hmlts, new development will have to comply wtth
all of the development regulations deemed necessary by City council to protect pubhc health, safety
and welfare Annexation also requires the provision of munlmpal services at levels consistent with
other areas reside the city
Sanders Ro~ld (private streefl Written Protest
A written protest was filed by the Sanders Road neighborhood, ~dentffied as the approximate 1,366 51-
acre Tract #1,, on October 19, 2000 (Attachment 6) Sanders Road is located just north of Ryan Road
on the east side of Country Club Road Protests received within 10 days of the date of pubhcatlon of
the public heanng notme, and signed by more than 10 percent of the adult residents within the area
subjects the annexation proceedings to Section 43 063(b) of the Texas Local Government Code, as per
the following requirement
At least one of the heartngs must be hem tn the area proposed for
annexatton tfa suttable stte ts reasonably avadable and more than 10
percent of the adults who are permanent restdents of the area file a wrttten
protest of the annexatton wtth the secretary of the muntctpahty wtthm 10
days after the date of the pubhcatton of the nottce reqmred by thts sectton
The protest must state the name, address, and age of each protester who
stgns
The petitions dad not include the age of each protester, however each protester was listed on the
property owner research list The total number of persons protesting A-101 in wntmg is 17, which ~s
approximately 8% of the adults who are permanent residents of the area The protest was received
w~thln 10 days of the date of publication of the public hearing notice, but has not been signed by more
than 10 pement of the adult residents wlflun the area, therefore the reqmrements of Section 43 063(b)
have not been met
SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICE PLAN INFORMATION
As per state law, a thorough analysis and a service plan have been prepared and are avmlable for pubhc
inspection (Attachment 3) Because the tracts to be annexed are for the most part undeveloped,
lmmedaate demand for servmes is low There are approximately 60 single-family residences, 10
mobile homes, and 6 non-residential uses developed m the area today The population forecast for th~s
area is 1,005 people (Attachment 4) All properties within the annexed tracts will be entitled to city
pohce proteetion, fire protection and prevention, emergency medacal service, sohd waste collection,
mmntenance of roads and streets, library services, code enfomement, bufldang inspections and
consumer health services, and planning and development services upon the effective date of the
annexation
Below ~s a summary of supplemental information to specffic sections of the servme plan
Pohce Protection:
The cumulative impact of the annexation of this area ~s relatively small for the police department,
because police service depends primarily on population The Police Department already provides
service for c0mmumties that darectly surround the proposed annexation area The Pohce Department
will be abl9 to provide appropriate serwce to th~s area ~mmedaately upon annexation As the
population grows and more land is developed, addatlonal staffing will be deployed to mamtmn a
consistent level of sermce
Fire Protection and Fire Prevention'
1 Initially fire protection will be provided by Station 3 at 1204 McCormick and Station 6 at 3232
Teasley Lane Depending on the type of emergency, additional equipment will be reqmred i e,
Structure Fire reqmres 3 engine companies, 1 Truck Company, Battalion Chief, Ambulance, and a
Fire Marshal for an initial response
2
The Fire Department's emergency response time to this annexation will be more than the Fire
Department's five-year Strategm Plan's goal ofa 4 minute response time to City residents in 80%
of the time However, the Denton Fire Department's response to this annexation area will still
substantially improve their current level of fire protection and emergency medical care
3
The Fire Department Strategic Plan recommends two new fire stations in this area in order to
maintain the same level of service provided to other areas of the City of Denton The Strategic
Plan calls for new fire stations located in the Vlclmty of Brash Creek Road and U S Highway 377
and at F M 2449 and 1-35 West These new fire stations will allow for an acceptable 4 minute
response time in 80% of the emergencies
4
There are currently other areas wlthm the City boundaries that do not meet the 4-minute response
time goal and are slmllar in duration to the expected response times to this annexation Improving
future response times to these areas are also addressed by the Fire Depamnent's Strategic Plan
No automatic md agreements with Argyle Volunteer Fire Department currently exist with the City
of Denton Whereby as a needed basis, the shanng of manpower and equipment is achieved by the
on-scene commander of the affected junsdlctlun Automatic md with any surrounding volunteer
fire department would not achieve the same level of service as the rest of the City of Denton due
to the nature of a volunteer fire department Volunteer fire departments are not sufficiently staffed
and ready at a moments notice as compared to a fully prod fire department as exists m the City of
Denton
Maintenance of Water and Wastewater Facilities
1 The Water Distribution System Master Plan includes a 20-tach water main along US Highway
377 The proposed annexation areas can and most likely will be served by tapping into this 20-
inch line The Master Plan also includes a 12-tach water line along Country Club Road and
Hickory Creek Road The impact of annexation and development of the subject tract can be
accommodated by the US Highway 377 Water Line The City of Denton will be the retml
provider of water utility service for all future developments in the area since they will be annexed
into the City limits and lie within Danton's CCN for water utility service No additional equipment
w~ll be needed for water to serve the annexation area
2
The Wastewater Dlsmbut~on System Master Plan shows the Roark Branch Sewer Line that will tie into
the existing Hickory Creek Interceptor (See Extnblt 1) The only existing City of Denton utility line
that lies within the proposed annexation area is the H~ckory Creek Interceptor sewer line The impact
of annexation and development of the subject tract can be accommodated by the programmed
Graveyard Branch Interceptor that will be installed in the southern portion of the annexation tract, and
the Hickory Creek Interceptor The City of Denton will be the retml provider of wastewater utility
sennce for all future developments m the area since they will be annexed into the City limits and he
wittun Denton's CCN for wastewater utlhty service No additional equipment will be needed for
wastewater to serve the annexation area
Drainage Services
1 Annexation of tins area includes subdivisions that may be poorly drained Some areas could be
substandard and susceptible to floochng Major channel or storm drmn systems may be required
Correction of these problems will require expenditure of City funds In addition, easements may
not exist to perform m~untenance of existing channels or storm dnuns
2
Provision of drainage servmes is currently funded by water and sewer ratepayers As development
occurs, and sewer or water service is extended to these areas, funding will become avmlable to
provide drainage mmntenance
3
Easements may not exist to perform mmntenance of channels or storm drmns in existing
developments, and will have to be secured before the city will consider providing services in these
areas
4 This area contains creeks that do not have a detmled flood study The Master Drainage Plan
Update will include these properties, if annexed, as part ofa detmled flood study
5 Areas cttrrently experiencing moderate to severe erosion may require eventual repmr
6
New subdivisions would be subject to the City's Drainage Criteria, subdivision regulations, and
lntenm regulations Areas along Ryan Road and Country Club Road contain properties in the
100-year floodphun Approximately 475 acres lie within the 100-year floodplain In addition, this
area contmns designated Environmentally Senmlve Areas The majority of the floodplain has a
contributing drsanage area of greater that one square mile The proposed development code will
essentially prohthlt any disturbance of the floodplmn and environmentally sensitive areas in these
areas, allowing limited density transfers Structures, parking lots, fill, excavation, land
disturbance, fences, decks, pools, and other aboveground manmade structures will be prohibited in
the floodplain
Maintenance of Roads and Streets
1 An lnvantory of existing roads within in the subject area, including immediate and long-term
maintenance and construction needs, is attached in Exhibit "C"
The City of Denton currently maintains 335 miles of road The subject area currently contains 2 7
miles of public roads that are mamtamed by the County These roadways would become the City
of Denton's responslblhty immediately upon annexation No new equipment or faclhtles would
be required to serve the area
Based on a projected population of 8,046 residents, and assuming there will be additional roads
constructed as property develops, it is anticipated that an additional three person street crew and
two office personnel will be required m order to mmntaln current levels of service at full
development Additional eqmpment for the street crew would include a dump track, backhoe and
miscellaneous field supplies totalmg $300,000 00 These resources would not be needed until the
area becomes more fully developed
Parks and Recreation Facilities
The current 2000 Parks and Recreation Master Plan indicates a need for a community park in this
general area, Population projections mdmate a bmld-out population of 8,046 people living m 3,661
housing units Based on service standards set in the Park and Recreation Master Plan, 20 114 acres of
4
new park land wll be needed for neighborhood parks Since the Parks and Recreation Master Plan
mdmates a need for a Community Park, a mmunum of 30 acres will be necessary for such a facthty
Nelghborhoo,d parks are currently supported by the Park Dedication Ordinance, which requires
developmentl exactions for land and improvements Taxpayers share the costs of community parks on
a cltywlde basis, typically through capital improvements programming
Solid Waste lCollection
Existing development in the area can be adequately served with resources provided in the fiscal year
2001 budget,with no appreciable impact upon those resources Future impact will be determined by
the rate of growth For automated residential systems an additional residential route is needed for
every 800-1000 dwellings The city proposes to serve flus area with automated residential collection
using roll-out carts
OPTIONS.
City Council members instructed staff to mdlcate ETJ areas that will have strong urban development
potential, based on proxmalty to water and wastewater utilities (either exlstxng or programmed) or
because of impending urban development that will create the demand for municipal services The
geographic scope of the annexation is not subject to exact and precise standards and is a policy matter,
City Counclll has the discretion to use its legislative authority to determine which properties should be
annexed However, the annexation process is strongly governed by the state law, and very little
d~scretlon is available concerning the process or service conditions under which annexation may occur
The Counclll may delete an area after the public is noticed of the proposed annexation based on the
determination that the area was not m the best interest of the City The annexation may be challenged
as a violation of the equal protection clause, if the reason for deleting an area is arbitrary or capricious
Staff has been made aware of the fact that some Council members may want to withdraw specific
Ryan Road properties from further consideration of annexation, a separate map of Ryan Road parcels
has been provided for Council review in Attachment 5
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the first public heanng for A-101 be held as scheduled, and pending comments
received, de~ermme if additional information is needed Staff continues to recommend annexation of
the tracts identified in their entirety, and action that is consistent with the Denton Plan The
avmlabthty Of water and wastewater services, the development of an elementary school on Ryan Road,
and the movement of development pressure westward from the Teasley Lane Comdor are all factors
that indicate, that these tracts will soon develop at urban densities Public safety services should be
provided to urban areas, and development should be managed and coordinated using all regulatory
tools available to the city In adrhtlon, significant Environmentally Sensitive Areas have been
identified that should function to preserve water quality and avoid expensive flood control measures,
as indicated in the Denton Plan
ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT
The annexation process, if followed according to the current schedule (Attachment 2), will be
completed by January 9, 2000
PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW
Council Work Session August 8, 2000
Council Work Session August 22, 2000
DRC Review August 24, 2000, September 7, 14, 21, 28, 2000 and October 6, 2000
Petition F~hng Date September 22, 2000
ATTACHMENTS
1 Location Map (page 7)
2 Annexation Schedule (page 8)
3 Service Plan (pages 9 -15) -
4 Supplemental Servme Plan Informatmn (pages 16-42)
5 Ryan Road Parcel Map (pages 43-44)
6 Petlt~ons agumst annexatmn (pages 45-49)
Respectfully submitted
D~rector of Planmng and Development
Prepared by
/Vlarc~ Rat~[ff \- [[
Developm6flt Revt~w Maflager
Attachment 1
NORTH
A-101 Ryan Road/Country Club Road Annexation
Location Map
7
Scale None
Friday, September 22
Friday, October 6
Thursday, October 5
Friday, October 13
Thursday, October 19
Tuesday. October 24
Wednesday, October 25
Tuesday, November 7
Wednesday, November 8
Tuesday, November 28
Wednesday, November 29
Tuesday, January 9, 2001
Attachment 2
ANNEXATION SCHEDULE OF
Ryan Road/Country Club Annexation Area
Involuntary Annexation Petition filed, Annexation Study & Service Plans
Drafted
30 day not, ce of intent to annex to each property owner, each public entuy or
privet entuy that provides serrates m the ama and each raikoad company
Annexation Service Plans Completed
Notice sent to be published on Monday. October 9 on City Website and in
Denton Record-Chronicle for CC's first public hearing (Noon)
500' Courtesy Notice and Posting of signs
Deadline for receipt of petitions for opposition (10 days after notice)
City Couned Conducts first public heann~
Notme sent to be published on Saturday, October 28 on City Website and m
Denton Record-Chronicle for PZ's public heanng on annexation and zoning
and CC's second public hearing on annexation and zoning (Noon)
City Council Conducts second public hearing
Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing - make a
recommendabon to City Council regarding the proposed annexation and the
proposed zoning
First reading of annexation ordinance - City Council by a 4/5's vote
institutes armexat~on proceedings
Annexatton ordinance to be published on Saturday. December 2 on City
Website and in Denton Record-Chronicle
Second reading and adoption of annexation ordinance and zoning
ordinance - City Council by a 4/5's vote takes final action
Athachment 3
Annexation A- 101
Ryan Road/Country Club Road
Servme Plan
Attachment 3
Exhibit "A"
City of Denton Annexation Service Plan
for A-101 (Ryan Road/Country Club Road)
AREA ANNEXED
The armexatlon area located m the extra-temtonal junsdmtlon of southwest Denton contains
approximately 1,370 acres The annexation area is located east of U S H~ghway 377, south of
Regency Court on each s~de of Country Club Road, west of Montemto along Ryan Road and mostly
north of Brush Creek Road See the attached location maps on Exhibit "B"
INTRODUCTION
Th~s service plan has been prepared in accordance w~th the Texas Local Government Code, Section
43 021, 43 065 and 43 065(b)-(o)(Vernon Supp 2000) Mumclpal fatalities and services to the
annexed area described above will be provided or made available on behalf of the city m accordance
with the following schedule
POLICE PROTECTION
Pohce servme, ]ncludlng patmlhng, response to calls and other mutme functions, will be provided to
the property on the effective date of the annexation The City shall provide a level of services,
infrastructure and Infrastructure maintenance that is comparable to the level of services, ~nfrastmcture
and infrastructure mmntenance avmlable m other parts of the city with topography, land use and
population denstty Slnnlar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
FIRE PROTECTION AND FIRE PREVENTION
Fire protection and prevention services will be prowded on the effective date of the annexation using
exmtmg Denton F~re Department personnel and equipment A mutual aid agreement w~th the Argyle
Volunteer Fire Department will be proposed The City shall prowde a level of services, infrastructure
and mfrastrueture mmntenance that is comparable to the level of services, infrastructure and
~nfrastmcture mmntenance avmlable in other parts of the city with topography, land use and population
density s~nnlar to those reasonably contemplated or projected m the area
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE
Emergency Medical Services will be provided immediately on the effective date of the annexation
using ex~st~ng Denton Fire Department personnel and equipment A mutual aid agreement with the
Argyle Volunteer F~re Department will be proposed The City shall prowde a level of servmes,
infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance that is comparable to the level of servmes, mfrastructure
and infrastructure maintenance avadable m other parts of the city w~th topography, land use and
population density s~mflar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
MAINTENANCE OF WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES
Maintenance of exlstmg City of Denton water and wastewater faclhtms in the area to be annexed that
are not wltlun the service area of another water or wastewater utility wall be cnntmued to be
mamtmned lmmedmtely on the effective date of the annexation The majority of the area to be
annexed ~s prowded water by either a private water well of the Argyle Water Supply Corporatmn and a
private wastewater system The City shall prowde a level of services, ~nfrastmeture and mfrastructure
mmntenance that rs comparable to the level of services, infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance
10
available ~n other parts of the city wxth topography, land use and population density s~mflar to those
reasonably contemplated or projected ~n the area
DRAINAGE SERVICES
Drainage mmntenanee will be provided on the effectave date of the annexation The City shall provide
a level of servaces, infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance that as comparable to the level of
services, infrastructure and infrastructure mmntenance available ~n other parts of the caty w~th
topography, land use and population dens~ty smaflar to those reasonably contemplated or projected ~n
the area
MAINTENANCE OF ROADS AND STREETS
Mmntenanee of roads and streets ~n the area to be annexed will be made available on the effective date
of the annexation The City shall prowde a level of servmes, infrastructure and infrastructure
maintenance that ~s comparable to the level of services, ~nfrastructure and infrastructure maintenance
avmlable in other parts of the c~ty w~th topography, land use and population density s~mflar to those
reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
STREET LIGHTING
Street hghtmg will be available on the effective date of the annexation The City shall prowde a level
of services, infrastructure and Infrastructure maintenance that ~s comparable to the level of services,
infrastructure and mfrastmcture maintenance available ~n other parts of the c~ty w~th topography, land
use and population density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
If any city park and recreation facilities are located w~thm the annexed area, the mmntenance will
beg~n on the, effective date of the annexation The City shall prowde a level of services, infrastructure
and ~nfrastmcmre maintenance that as comparable to the level of services, infrastructure and
infrastructure mmntenance available in other parts of the city w~th topography, land use and populatmn
density slmdar to those reasonably contemplated or proj coted ~n the area
No parks are wlthan the proposed annexation The closest Denton Park properties are the Undeveloped
Cross Timbers Park and Bent Creek Park, winch are adjacent to the annexation area South Lakes
Park, located at Hobson at Santa Momca (approx 1 2 miles), Dema Park, located at 1001 Parv~n
(approximately 1 mile away) Current residents will be able to use exlstang City of Demon parks,
facilities and programs
LIBRARY SERVICES
L~brary services will be made available on the effective date of the annexation on the same basra and at
the same level as similar facilities are ma~mamed throughout the may
CODE ENFORCEMENT, BUILDING INSPECTIONS AND CONSUMER HEALTH
SERVICES,
Code enforcement, building inspections and consumer health servmes will be made available on thc
effective date of the annexatmn on the same basis and at the same level as similar faefl~ttes arc
mmntmned throughout the city
11
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SERVICES
1 Planmng and Development Department services will be provided will be made available on the
effective date of the annexatmn on the same basis and at the same level as s~mfiar facd~ttes arc
mmnta~ned throughout the c~ty The Planmng and Development Department currently prowdes
servmes to th~s property by way of admlmstratmn of Chapter 34 of the Code of Ordmances,
Subdlwslon and Land Development Regulattons
2
C~ty Council adopted The Denton Plan 1999-2020 Comprehensive Plan of the C~ty of Denton and
its extra-temtonal junsdtct~on by Ordinance 99-439 on December 7, 1999 The Future Land Use
Plan designates the area as Regional M~xed Use Centers, Neighborhood Centers, Ex~sttng
Nelghborhoods/Infill Compat~b~hty and 100 Year Floodplmn/Enwronmentally Senmtlve Areas
The Denton Plan land use districts where designated to manage the quahty and quantity of growth
by orgamzmg the land use patterns, matching land use ~ntens~ty w~th avadable infrastructure and
by preserving floodplmns as enwronmental and open space comdors The Denton Plan wall be
used as a bas~s to zone the property when ~t ~s annexed ~nto the C~ty Llmtts
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
The C~ty of Denton Sohd Waste Department ~s the exclusive mmdentlal and commermal solid waste
service provider ~n the City The Department ~s an entirely fee based operation and receives no
resources from taxes The current residential sohd waste rate is $16 per 30 days Commercial rates
vary depending upon the scope of service prowded Sohd waste collection servme will be prowded to
the property on the effective date of the annexation The C~ty of Denton Sohd Waste Department w~ll
honor ex~stmg contracts w~th private sohd waste service providers for two years after the effective date
of th~s annexation m accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 43 056(0) (Vemon
Supp 2000) To receive sohd waste collection service the customer must contact one of the City of
Denton Customer Service Offices and submit a request/apphcatlon for servme
ELECTRIC FACILITIES
1 Denton Munlmpal Electric plans to prowde electric utility service to the entire annexation area
Electric utlhty servme will be made avmlable on the effective date of the aunexatlon on the same
bas~s and at the same level as s~m~lar famht~es are mmntmned throughout the caty
Denton Mumc~pal Electric has ex~st~ng facilities in the Ryan / Country Club Annexation Area
The 138 kV transmasslon lane crosses the annexation area Distribution famhtles are on US 377,
Ryan Road, Country Club Road, and Hmkory Creek Road
3 Denton Munm~pal Electric plans to build two substations one on US 377 and the other at Teasley
Lane and H~ckory Creek Road
OTHER SERVICES
Other servmes that may be provided by the city such as ammal control, munlmpal and general
adm~nlstratmn will be made available on the effective date of the armexatmn The City shall prowde a
level of serwces, ~nfrastmcture and ~nfrastmcture maintenance that ~s comparable to the level of
services, infrastructure and ~nfrastructure maintenance avmlable ~n other parts of the c~ty w~th
topography, land use and population density samdar to those reasonably contemplated or projected m
the area
12
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP)
Constmct~on~of additional water, sewer, street and drmnage famhtles wall begin within two and a half
(2 ½) years unless cartmn servmes can not be reasonably provided w~tlun that period If certmn
services cannot be reasonably provided, the city will provide those servaces wlthm 4 and a half (4 V2)
years after the effective date of the annexation Construction will be completed w~th~n four and one-
half (4 ~) years after the effective date of the annexation unless the construction process ~s ~ntermpted
by cimumstances beyond the control of the mty Construction of other capital ~mprovements shall be
considered by the c~ty in the future as the needs dactate on the same bas~s as such capital ~mprovements
are considered throughout the city
UNIFORM LEVEL OF SERVICES MAY NOT BE REQUIRED
Nothing in this plan shall require the mty to provide a umforrn level of full mumc~pal services to each
area of the city, including the annexed area, if different characteristics of topography, land use, and
population density are considered a sufficient basis for providing different levels of service
TERM
Th~s service plan shall be vahd for a term often (10) years
AMENDMENTS
The plan shall not be amended unless public hearings are held m accordance with Texas Local
Government Code, Sectmn 43 052 (Vernon Supp 2000)
13
14.
Area Tract 2
3.5.
Attachment 4
Annexatxon A- 101
Ryan Road/Country Club Road
Supplemental Service Plan Information
16
SERVICE ANALYSIS
Ryan Rd Annexation Area/Priority Area
POLICE
Estimated average response t~me for th~s area based on current
department conditions
2
Pnonty 5 minutes
Non-pnorlty between 6-10 minutes
Average Between 5 and 7
Appropriate average response time m the city based on current
department conditions
Pnonty
Non-pnonty
Average
5 minutes or less
between 5 and 10 m~nutes
6 m~nutes
Note This ~s the current s~tuat~on ~n the c~ty and would be also for the outer most
boundaries of the annexahon areas, again based on current departmental
conditions
3
If annexed and developed as proposed will additional personnel be
needed as a specific result of th~s proposal
The addition of the following personnel would be required
Sworn:
Patrol officers 7
Supervisors 1
Cnm~nal Investigators 2
Traffic Unit 0
Warrant Officers 0
Area Coordinator Officer 0
Civilian'
D~spatcher 2
Records 1
Jailer 1
Total additional staff to service the increase m population over all annexation 40
Addttmnal personnel would be gradually h~red over the development period
4 Wdl add~tional equipment and funding be needed to serve th~s area?
Addibonal equipment and funding ~s needed for the ~ncrease in the staffing due to
the annexation of the area The equipment and funding needs are based on the
needs of the personnel and/or particular s~tuat~ons Therefore, equipment
needed will be determined as situat~ons anse and more staff ~s added There is
no populabon to equipment ratio for the pohce department Equipment needs
may ~nclude
Patrol Cars w~th Computer
Computers
Basic~equ~pment to support the additional personal
Special grants may be necessary as bme passes
5
Will a pohce substabon or other faclhty be needed to serve this area as a
result of annexation and development?
In order to propedy handle the ~ncrease ~n calls for service and crime, and to
accommodate the additional staff, we w~ll need some faclhty for operabons
Th~s would be a commumty office and could be done ~n conjunction w~th parks,
fire, or hbrary A community office is simply a place where an officer ~n the area
can go, and have commumty meetings, and perform some basic administrative
task Such a faclhty could be operational as soon as space becomes available
Please comment on the cumulative ~mpact of annexabon and
development
The cumulative ~mpact of the annexation of this area ~s relabvely small for the
pohce department Unhke other departments, our service pnmanly depends on
population This area is not projected to be developed as heavily for residential
purposes as the US377 annexation area That coupled w~th the fact that we
already provide service for communlbes that d~rectly surround the area means
that we could provide appropriate servme to th~s area ~mmed~ately upon
annexation As the population grows and the land becomes more developed, we
w~ll then require additional staff to maintain that level of service
Cont8ct person and ~nformat~on
Eric Parkey
Crime Analyst
C~ty of Denton Police Department
349-7947
e-ma~l ewparkey~cltyofdenton com
Date 9/13/00
18.
10/19/2000
Annexation Service Plan
Fire Department Comments
Case Number: A-101 (Ryan Road)
Area: 1,370 acres
Location: Ryan Road/Country Club Road, East of US 377
B. Fire Protection
Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services will be provided immediately after
the effective date of the annexation using existing Denton Fire Department
personnel, equipment, and any existing mutual md agreements with Argyle
Volunteer Fire Department
Imtlally fire protection will be provided by Station 3 at 1204 McCormick and Station
6 at 3232 Teasley Lane Depending on the type of emergency, additional eqmpment
will be required 1 e, Structure Fire requires 3 engine companies, 1 Truck Company,
Battalion Chief, Ambulance, and a Fire Marshal for an initial response
The Fire Department's emergency response time to this annexation will be more
than the Fire Department's five-year Strategic Plan's goal of a 4 minute response
time to City residents in 80% of the time However, the Denton Fire Department's
response to flus annexation area will still substantially improve their current level of
fire protection and emergency medical care
4
The Fire Department Strategic Plan recommends two new fire stations in this area in
order to maintain the same level of servlee provided to other areas of the City of
Denton The Strateglc Plan ealls for new fire statlons located m the vlcmlty of Brush
Creek Road and U S Highway 377 and at F M 2449 and 1-35 West These new fire
stations will allow for an acceptable 4 minute response time in 80% of the
emergencies
5
There are currently other areas within the Clty boundaries that do not meet the 4-
minute response time goal and are similar in duration to the expected response t~mes
to flus annexation Improving future response times to these areas are also addressed
by the Fire Department's Strategic Plan
6
No automatic md agreements with Argyle Volunteer Fire Department currently exist
with the City of Denton Whereby as a needed basis, the shanng of manpower and
equipment is achieved by the on-scene commander of the affected junsdlCtlOn
Automatic md with any surrounding volunteer fire department would not achieve the
same level of service as the rest of the City of Denton due to the nature of a
volunteer fire department Volunteer fire departments are not sufficiently staffed
and ready at a moments notice as compared to a fully prod fire department as exists
m the City of Denton
19.
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A-
.FIRE
1
Fire and Emergency Medical Services can be provided to the area from station(s)
# 3 and 6 located at 1204 McCormick and 3232 Teasley Lane
2 Esbmated response t~me
12-15 minutes
3 Appropnate response bme m the C~ty 4 m,nutes
4
Is a new fire station approved ~n the CIP that could serve th~s area? No If yes. what ~s
the CIP program year?
5
Wdl a new fire station be requested in upcoming CIP proposals to serve th~s area? Yes
If yes, when should this stabon be operational? 2 Years
6
Total estimated funding for equipment, employees and/or fac~hbes needed to serve this
area strictly based on annexahon and proposed development
Estimated funding.
$1,210,000 estimated equipment to include one quint, [ten year replacement] one
engine [ten year replacement], two ambulances [two year replacement], and one
prevention vehicle.
$2,300,000 estimated funding for employees [Annual Cost] to include four
employees to the quint, three employees for the engine, four employees for the
ambulances and one prevention personnel
$4,200,000 estimated funding for facilities to include two fire stabons
7
Please comment on the cumulabve ~mpact of annexation and development
Is there an accepted employee to population ratio that can be used for planning
purposes?
I 5 Firefighters and Emergency Medical Personnel per 1,000 people in the city
0 25 persons per '1,000 people for support staff
Additional Comments
Because of the lack of connecting roadways in this area a four minute response
time will be difficult A station should be located at Brush Creek Road and State
Highway 377 and F.M 2449 and 1-35 West. The proposed fire stations will be a
minimum requirement to service this vast of an area This proposal was based
on meeting the minimum requirements for water distribution and Infrastructure
requirements.
After annexation this area will be covered by Stations 3 and 6 The potential for
urban interfaced fires is extreme The lack of water and interconnecting roads
Annexation - Service Info Request dot
20
and existing topography create a challenge without the additional manpower,
facilities, and equipment ~
John K. Gillette III, P.E
Assistant Fire Marshal
(940) 349-8~ 59
Person to contact ~f there are quesbons
Cc Chief Ross Chadwick, Fire Chief
Chief Rick Jones, Fire Marshal
September 5, 2000
Date
Annexation - Service Info Request dot
23..
WATER/WASTEWATER
SERVICE PLAN
Water and wastewater utfltty services will be prowded to the annexed prope~es in
accordance wath the following state and local laws and current serrate pohcles and
master plans
The Texas Local Government Code
Chapter 43 - Mummpal Annexation
Chapter 395 - Impact Fees
The City of Denton, Texas Code of Ordinances, as adopted May 7, 1991
Chapter 26 - Utilities
Chapter 34 - Subdlvlslon and Land Development
The City of Denton Mummpal Utlhtles Pohcy/Pmeedures Manual, as rewsed July 1992
Water/Sewer Line Extension Policy, as revised June 1985
Infi'aslracture Fmancmg Pohcy, as adopted by City Council Resolutton ~*.91-008
The C~ty of Denton, Texas Ordinance 98-301, as adopted September 15, 1998
Amendmg Chapter 26 - Utilities, Adopting Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
The City of Denton Mttmclpal Utthties Master Planmng Documents
Water D~stnbutlon System Master Plan, October 1999, by Alan Plurnmer Assomates,
Inc
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, July 1985, by Freese and Nichols, Inc
Wastewater Treatment Planning Report, December 1998, by Alan Plurnmer Associates,
Inc
Prehmmary Design Report for Lake Ray Roberts Water Treatment Plant, March 2000,
Freese and Nichols, Ine
Denton Mumclpal Utilities 2000-2004 Capital Improvements Plan
22
1 What ~s the nearest City of Denton water line9
The nearest Caty of Denton water lines (shown m Exlubat 1) are located along Ryan
Road, Hickory Creek Road and Country Club Road The proposed 20-tach water line
along US Highway 377 wall extend to appmxnnately 2,000 feet North of Crawford
Road The constmchon of the US I-hghway 377 water line vall begin the first week of
October 2000 The 12-tach water line along Ryan Road is being extended to the west
property line of the new Wayne Ryan Elementary School The 12-water line along
Hmkory Creek extends to the west property hne of MeNtor Elementary The 8-tach
water line located on Country Club Road as at the mtersectmn of Beechwood Drive &
Country Club Road Exastmg developments that are on mdtvldual water wells or
private water systems wall be allowed to continue to remain on these systems untal
they fml or a request fi.om the owner or TNRCC for water semce ~s made to the City
of Denton These requests for service will be handled m accordance vath the
apphcable utility semce line extensaon and connectaon pohc~es currently m place at
the tame the request for servme is receaved
2 What is the nearest Caty of Denton sewer hne9
The nearest City of Denton sewer line (shown in Extubat 1) semng the annexataon
area is the I-hekory Creek Interceptor Tlus 27-tach lme flows southerly along the
route of Hickory Creek A Lffi Station is under constmctton to serve the new Wayne
Ryan Elementary School and the surrounding sewer basra There ~s a 15-tach samtary
sewer line located along the west property line of McNatr Elementary School flowing
south, wbach Ues into the Hickory Creek Interceptor approxtmately 3000 feet south of
Hickory Cke. ek Road Emstmg developments that are currently on septic systems will
be allowed to remain on these systems untal they fad or unhl a request for wastewater
serrates from the owner is made to Denton These requests for sen, ace will be handled
m accordance With the apphcable uhhty servace line extensaon and cormect~on pohcles
currently m place at the tame the request for serrate as receaved
3 According to the City of Denton master plan what type of lines and facilities would be
required for tlus area and when are those lines and facfl~taes proposed for constmctton
Water Dlstributaon System Master Plan'
The Water Dlstnbut~on System Master Plan includes a 20-tach water mare along US
Highway 377 The proposed annexation areas could be served by tapping into tins
20-tach water moan The Master Plan also includes a 12-tach water line along
Country Club Road and H~ckory Creek Road The Caty of Denton will be the retml
proxader of water utthty service for all future developments m the area since they vail
be annexed into the City lmuts and he vathm Denton's CCN for water ut~hty serwce
23.
Wastewater Master Plan
The Wastewater Master Plan shows the Roark Branch Sewer Lme that will Ue rote the
exxstmg I-hckory Creek Interceptor (See Extub~t 1) The C~ty of Denton xxall be the
retail prowder of wastewater utihty serrate for all future developments m the area
since they will be annexed rote the C~ty hnuts and lie w~thm Denton's CCN for
wastewater utility service
4 Are there any City of Denton lmes included ~n the proposed annexation9
The only ex~stmg C~ty of Denton utihty lines that he w~thm the proposed annexation
area is the Hickory Creek Interceptor sewer hne
5 Please comment on cumulative nupact of annexation and development
The impact of annexation and development of the subject tract can be accommodated
by the US Highway 377 Water Line, Graveyard Branch Interceptor and the I-hckory
Creek Interceptor
No adchtional eqmpment will be needed for water or wastewater to serve the
annexation area
If you have any questions, please contact the person below
P S Arora. P E Engineering Adrmmstrator
Person to contact if them are questions
9/14/00
24.
DRAINAGE
SERVICE PLAN
2
3
4
5
6
7
Annexabon of th,s area includes subd~ws~ons that may contain httle or no drainage
Some areas could be substandard and susceptible to flooding Major channel or
storm drain systems may be required Correcbon of these problems wdl require
expenditure of C~ty funds In addition, easements may not exist to perform
maintenance of channels or storm drains
Untd sewer or water servme is provided to these areas, no funding mechamsm ~s
available to prowde drainage maintenance
Easements may not exist to perform maintenance of channels or storm drams
This area contains creeks that do not have a detaded flood study Add~bonal cost wdl
be,added to the Master Drainage Plan Update to ~nclude these areas ~n a detaded
flood study
Areas currently experiencing moderate to severe erosion could possible need repair
New subd~v~sions would be subject to the City's Drainage Criteria, subd~ws~on
regulations, and interim regulations
New subdivisions would be subject to the C~ty's Drainage Cntena, subdtwsion
regulations, and ~ntenm regulations Areas along Ryan Road and Country Club Road
contain properbes ~n the 100-year flcodpla~n Approximately 475 acres I~e w~thln the
100-year floodplain In add~bon, th~s area is w~th~n the designated enwronmental
sensitive areas The majority of the floodplain has a contnbubng drainage area of
greater that one square m~le The proposed development code wdl essenbally
prohibit any d~sturbance of the floodplain and environmentally sensitive areas in
these areas Structures, parking lots, fill, excavabon, land disturbance, fences,
decks, pools, and other aboveground manmade structures wdl be prohibited ~n the
floodplain
26.
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A- Ryan Rd/Country Club Rd
ENGINEERING AND TRANSPORTATION
What,ex,sting roads, bndges and other transportation fac~hbes will be ~mpacted by this
proposed annexation and development m terms of needed Improvements or upgrades?
Name and Iocabon
Type of Improvement
Approximate Cost
See Attached Table
2
Are any of these ~mprovements presently scheduled to be done at state or federal
expense? No If yes, please ~dent~fy fac~hty and anbc~pated date ~mprovements will
begin
3
W~ll add~bonal equipment and fac~ht~es be needed as a specific result of th~s annexation
and development? Yes If yes, what type of equipment or fac~hty?
The City of ~)enton currently maintains 335 miles of road The sublect area currently conta/n,~
2 7 miles of public roads that are maintained by the County, however would become the City of
Denton's re~pons/b/I/t¥ upon annexation No new equipment or facilities would be required tn
serve the area Immediately, upon annexation Based on an ultimate prolected population of
9051 and a~summq that there would be additional road construct/on for new subdivisions,
equipment for one additional street crew and two off/ce personnel would be required Th/,~
would include a dump truck, a backhoe, normal field supplies, off/ce supplies, and 2
computers The est/mated cost of the equipment Is $350,000 O0
4
Please comment on the cumulative ~mpact of annexabon and development
At what population level would additional equipment be required? The area currently
has less than 200 residents w/th an u/t/mate prolected population of 9051 Looking
cumulatively at the three areas currently be/n.q considered for annexation, equipment for
an additional street crew would be required In the near future This would Include a
dump truck, a backhoe, and field supplies This equipment is est/mated at $300 000 O0
Is there an accepted equipment to populabon ratio that can be used for planning
purposes? N/A
Is there an accepted employee to populabon rabo that can be used for planmng
purposes? Current raho of Enqmeenng & Transportation employees to population is 1
employee for each 1700 citizens, The ratio of employees to miles of road maintained by
the city is 1 employee per 7 5 miles of Road Based on existing and proposed
~)o~)ulat/on for the area, no additional personnel will be necessary Immediately upon
annexation The increase In mi/es of road to maintain due to development will be
dependant on how the area develops As indicated above, we do expect an Increase in
the mlleaqe of road to maintain As the area ultimately develops, we est/mate the need
ryan road Service Info Request doc
27.
for 5 additional employees Look/no cumulabvelv at all three areas be/n,q considered for
annexation at this t/me, based on the lenqth of ex/sting roads, an additional 3 person
street crew could be required ~n the near future ~o maintain current se/v/ce levels
Dawd Salmon,, C~ty Engineer
Person to contact ~f there are questions
Date 9/21/00
ryan mad Service Info Request doc
:28.
Ryan Road / CoUntry Club Road Annexabon Area
~ffected Streets
~ Oty bm~s
~ Annexat~n A~ea
29
SERVICE ANALYSIS
Ryan Road/Country Club Annexation Area
PARKS AND RECREATION
What neighborhood park and recreational faclht~es are currently serving th~s area or are
capable of serving th~s area If annexed and/or developed (federal, state, or local)?
None ~re w~thln the proposed annexation The closest Denton Park properties are
Undeveloped Cross T~mbers Park and Bent Creek Park which are adjacent to the
annexation area South Lakes Park, located at Hobson at Santa Momca (approx
1,2 miles), Denla Park, Iocated at 1001 Parvin (appox I rode away) Current
residents will be able to use existing Ctty of Denton parks, facd~bes and
programs,
2
What projects and/or equipment will be needed to adequately serve this area ~f annexed
and/or development based on the parks and recreabon master plan or s~mflar
standards? The current 2000 Park and Recreation Master Plan indicates a need
for a c0mmunlty park In this general area Population projections propose 8,046
people living In 3,661 housing units Based ~3n service standards set in the Park
and Recreation Master Plan, 20.tt4 acres of new park land will be needed for
neighborhood parks Since the Park and Recreation Master Plan indicates a need
for a Oommunlty Park, a Park with a minimum of 30 acres will be necessary.
Servlc~ Standards
Neighborhood Parks
Community Parks
2 ,5 acres per 1,000 population (to be dedlcated at time of
development)
,5 acres m~mmum s~ze
(by developer) cost per acre
3.0 acres per 1,O00 population
30 acres minimum
3
How much additional funding will be needed for maintenance if additional park facilities
are developed to serve th~s area? $f03,620 O0
Serv~ce Standard
Based on $3,454 (developed) cost per acre
4
How many additional personnel would be needed to properly serve th~s area ~f annexed
and developed? 5,6
Service Standards
0 5 to 10,7' FTE additional personnel per 1,000 populabon (depending on type of
servide)
$38,000 per year cost per additional personnel
Add~bonal C(~mments Road right of way requiring mowing is 6 85 m,ies or approximately
22 acres C~)st estimate for mowing Is $2,750.00
Person to contact ~f there are questions Date
Annex tracts~Ryan Rd,Country Club area 9-20-00 doc
:31.
SOLID WASTE
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A-101 Ryan Road/Country Club Road
How many dwellangs and/or busanesses are currently located in the area, and what are the
charactenstacs of current solad waste servmes being provided to the area9
The area included ~n this annexation consists of approximately 86 dwelhng units and 3
businesses The residents are served w~th e~ther automated or bags by private service
providers
2 Will addatlonal resources be nceded to serve this area9
The resources prowded in the 2001 fiscal year budget wall be adequate to provide solad
waste services to th~s area A descnptaon of the scope of service along w~th residential
collection pohmes and procedures is presented below
RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE INFORMATION
To enroll for service the customer should go to any of the Customer Service locations and
complete a request for solid waste services
Resldentml Solid Waste is an entirely fee~for-serwce supported subscriber serwce
providing trash collection to single-family, duplex, and four-plex residences within the
City limits All occupied dwelhngs in the City not serviced by Commercial Solid Waste
are required to subscribe to this service Unoccupied dwelhngs and/or premises that are
not subscribers wall not receive service without prior arrangement
Our service is designed for twice per week collection of household waste generated at the
residential prermse by an average family, whach is about four bags per week This
service is not for collection of remodehng, demolition, or roofing debris Contact our
Commercial Sohd Waste Division to arrange for collection of th~s type of debris
The Residential Solid Waste Division also provides automated collection services using a
roll-out cart w~th wheels in designated areas of the city At this t~me the automated
service frequency will be the same as bag service
Service Days
Generally, residences located north of Hickory and north of Mlngo Road receive regular
collectlun on Mondays and Thursdays Residences south of this boundary receive
collection service on Tuesdays and Fridays
32.
Containers
Residential customers receive two free rolls (104 bags) of plastic trash bags annually
These bags, or bags of comparable strength and size, are the only containers, which may
be used for trash collection Trash will not be collected in brown paper bags, cardboard
boxes, garbage cans or any other such containers Garbage cans left at the curb on
collection day will be disposed of properly A trash bag and its contents may not exceed
50 pounds
Residential customers using the automated roll-out cart collection will not be eligible for
free bags, but are required to contain the trash in the roll-out cart with plasUe bags to
prevent spillage and httenng
Distribution of Plastic Bags
Customers are given one roll of plastic bags when they sign up for service The City
distributes additional roles of plastic bags twice a year Usually the bag distribution is
held in the parking lot of the Civic Center at 321 E McYdnney To receive these
additional bags, each customer is required to present the customer copy of their prior
month's utility bill which will state "bnng receipt to Civic Center parking lot for trash
bags" Bag dastnbutlon dates are pnnted on utility bills issued in FebruaryfMarch and
September/October Additional rolls of bags may be purchased at Customer Service at
601 E Hickory, City Hall in the Mall at the Golden Triangle Mall, or at any of the City's
fire stations If you receive bags that are defective, please call 349-8210 for
replacements Not available to customers served with automated carts
Placement of Bags for Collection
CUSTOMER GUIDE TO RESIDENTIAL SERVICES
All bags of garbage must be placed just behind the curb in front of your residence prior to
7 00 a m on your collection day or as designated Failure to do so can delay collection
untll your next collection day Garbage should be put out no earlier than the night before
Loose material and individual pieces that can be placed in bags will not be collected until
properly bagged
Unusual Accumulations
Please call our office at 349-8420 if you have an unusual accumulation of waste (not yard
trimmings) for preparation and collection instructions Depending on the circumstance,
there may be a fee charged for collection
Large Household Appliances
You may call in and make special arrangements for the collection of large appliances
Large appliances include items such as refrigerators and freezers, dishwashers, washers
and dryers, stoves, mr condltlomng umts, and hot water heaters Please place the item at
33.
the curb for collectlon It wfll be packed up w~thln 48 hours ofyour request Aonetlme
fee of $50 00 per atom wall be added to your monthly utility bill for applaances, winch
eontaan chlonnated fluorocarbons (CFC) and polychlonnated blphenyls (PCB) This fee
defrays the cost of our compliance with federal and state regulations prohibiting the
disposal of CFC and PCB an municipal landfills The CFC is removed and recycled and
the PCB as dasposed of at a hazardous waste dasposal facility Metals and components
from the appliances are recycled or reused There as no charge for appliances without
CFCs or PCBs
Yard Trammings
Brush, tree lambs, grass and leaves are collected on Wednesdays Customers may place
up to eaght eubae yards (one yard equals Yx3'xY) of brash out for collection each
Wednesday for free If the brush exceeds eight cubic yards, you wall be charged $5 00
per oubae yard Please cut brush and hmbs into 4' lengths and stack in one pile beinnd
the curb m front of your residence with the cut end towards the street For customers
who are on the automated cart collection, the yard trimmings should be stacked on the
curb, and not placed in the roll-out cart
The first forty-eaght bags of leaves and grass are collected flee &charge After the first
forty-eaght free bags, there as a charge of $ 50 per additional 30-gallon bag Bags of grass
and leaves must be placed m front of your residence at the curb for collection Prior to
colleetaon, customers wall be asked to approve charges over $20
Protectaon of Bags
To protect bags from damage by anamals, spray the extenor of bags with bleach or some
similar prodnct Call Anamal Control at 349-7594 for persistent problems xvath dogs or
cats getting into your bags
Animal Manure
Small amounts of anamal manure may be placed for collection The manure should only
make up 20% of the garbage and be mixed wath other solid waste inside a plastic bag
Manure wall not be collected afnot prepared an this manner Large amounts of ammal
manure must be properly dasposed of by the property owner
Prohibited Items
Bodaes or portaons of dead ammals may not be placed for collection Call Ammal
Control for collection of dead anamals We do not collect rocks or dirt, car or truck
batteries or tares, lead acad batteries, motor or other automotave oil or fluads, oal filters,
ammumtlon, fireworks, any other flammable material, or non-dried paint Ashes must be
cooled for at least 48 hours before being placed for collectaon Contact the Fare
Department for dasposal mformataon regarding flammable materials or hqmds Motor oal
and filters can be recycled at the City's four used oal recycling centers Used batteries
can typmally be recycled at the time a new battery is purchased from a retmler or at
34.
various scrap dealers an the C~ty Leftover paint should be allowed to dry completely
before being placed for colleetmn with the hd unfastened
Sharps
To d~spose of needles and synnges used for mject~ons, please break offthe needle and
place it m a puncture proof container Tbas vail help to prevent injuries to samtat~on
employees Bags should not have sharp objects protruding l~om them and bags
contatmng glass should be clearly labeled
Landfill Hours
Landfill hours of operatton are 7 00 a m to 4 00 p m Monday through Friday, 7 00 a m
to 12 00 p m on Saturdays For mformat~on regarding charges, call the Landfill at 349-
7510
Illeeal dumDine
The green dumpsters that you see around town are rented by specific Denton
businesses. They are solely for the use of the businesses paying for their service It
is unlawful for anyone else, whether another business or a c~t~zen, to put anything in
these dumpsters
35.
2
3
4
5
ELECTRIC UTILITIES
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A-
What is the distance to, location of, and size of the nearest City of Denton electric hne9
Denton Municipal Electnc has existing facilities in the Ryan / Country Club & US 377 / 1-35W
Annexation Areas The 138 kV transmission line crosses the annexation area D~stnbutlon
faelhtle$ are on US 377, Ryan Road, Country Club Road, and Hickory Creek Road
What type of lines and facilities would be required to serve this area9
Main Line circuits and infrastructure based on development
Are any new hnes or facilities proposed for construction to serve this area9
Denton Municipal Electric nlans to build two substations one on US 377 and the other at Teasle¥
Lane and Hickory Creek Road
Are there any potential responslblhtles if this area is annexed*
Denton ~VlUnlmpal Electric plans to provide electric utfla¥ service to the ennre annexation area
Please corrnnent on the cumulative impact of annexation and development
At what population level would additional equipment be reqmred9
Is there an accepted equipment to populatlon ratio that can be used for planning purposes?
Is there an accepted employee to population ratio that can be used for planning purposes9
Additional Comments
Donald, L McLaughhn. PE
Person ~o contact if there are questions
September 11,2000
Date
ANNEXAT2 doc
36.
.LIBRARY
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A-
7
If annexed, can anbc~pated serv,ce demands be met using ex~sbng materials, facd~bes,
and personnel? Yes
8
If not, how many add~bonal employees and what type of facd~bes and materials w~ll be
needed to prowde services?
9
Esbmated additional funding needed strictly based on proposed annexabon and
development
10 Please comment on the cumulative Impact of annexabon and development
At what populabon level would another hbrary facd~ty be required? 71,500
Is there an accepted c~rculabon to populabon ratio that can be used for planmng
purposes? 6.4 oer caolta
Is there an accepted employee to population rabo that can be used for planmng
purposes? Staff: one full-time ea~lv~]ent (FTE) per 2000 population
Professional Librarians: comprise one-third of FTE staff.
Add)bonal Comments
I~erson to contact if there are ques ions
Date
Document1
3?.
Annexation Plan 2000 - Envlronmentalty Sensitive Areas
iValues Irl,~fe's~~ 377 & 135W Happy Acres Ryan & 1830 Priority Totals
Stream Buffer 182 79~ 8 459 106 421 28 915 326 59'
Developed Floodplain 16 853' 8 609 13 44c~ 5 728 44 63~
Large Floodplain 600 883 0 000 448 567 24 799 1074 249
Small Floodplain 124 004 0 000 13 084 0 000 137 088
Upland Habitat 7 228 0 000 5 725 10 060 23 013
Rtparlan Habitat 78 079 0 000 0 137 3 006 81 222
Totals 1009,843 17 068 587 383 72 508 1686 802
(-83+ acres (+83+ acres)
Total LandArea (Annex) 1606 891 153 560 1075 522 215 609 3051 582
ESA % of Total Land Area 62 8% 11 1% 54 6% 33 6°A 55 3%
Population forecast for Ryan Road/Country Club Road Annexation
Area.
Assumptions'
1 Future zomng districts were used to determine land use
2 Average density of area as 2 0 umts per acre
3 Average single-family household = 2 8 people/umt
4 50% density transfer w~than ESA's
5 Total area = 216 + acres
6 Total ESA = 73 ± acres
7 4% growth per year
Single-family development
216 acres - 73 (ESA area) = 143 ~ 2 umts/a¢ = 286 umts
73 acres (ESA) ~ 1 umts/ae = 73 umts
Total single family units = 359 umts x 2.8 = 1,005 people
At 4% per year
14± SF units per year (39 people)
TAX FINANCIAL IMPACT
The information provided below prowdes a brief overview of the financial ~mpacts of the
proposed annexation on the affected property owners, acknowledging the fact that
ind~vidual c~rcumstances may vary More detailed information is available
POTENTIAL FINANCIAL IMPACT FOR PROPOSED ANNEXED AREAS
City of Denton Tax Information
A Base Tax
Formulation
Taxable Tax Tax
Value Rate Levy
*Agncutture, Acreage $ 10,000
Unimproved, Platted Lots $ 25,000
Improved, Residential $100,000
052815/5100 52 82
052815/$100 132 04
052815/5100 528 13
Annexed property must be on the tax roll on January 1 in order to be taxed for that year
Therefore, property annexed during the year would not go on the roll unbl the January
2001 and not be taxed until October 2001 for the fiscal year 2001-2002
B Rollback Taxes
Yearly Rollback &
Tax Year Tax Interest Total
1999 48 27 + 49 95 98 22
1998 48 27 + 57 18 105 45
1997 48 75 + 64 09 112 84
1996 50 20 + 73 04 123 24
1995 51 39 + 81 96 133 35
$246 88 $326 22 $573 10
A property owner with an AG exemption on a single acre w~th an AG value of
$500/acre w~ll pay approximately $573 10 If property changes use on March 31, 1999,
and the non-AG value of the acre is $10,000/acre
10/13/00
39.
annexH xls
~
ooo ,,o
z
41.
zz ~
42.
Attachment 5
Ryan Road Parcel Map
43.
I,LI
0
Z
~ 55 r..~
~ 49 ~
48 -- ~
40 ~
15
44,
Attachment 6
Petitions Agmnst Annexation A-101
45.
MEMORANDUM
October 9, 2000
TO
Honorable Mayor and C~ty Council
CIO Larry Relchhart, Assistant D~rector
C~ty of Denton Planning and Development Department
OCT .[ 9 2000 IIIIII
FROM
Homeowners on Sanders Road, Denton County, Texas
SUBJECT Notice of Intent to Annex, A-101 Ryan Road - Country Club Road
The purpose of th~s memo ~s to formally not~fy C~ty of Denton officials regarding
our wews on the proposed annexation as it pertains to Sanders Road Unless
there are plans for the c~ty to extend water, we see no benefit to being ~n the c~ty
It ~s the consensus of the homeowners hsted below that our properties do not
need to be part of the city based on the following factors
t) We do not need zoning protection
The properhes along Sanders Road have been developed for many years
(some as long as 75 years) w~th rural residential homes As such, there is
a d~verslty of property types which su~ts the homeowners - who made the
choice to hve in a rural area
2) We do not need subdivision protection.
Most of the tracts along Sanders Road are small acreage, not typically
subd~ws~on type tracts Regardless, even ~f the tracts were subd~wded,
they would have to meet city of Denton subdivision standards, even
without annexation
3) We do not need street maintenance
Sanders Road ~s a sub-standard asphalt paved read - a dead-end street
(about one-half m~le long) which serves no properties but the ones fronbng
Sanders Road The asphalt pavement ~s older, and receives very hm~ted
county maintenance The residents are content w~th the read as it is, and
the hm~ted county maintenance is satisfactory In fact, any ~mprovement
would probably be a negative because better roads encourage h~gher
speeds Our residential street certainly does not need that
4) We do not need trash collection
Services such as trash collection are prowded by pnvate waste collection
companies
Ltr City Proposed Annexation
46.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
.oberP.e -2- 9, 2.0
We are a self-contained, small neighborhood on a dead-end street
neighbors look out for each other, and as such, cnme has been non-
ex~stent ,n the neighborhood for many years The small amount of
service that we m~ght rrequ~re ~s handled very well by the Denton County
Sheriff's Department
6) We do not need fire protection
The houses are on acreage lots and thus do not create a b~g danger to
each other And, further, w~thout water, the fire protection would be
m~mmal, at best We have the Argyle Volunteer F~re Department for small
grass rites, etc
7) We do not need building code protection
The street ~s already developed w~th a m~x of housing types and quaht~es
Th~s diversity of housing types and people ~s very acceptable to us as ~s
8) Annexation only de-values property
Sanders Road ~s already developed as Iow to moderate income rural
residential uses If annexed, properties along Sanders Road w~ll have an
additional taxing entity That additional tax, for our type of rural residential
properties, w~ll hkely result ~n a reduction of property value Potential
buyers of rural residential of th~s economm segment operate on a
consistent percent of ~ncome they can spend on housing Thus, the
additional taxes cannot be passed on to new buyers of th~s type of
housing
Lb' City Proposed Annexation
47.
HonorablelMayor and City Council
October 9, 2000
Page -3-
We do need reliable water
We would be agreeable to the proposed annexation if the c~ty of D~w~rTC'
with us to get c~ty water hnes and service extended along Sanders Road A more
rehable water source would be attractive to us It could also be of benefit to the
c~ty to
1)
Possibly help w~th overall water pressure to southeast Denton by tying the
Forrestndge addition to the new water hne along FM 1830
2)
Increase fire protection to the Forrestndge housing Sanders Road
properties are typically small acreage tracts, thus, fire from adjacent
housing ~s not cnt~cal However, w~th the high density of development ~n
the Forrestndge area, fire protection to Forrestndge housing from fire
originating near or along Sanders Road could be a threat
3)
The cost of extension of water ~s a major concern to us The homeowners
along Sanders Road have spent upward to $20,000 for water wells, and
thus, could not afford to pay up front for the extension of c~ty water
However, the c~ty could extend the water hnes for the above stated benefit
to the c~ty (#1 and #2), similar to what was done off Ft Worth Drive many
years ago when that area was annexed Over bme, with the collectmn of
monthly usage fees, the c~ty would recover the cost of the water line
extension
Respectfully submitted
Name
Address Phone #
Honorable Mayor and City Council
October 9, 2000
Page -4-
Signatures - continued
_PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Name ~-~ ,o ~ . Address Phone#
Ltr City Propoaed Annexation
49.
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
Agenda Item ,S-r'
Date
AGENDA DATE:
DEPARTMENT.
CM/DCM/ACM:
October 24, 2000
Planning Department
David Hill, 349-8314
SUBJECT - (A-102) (US 377/l-35W.4nnexatton)
Hold a public heanng regarchng the involuntary annexation and servme plan for 1,711 acres of land
located m the southwestern section of the City of Denton cxtratemtonal j unsdmt~on (ET J)
a
Tract #1: approximately 504 acres of land located in the southwestern s~de of the Cl~y of
Denton's extratemtonal junsdmtlon west of U S Highway 377, south of Allred and north of
Johnson Road
b
Tract #2: approximately 1032 acres of land located in the southwester side of the City of
Danton's extratemtonal junsdletmn east of Interstate H~ghway 35 West and west of the Kansas
C~ty Southern Rmlway Company, extending south along Bonme Brae to the west side of U S
Highway 377
c Tract #3: approximately 1 7 acres of land located northeast of the intersection of Corb~n and
BOlmle Brae
d Tract g4: approximately 173 acres of land located east of U S H~ghway 377 (Fort Worth
Drive) and north of Brash Creek Road and west of Country Club
BACKGROUND
An involuntary annexation proceeding is being considered by the C~ty of Denton for approximately
1,711 acres of land located generally m the southwest section of the c~ty, between US Highway 377
and Interstate Highway 35W Maps of the tracts being considered for annexation are provided m
Attachment 1 Annexations are governed by state law, and dunng the October 24th meetmg, C~ty
Counml will, conduct the first of two required pubhe heanngs to hear public comments regarding the
proposed annexation and servme plan The current schedule (provided as Attachment 2) ~dentffies
other steps m the process as required by state law
The issue of armexat~on m the US 377 / 1-35W area was first raised in spnng 1999 Several parcels
currently being considered for annexation failed to be annexed, although Robson Ranch and Willow
Lakes were annexed dunng May / June 1999 City staff asked Counml to reevaluate potential
annexation of this area, and dunng the August 22, 2000 work session, staff was instructed to institute
involuntary annexation proceedings because of lnt~astmcture avmlabthty and impending development
pressure
Annexation of ETJ areas is the highest level of protection afforded to cities to manage growth and
coordinate mumclpal services Once inside the city limits, new development wull have to comply with
all of the development regulations deemed necessary by City council to protect pubhc health, safety
and welfare Annexation also requires the provision of municipal services at levels consistent with
other areas inside the city
WRITTEN pROTESTS
South Bonnie Brae - Tract #2
Written protest letters from nine property owners (Attachment 6) within Tract #2, ~dentffied as the
approximate 1,032-acre Tract 2 (Attachment 3), were received by staff on October 19, 2000
Happy Acres - Tract #4
A written protest was received from the Happy Acres neighborhood along with four other property
owners on Brush Creek (Attachment 7), identified as the approximate 173-acre Tract #4 (Attachment
3), on October 17, 2000
Effect of Written Protests
Protests received wltlun 10 days of the date of pubhcatlon of the public heanng notice, and
signed by more than 10 pement of the adult residents within the area subjects the annexation
proceedings to Section 43 063(b) of the Texas Local Government Code, as per the followxng
requirement
At least one of the hearings must be held tn the area proposed for
annexation tfa suitable site Is reasonably available and more than 10
percent of the adults who are permanent residents of the area file a
written protest of the annexation with the secretary of the muntcipahty
wtthln 10 days after the date of the pubhcatton of the notice required by
this section The protest must state the name, address, and age of each
protester who signs
The petitions received did not include the age of the protesters, as is required by state law, and
staff informed the Happy Acres residents of this omission The petition was not amended to
include age information, and it appears that the petition signers were not as interested in
condt~ctmg a public heanng wlttun the area proposed for annexation as much as they were in
communicating to Council their opposition to the annexation
SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICE PLAN INFORMATION
As per state law, a through analyses and a service plan have been prepared and are avmlable for public
inspection (Attachment 3) Because the tracts to be annexed are for the most part undeveloped,
immediate demand for serwces is low There are approximately 70 single family residences and 1
mobile home and 2 non-residential uses developed in the area today The population forecast for
Tracts #1, #2, and #3 is 13,827 people Tract #4 (Happy Acres) has an existing population of 132
people All properties within the annexed tracts will be entitled to police, fire protection and
prevention, emergency mechcal service, solid waste collection, mmntenance of roads and streets,
library services, code enfomement, bmldmg inspections, consumer health services and planmng and
development servaces will be made available on the effective date of the annexation Below as
supplementallanformataon to specafie sectaons of the service plan
Pohce Protection
US 377 / 1-35W Area
The primary cumulatave impact of the annexation for the pohce ~s the anerease an population An
increase m p0pulataon wall result m an merease m the calls for service received In order to mmntaln
our current level of serwee wath the adchtmnal population the Pohee Department will reqmre an
mcrease m staff and eqmpment Not only population will contribute to the need for an merease in
staff The area of land for an officer to cover wall now be greater Therefore for an officer to reach a
call in a reasonable mount of tame, more officers are reqmred Th~s additional land and population
will reqmre the department to redraw reporting dastnets Currently there are four reporting dastncts
We wall need to have at least 7 reporting d~stncts once the land ~s developed Ultamately, the
cumulatave ampact of annexataon and development for the police department as to add reporting
d~strlets, staff, and appropriate eqmpment Wath the current populataon of the area m questaon, we can
begm appropriate pohee serwce upon annexation As the populatmn begms to grow and the land
become more developed we wall began the necessary merease ~n staff and eqmpment
Happy Acres, Area
Due to the saze and populataon of the Happy Acres area, ~n conjunction w~th the fact that the Caty of
Denton Pohce Department currently servaees a surrounding commumty, the cumulative ampact of thas
annexataon is neghglble Pohce service could be provided ~mmedlately upon annexation and
ma~ntamed w~thout future ampact to the department
Fire Protection and Fire Prevention
1 Inmally fire protection will be provided by Station 3 at 1204 McCormack and Station 6 at 3232
Teasley Lane Dependmg on the type of emergency, add~tlonal equipment will be reqmred a e,
Structure Fare reqmres 3 engine companies, 1 Truck Company, Battalion Chaef, Ambulance, and a
F~re Marshal for an mlt~al response
2
The Fare Department's emergency response t~me to thxs annexataon will be more than double the
F~re Department's five-year Strategic Plan's goal of a 4 manure response time to C~ty resadents in
80% of the tame However, the Denton Fare Department's response to this annexataon area will
stall substantxally amprove thear current level of fire protection and emergency medical care
3
The Fire Department Strategic Plan recommends two new fare stataons in thas area m order to
maintain the same level of servace provaded to other areas of the C~ty of Denton The Strategac
Plan calls for new fire stataons located an the we~mty of Brush Creek Road and U S Haghway 377
and at F M 2449 and 1-35 West These new fire stataons wall allow for an acceptable 4 m~nute
response tame an 80% of the emergencaes
4
There are currently other areas w~th~n the City boundaries that do not meet the 4-mannte response
t~me goal and are samllar in durataon to the expected response tames to flus annexataon Improving
future response t~mes to these areas are also addressed by the Fire Department's Strategic Plan
No automatae md agreements with Argyle Volunteer Fare Department currently exist wath the Caty
of Denton Whereby as a needed basis, the shanng of manpower and equipment is achaeved by
3
the on-scene commander of the affected junsdmtaon Automatac aad wath any surroundang
volunteer fire department would not achieve the same level of servace as the rest of the Caty of
Denton due to the nature of a volunteer fire department Volunteer fire departments are not
sufficaently staffed and ready at a moments notate as compared to a fully prod fire department as
exasts an the City of Denton
Maantenance of Water and Wastewater Facilitaes
1 The Water Dastnbutlon System Master Plan includes the 20-1nch water mmn along US Highway
377 The proposed aunexataon areas (northern & southern) could be served by tapping into the
20-aneh water mmn Thas lane wall be avaalable for servace April 2001 However, flus 20qnch lane
by atself cannot provade serwce capaeaty for the entare annexataon area The Master Plan also
includes a 16-mch water lane along Bonnae Brae, a 12-tach hne through the V~ntage Sub-davasaon
and a 20-tach lane along IH-35W that wall end at Crawford Road These lanes are not currently ~n
the FY 2000-2004 Capatal Improvements Plan The proposed master plan water lanes ~n the
annexataon area are shown an Exhibit 1
For water servace the impact of annexation and development at will be necessary to extend the 16-
1nth water lane along Bonme Brae and the 12-tach water through the Vantage property Also,
depending on the construction dans~ty, it may be necessary to extend the 20-tach water lane along
IH-35W up to the Vintage property These water lines are not ~ncluded ~n the FY 2000-2004
Capital Improvements Plan The Caty of Denton will be the retail provader of water utalaty service
for all future developments m the area sance they wall be annexed ante the City hm~ts and he
w~thln Denton's CCN for water utllaty servace
The Wastewater Master Plan shows the Roark Branch Interceptor sewer that wall tae ante the
exastang Hmkory Creek Interceptor (See Exh~bat 1) However, the Roark Branch Interceptor ~s not
wathan the FY 2000-2004 Capatal Improvements Plan The vmble wastewater service may revolve
constmchon of hft stataon and force main to t~e rote the exlstang Hackory Creek Interceptor Also,
cost partm~pataon for the construction of the Roark Branch Interceptor ~n heu of hft station and
force mmn may be negotmted wath the developers No addat~onal equipment will be needed for
wastewater to serve the annexataon area
Drainage Services
1 Annexataon of flus area ancludes subdawsaons that may be poorly drmned Some areas could be
substandard and susceptible to flooding Major channel or storm drmn systems may be requared
Correctaon of these problems wall reqmre expenditure of Caty funds In addat~on, easements may
not exast to perform maantenance of exlstang channels or storra drains
2
Provasaon of drainage services is currantly funded by water and sewer ratepayers As development
occurs, and sewer or water service as extended to these areas, funding will become available to
prowde draanage maintenance
3
Easements may not exist to perform mmntenance of channels or storm drmns ~n existing
developments, and wall have to be secured before the city will consider providing servmes an these
areas
4
This area contains creeks that do not have a detailed flood study The Master Drainage Plan
Update will include these properties, if annexed, as part of a detailed flood study
Areas currently experiencing moderate to severe erosion may require eventual repmr
New subdivisions would be subject to the City's Drainage Criteria, subdivision regulations, and
interim regulations Areas along Hickory Creek Road, FM 1830, Highway 377, Country Club
Road, and Brush Creek Road contmn properties in the 100-year floodplmn Approximately 740
acres lie within the 100-year floodplain In addition, this area contmns designated
Environmentally Senmive Areas The majority of the floodplain has a contributing drainage area
of greater that one square mile The proposed development code will essentially prohibit any
disturbance of the floodphun and environmentally sensitive areas in these areas Structures,
parking ,lots, fill, excavation, land disturbance, fences, decks, pools, and other aboveground
manmade structures will be prohibited in the floodplain
Maintenance of Roads and Streets
US 377 / 1-35W Area
1 An inventory of existing roads within in the subject area including immediate and long term
maintenance and construction needs is provided m Attachment 4
2
The City of Denton currently maintains 335 miles of road The subject area currently contmns 5 3
miles of public roads that are maintmned by the County, however would become the City of
Denton's responslbthty upon aunexataon There are currently less than 200 residents llmng in the
subject area Based on existing conditions no additional equipment or facilities would be required
to service the area immediately upon annexation
Based on a projected ultimate population of 13,827, and 304,920 square feet of industrial
develop~nent, assuming that adchtlonal roads will be constructed as a result of development,
eqmpment for at least two additional street crews and two office personnel will be required This
would include 2 dump trucks, 2 backhoes, field supplies, office supplies, and two computers The
estimated cost of additional equipment and supplies is $650 000 00
4 An inventory of existing roads including immediate long term mmntenance and construction
needs is attached
Happy Acre~ Area
The subJect,area currently contains 2 8 miles of public roads that are mmntmned by the County,
however would become the City of Denton's respons~bfllty upon annexation Based on the ex~stlng
population of 140 people and mileage of existing roads, no additional equipment or facilities would be
required ~mmedaately upon annexation As this area is mostly developed we would expect very little
new road construction m the future Based on an ultimate projected population of 272 people, no new
facilities or equipment are anticipated in the future due to annexation of thru area
An inventory of ex~stmg roads within the subject area including immediate and long term maintenance
and construction needs is attached
Parks and Recreation Facilities
US 377 / 1-35W Area
The current 2000 Park and Recreation Master Plan lndmates a need for a commumty park tn thts
general area Population project~ons propose 13,827 people hwng tn 5,474 houstng units Based on
servme standards set m the Park and Reereatmn Master Plan, 34 56 acres of new park land will be
needed for neighborhood parks Since the Parks and Recreation Master Plan intimates a need for a
Commumty Park, a mlmmum of 30 acres will be necessary for such a £acfllty Neighborhood parks
are currently supported by the Park Dedleatmn Ordinance, which requires development exactions for
land and improvements Taxpayers share the costs of commumty parks on a c~tywtde basis, typmally
through capital lmprovemants programming
Happy Acres Area
The current 2000 Park and Reereatxon Master Plan indicates a need for a community park in th~s
general area Population projectmns propose 272 people hvmg m 47 housing umts for the Happy
Acres subdlwsxon Based on service standards set tn the Park and Recreatxon Master Plan, 32 acres of
new park land will be needed for neighborhood parks Since the Park and Recreatton Master Plan
indicates a need for a Community Park, a Park with a minimum of 30 acres will be necessary xn th~s
general area No park is planned within the xmmedxate area of the existtng Happy Acres subdlws~on
Solid Waste Collection
US 377 / 1-35W Area
The existing units in this area can be adequately served wtth resources prowded tn the fiscal year 2001
budget with no appreetable ~mpaet upon those resources Future tmpact will be determined by the rate
of growth For automated res~dentml systems an additional res~denttal route ts needed for every 800-
1000 dwelhngs The city proposes to serve this area with automated residential collectmn using roll-
out carts
Happy Acres Area
The area included m ttus annexation consists of approximately 47 dwelhng umts and no apparent
businesses These dwelhngs are currently serviced by residential automated private servme providers
wtth the exception of one or two who use a dumpster servtee Servme lS typically provided one ttme
per week at a rate of approxtmately $53 per three months Penodm bulky xtem service is xneluded
wahout addttlonal charges
OPTIONS
Ctty Council members instructed staff to mdtcate ETJ areas that will have strong urban development
potential, based on prox~mtty to water and wastewater utfltt~es (e~ther extst~ng or programmed) or
because of ~mpendmg urban development that will create the demand for municipal servtces The
geographic scope of the annexatton ts not subject to exact and premse standards and ts a pohcy matter,
C~ty Councd has the dtscretton to use tts legtslative authority to detenmne which properties should be
annexed However, the annexation process ~s strongly governed by the state law, and very httle
discretion m available concermng the process or service conditions under whmh annexation may occur
The Council may delete an area after the public ~s not,ced of the proposed annexation based on the
detenmnatlon that the area was not in the best interest of the C~ty The annexation may be challenged
as a vtolatton of the equal protectton clause, ffthe reason for delettng an area ts arbttrary or capnctous
RECOMMENDATION
Staff reconunends that the first public heanng for A-102 be held as scheduled, and pending comments
received, determine if addmonal reformation is needed As is consistent with the Denton Plan and
previous recommendations, staff continues to advise Council that the tracts identified should be
annexed in their entirety As Country Lakes and Robson Ranch continue to develop to the south, and
as infrastructure Improvements are constructed (such as the US 377 water line, Graveyard Branch
wastewater line, Hickory Creek Road expansion, and the US 377 / 1-35W connector through the
Vintage Planned Development), the subJeCt tracts will develop at urban densities The need to provide
mnnlclpal public safety services, and the need to manage and coordinate development in an orderly
manner are slgmficant clW objectives that should be pursued The annexation tracts also contain
slgmficant acreage designated as Environmentally Sensitive Areas, which have important water quality
and flood control implications
ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT
The annexation process, if followed according to the schedule shown in Attachment 2, will be
completed by January 9, 2000
PRIOR ACTION ! REVIEW
Spnng 1999 Council declines to annex US 377 / 1-35W parcels
August 22, 2000 Council instructions to staffto initiate annexation proceedings
Petition Filed September 22, 2000
DRC Review August 24, 2000, September 7, 14, 21, 28, 2000 and October 6, 2000
ATTACHMENTS
1 Location Map (page 8)
2 Annexation Schedule (page 9)
3 Service Plan (pages 10- 18)
4 Supplemental Service Plan Information (pages 19 - 55)
5 Petitions against annexation of Tract #2 - South Bonnie Brae (pages 56 - 66)
6 Petition agmnst annexation of Tract # 4 Happy Acres (pages 67- 72)
Developm{Jnt R,vlew l~a/nager
Respectfully submitted
Director of Planning and Development
7
Attachment 1
A-'I02 U.S. 377/1-35W
NORTH
Location Map
Scale None
8
Attachment 2
ANNEXATION SCHEDULE OF
US 377/1-35W Annexation Area
Friday, September 22
Involuntary Annexation Petmon filed, AnnexaUon Study & Service Plans
Drafted
30 day not,ce of intent to annex to each property owner, each public entity
or privet entity that provides semces m the area and each railroad
company
Friday, October 6
Annexation Servme Plans Comnleted
Thursday, October 5
Notice sent to be pubbshed on Monday, October 9 on City Webs~te and ~n
Denton Record-Chromcle for CC's first public hearang (Noon)
Friday, October 13
500' Courtesy Notice and Posting of s~gns
Thursday, October 19
Deadline for receipt of petitions for opposffion (10 days after not~ce)
Tuesday, October 24
City Council Conducts first nubile hearing
Wednesday, October 25
Notice sent to be pubhshed on Saturday, October 28 on City Websae and ~n
Denton Record-Chromcle for PZ's public heanng on annexatmn and zoning
and CC's second pubhc heanng on annexation and zomng (Noon)
Tuesday, November 7
City Council Conducts second public hearing
Wednesday, November 8
Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing - make a
recommendatmn to City Council regardlng the proposed annexation and the
proposed zoning
Tuesday, November 28
First reading of annexation ordinance - City Council by a 4t5's vote
institutes annexation proceedings
Wednesday, November 29
Annexation ordinance to be pubhshed on Saturday, December 2 on C~ty
Webslte and in Denton Reeord-Chromele
Tuesday, January 9, 2001
Second reading and adoption of annexation ordinance and zoning
ordinance - City Council by a 4/5's vote takes final action
Attachment 3
Annexation A- 102
U.S. 377/I-35W
Serwce Plan
10
Attachment 3
Exhibit "A"
City of Denton Annexation Service Plan for
A-102 (US 377/I 35 W)
AREA ANNEXED
The almexatlon area located in the extra-temtonal jurisdiction of southwest Denton contains
approximately 1,710 anms The annexation area is located east of Interstate 35 West, south along
Bonnie Brae to U S Highway 377 south and to the north of Brash Creek Road See the attached
location maps on Exlublt "B"
INTRODUCTION
This service plan has been prepared in accordance with the Texas Local Government Code, Section
43 021, 43 065 and 43 065(b)-(o)(Vernon Supp 2000) Municipal facilities and services to the
annexed area described above will be provided or made avmlable on behalf of the city in accordance
with the following schedule
POLICE PROTECTION
Police service, including patrolling, response to calls and other routine functions, will be provided to
the property on the effective date of the annexation The City shall provide a level of services,
infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance that is comparable to the level of services, infrastructure
and infrastructure maintenance avmlable in other parts of the city with topography, land use and
population density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
FIRE PROTECTION AND FIRE PREVENTION
Fire protection and prevention services will be pmwded on the effective date of the annexation using
existing Denton Fire Department personnel and equipment A mutual aid agreement with the Argyle
Volunteer Fire Department will be proposed The City shall provide a level of servmas, infrastructure
and infrastructure mmntenance that is comparable to the level of services, infrastructure and
infrastructure maintenance available in other parts of the c~ty with topography, land use and population
density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE
Emergency Medical Services will be prowded immediately on the effective date of the annexation
using exlstlr~g Denton Fire Department personnel and equipment A mutual md agreement with the
Argyle VolUnteer Fire Department will be proposed The City shall provide a level of services,
infrastructure and ~nfrastmcture mamtenance that is comparable to the level of services, infrastructure
and infrastructure mamtenance avmlable in other parts of the city with topography, land use and
population density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
MAINTENANCE OF WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES
Maintenance of existing City of Denton water and wastewater facilities in the area to be annexed that
are not wlttun the service area of another water or wastewater utlhty will be continued to be
maintained immedmtely on the effectxve date of the annexation The majority of the area to be
annexed is provided water by either a private water well of the Argyle Water Supply Corporation and a
private wastewater system The City shall provide a level of services, infrastructure and infrastructure
maintenance that ~s comparable to the level of serrates, ~nfrastructure and infrastructure maintenance
11
available in other parts of the city with topogral)hy, land use and population density similar to those
reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
DRAINAGE SERVICES
Drmnage maintenance will be provided on the effective date of the annexation The City shall provide
a level of services, infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance that is comparable to the level of
services, infrastructure and infrastructure mmntenance avmlable in other parts of the city w~th
topography, land use and population density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in
the area
MAINTENANCE OF ROADS AND STREETS
Maintenance of roads and streets in the area to be annexed will be made avmlable on the effective date
of the annexation The City shall provide a level of services, infrastructure and ~nfrastructum
maintenance that is comparable to the level of services, infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance
available in other parts of the city with topography, land use and population density s~mdar to those
reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
STREET LIGHTING
Street lighting will be available on the effective date of the annexation The City shall provide a level
of services, infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance that is comparable to the level of servmes,
infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance available in other parts of the city with topography, land
use and population density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected m the area
PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
If any city park and recreation facilities are located within the annexed area, the maintenance will
begin on the effective date of the annexation The City shall provide a level of servmes, infrastructure
and infrastructure maintenance that is comparable to the level of services, infrastructure and
infrastructure mmntemance available m other parts of the city with topography, land use and population
density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the area
No parks are within the proposed annexation The closest Denton Park properties are the Undeveloped
Cross Timbers Park and Bent Creek Park, which are adjacent to the annexation area South Lakes
Park, located at Hobson at Santa Momca (appmx 1 2 miles), Dema Park, located at I001 Parv~n
(approximately 1 mile away) Current residents will be able to use existing City of Denton parks,
facilities and programs
LIBRARY SERVICES
Library services will be made avmlable on the effective date of the annexation on the same basis and at
the same level as similar facilities are maintained throughout the city
CODE ENFORCEMENT~ BUILDING INSPECTIONS~ & CONSUMER HEALTH SERVICES
Code enforcement, bmldlng inspections and consumer health services will be made available on the
effective date of the annexation on the same basis and at the same level as similar facilities are
maintained throughout the city
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SERVICES
1 Planmng, and Development Department services will be provided will be made avmlable on the
effective date of the annexation on the same basis and at the same level as similar faclhtles are
malntmned throughout the mty The Planning and Development Department currently provides
12
services to this property by way of administration of Chapter 34 of the Code of Ordinances,
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations
City Council adopted The Denton Plan 1999-2020 Comprehensive Plan of the City of Denton and
its extra-temtonal jurisdiction by Ordinance 99-439 on December 7, 1999 The Future Land Use
Plan designates the area as Regional Mixed Use Centers, Neighborhood Centers, Existing
Nelghborhoods/Infill Compatibility and 100 Year Floodplmn/Envlronmentally Sensitive Areas
The Denton Plan land use districts where designated to manage the quality and quantity of growth
by organizing the land use patterns, matching land use intensity with available infrastructure and
by preserving floodplains as environmental and open space comdors The Denton Plan will be
used as a basis to zone the property when it annexed into the City Limits
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
The City of Denton Sohd Waste Department is the exclusive restdentlal and commercial solid waste
service provider in the City The Department is an entirely fee based operation and receives no
resoumes from taxes The current residential solid waste rate is $16 per 30 days Commercial rates
vary depending upon the scope of service provided Solid waste collection service will be provided to
the property on the effective date of the annexation The C~ty of Denton Solid Waste Department will
honor existing contracts with pnvate solid waste service providers for two years after the effective date
of this annexation in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 43 056(o) (Vemon
Supp 2000) To receive solid waste collection service the customer must contact one of the City of
Denton Customer Service Offices and submit a request/apphcatlon for service
ELECTRIC FACILITIES
1 Denton Mummpal Electnc plans to provide electric utility service to the entire annexation area
Electric utility service will be made available on the effective date of the annexation on the same
basis and at the same level as similar faclhtles are maintained throughout the mty
2
Denton Municipal Electric has existing facilities in the U S Highway 377/1-35 West Annexation
Area The 138 kV transmission line crosses the annexation area Distribution facilities are on US
377, Ryan Road, Country Club Road, and Hickory Creek Road
3 Denton Mumcipal Electnc plans to bmld two substations one on US 377 and the other at Teasley
Lane and Hickory Creek Road
OTHER SERVICES
Other services that may be provided by the city such as animal control, municipal and general
admimstrat~on will be made available on the effective date of the annexation The City shall provide a
level of sermces, infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance that as comparable to the level of
services, infrastructure and infrastructure maintenance available in other parts of the city with
topography, land use and population density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in
the area
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP)
Construction of additional water, sewer, street and drainage facilities will begin within two and a half
(2 V2) years unless certmn serrates can not be reasonably provided within that period If certain
sermces cannot be reasonably provided, the city wall provide those services wittun 4 and a half (4 ½)
years after the effective date of the annexation Construction will be completed within four and one-
half (4 ~A) years after the effective date of the annexation unless the construction process is interrupted
13
by circumstances beyond the control of the city Construction of other capital improvements shall be
considered by the city m the future as the needs dictate on the same basis as such capital improvements
are considered throughout the city
UNIFORM LEVEL OF SERVICES MAY NOT BE REQUIRED
Nothing in this plan shall require the city to provide a llnlform level of full mum¢~pal services to each
area of the city, including the annexed area, ~f d~fferent characteristics of topography, land use, and
population density are considered a sufficient bas~s for prowdlng different levels of service
TERM
Tins service plan shall be vahd for a term often (10) years
AMENDMENTS
The plan shall not be amended unless pubhc heanngs are held in accordance with Texas Local
Government Code, Section 43 052 (Vernon Supp 2000)
14
LOCATION MAP
US 377 Area Tract 1
9121/00
N
1000 0
1000 2000 Feet
15
LOCATION MAP
US 377 Area Tract 2
1000
0 1000
16
LOCATION MAP
US 377 Area Tract 3
I 654
LOCATION MAP
US 377 Area Tract 4
_ ~, ~ ~x~ ",:'.
2000 F6)t'4~¢'"'%~ '¢ ~¢
Attachment 4
Annexation A- 102
U.S 377/I-35W
Supplemental Service Plan Information
19
SERVICE ANALYSIS
US3771135W Annexation Area
POLICE
Estimated average response time for th~s area based on current
department conditions
With current resource allocation a pohce unit could be in any part of the
annexabon area within 7-8 m~nutes (maximum), ~fthe call was pnonty 1 On
average the response bmes would be 10-12 minutes (maximum) Based on
current resources and departmental conditions
Other factors ~nvolved are current mad quahty ~n the area ~n quesbon, the spread
of the area, and the surrounding area (~ e do we already service a nearby
commumty)
2
Appropnate average response t~me in the c~ty based on current
department cond~bons
Priority
Non-pnonty
Average
5 minutes or less
between 5 and 10 m~nutes
6 minutes
Note This ~s the current situat~on ~n the c~ty and would be also for the outer most
boundaries of the annexation areas, again based on current departmental
condlbons
3
If annexed and developed as proposed w~ll additional personnel be
needed as a specific result of this proposal
The addition of the following personnel would be required
Sworn:
Patrol,officers 12
Supervisors 1
Criminal Investigators 3
Traffic Umt 1
Warrant Officers 1
Area Coordinator Officer 1
Civilian:
D~spatcher 3
Records 1
Jailer' 1
Total additional staff=to service the ~ncrease in popu[abon over all 40
4 W~II additional equipment and funding be needed to serve this area?
20.
Additional equipment and funding ~s needed for the ~ncrease In the staffing due to
the annexation of the area The equipment and funding needs are based on the
needs of the personnel and/or particular s~tuatlons Therefore, equipment
needed will be determined as s tuat ons ar se and more staff Is added There ~s
no population to eqmpment ratio for the police department Equipment needs
may Include
Patrol Care w~th Computer
Computers
Basic equipment to support the additional personal
Special grants may be necessary as time passes
5
W~ll a pohce substation or other facility be needed to serve th~s area as a
result of annexation and development?
In order to properly handle the ~ncrease in calls for service and crime, and to
accommodate the addlbonal staff, we will need some facility for operations
This would be a commumty office and could be done ~n conjunction w~th parks,
fire, or library A community office is simply a place where an officer ~n the area
can go, and have commumty meetings, and perform some basic adm~mstratlve
task Such a faclhty could be operational as soon as space becomes available
6 Please comment on the cumulative ~mpact of annexabon and development
The pdmary cumulative impact of the annexation for the police is the ~ncrease ~n
population An ~ncrease in population w~ll result ~n an ~ncrease in the calls for
servme received In order to maintain our current level of service w~th the
additional population we require the d~scussed increase ~n staff and eqmpment
Not only population w~ll contribute to the need for an ~ncrease m staff The area
of land for an officer to cover w~ll now be greater Therefore for an officer to
reach a call in a reasonable amount of time, more officers are required This
add~bonal land and populabon will require the department to redraw reporbng
dlstn(~ts Currently there are four reporting d~stncts We will need to have at least
7 reporting districts once the land is developed Ultimately, the cumulative
~mpaCt of annexation and development for the pohce department ~s to add
reporting districts, staff, and appropriate equipment W~th the current populabon
of the area in quesbon, we could begin appropnate police servme upon
annexation As the population begins to grow and the land become more
developed we will begin the necessary ~ncrease ~n staff and equipment
Contact person and ~nformat~on
pate 9/13/00
21.
Enc Parkey
Cnme Analyst
C~ty of Denton Pohce Department
349-7947
e-marl, ewparkey~c~tyofdenton corn
22.
10/19/2000
Annexation Service Plan
Fire Department Comments
Case Number: A-102 (US 377/I-35W)
Area: 1,538 acres
Location: South along Bonnie Brae between US 377 and 1-35W
B. Fire Protection
Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services will be prowded lmmed~ately after the
effective date of the aunexat~on using ex~stlng Denton Fire Department personnel,
eqmpment, and any ex~st~ng mutual md agreements with Argyle Volunteer F~re
Department
2
Initially fire protection will be prowded by Station 3 at 1204 McCorm~ck and Station 6 at
3232 Teasley Lane Depending on the type of emergency, additional eqmpment will be
required I e, Structure Fare requires 3 engine companies, 1 Tmek Company, Battahon
Cluef, Ambulance, and a Fire Marshal for an initial response
The Fire Department's emergency response t~me to th~s annexation will be more than
double the Fire Department's five-year Strategic Plan's goal of a 4 m~nute response t~me
to City residents in 80% of the time However, the Denton Fire Department's response to
th~s annexation area will still substantially ~mprove their current level of fire protection
and emergency medical care
The Fire Department Strategic Plan recommends two new fire stations in th~s area ~n
order to maintain the same level of service provided to other areas of the City of Denton
The Strategic Plan calls for new fire stations located in the vicinity of Brush Creek Road
and U S Highway 377 and at F M 2449 and 1-35 West These new fire stations will
allow for an acceptable 4 minute response t~me ~n 80% of the emergencies
There are currently other areas w~thln the City boundaries that do not meet the 4-minute
response time goal and are s~mflar ~n duration to the expected response times to this
annexation Improving future response t~mes to these areas are also addressed by the F~re
Department's Strategic Plan
3
No automatic a~d agreements with Argyle Volunteer Fire Department currently ex~st w~th
the City of Denton Whereby as a needed bas~s, the shanng of manpower and eqmpment
is achieved by the on-scene commander of the affected jurisdiction Automatic aid with
any surroundmg volunteer fire department would not achieve the same level of service as
the rest of the City of Denton due to the nature ora volunteer fire department Volunteer
fire departments are not sufficiently staffed and ready at a moments not~ee as compared
to a fully pa~d fire department as exists an the City of Denton
23.
10/19/2000
Annexation Service Plan
Fire Department Comments
Case Number: A-102 (Happy Acres)
Area: 173 acres
Location: North of Brush Creek Road and East of US 377
B Fire Protection
Flm Protection and Emergency Medical Services wall be provided immediately after
the effective date of the annexation usmg existing Denton Fire Department
personnel, equipment, and any existing mutual aid agreements with Argyle
Volunteer Fare Department
2
Imtaally fn:e proteetaon wall be provided by Stataon 3 at 1204 McCormack and Stataon
6 at 3232 Teasley Lane Depending on the type of emergency, addatlonal equipment
wall be requamd i e, Structure Fare requams 3 engane companaes, 1 Track Company,
Battalion Chief, Ambulance, and a Fare Marshal for an anatlal response
The F~re Department's emergency response time to this annexation wall be more
than double the Fare Department's five-year Strategac Plan's goal of a 4 manute
response tame to City residents an 80% of the time However, the Denton Fire
Department's response to thas armexataon area will stall substantially improve thear
current level of fire protection and emergency medacal care
The Fare Department Strategic Plan recommends two new fire stations In thas area in
order to mamtaln the same level of servace provaded to other areas of the Caty of
Denton The Strategic Plan calls for new fire stations located an the vIc~naty of Brush
Creek Road and U S Haghway 377 and at F M 2449 and 1-35 West These new tim
stataons wall allow for an acceptable 4 minute response tame an 80% of the
emergencies
Them are currently other areas within the City boundaries that do not meet the 4-
minute response tame goal and are similar an duration to the expected response times
to flus annexation Improving future response times to these areas are also addressed
by the Fare Department's Strategic Plan
3
No automatic aad agreements wath Argyle Volunteer Faro Department currently exast
wath the Caty of Denton Whereby as a needed basis, the shanng of manpower and
equipment is achaeved by the on-scene commander of the affected junsdaction
Automatic md wath any surrounding volunteer fire department would not achieve the
same level of service as the rest of the Caty of Denton due to the nature of a
volunteer fire department Volunteer tim departments are not sufficiently staffed
and ready at a moments notme as compared to a fully paid fire department as exists
in the Caty of Denton
24.
WATER/WASTEWATER
SERVICE PLAN
Water and wastewater utility sermces will be provided to the annexed pmpemes in
accordance w~th the following state and local laws and current service policies and
master plans
The Texas Local Government Code
Chapter 43 - Mummpal Annexation
Chapter 395 - Impact Fees
The City of Denton, Texas Code of Ordinances, as adopted May 7, 1991
Chapter 26 - Utahtaes
Chapter 34 - Subdivision and Land Development
The City of Denton Mummpal Utilities Pohcy/Procedures Manual, as rewsed July 1992
Water/Sewer Line Extension Policy, as revised June 1985
Infrastructure Financing Policy, as adopted by City Council Resolution #R91-008
The City of Denton, Texas Ordinance 98-301, as adopted September 15, 1998
Amending Chapter 26 - Ut~htaes, Adopting Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
The City of Denton Mumcipal Utilities Master Planmng Documents
Water Distribution System Master Plan, October 1999, by Alan Plummer Associates,
Inc
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, July 1985, by Freese and Nichols, Inc
Wastewater Treatment Planning Report, December 1998, by Alan Plummer Associates,
Inc
Prelmunary Design Report for Lake Ray Roberts Water Treatment Plant, March 2000,
Freese and Nichols, Inc
Denton Mumc~pal Utthtles 2000-2004 Capital Improvements Plan
25.
1 What is the nearest City of Denton water lme9
There are no exlstmg City of Denton water lines in the proposed annexation area
However, a 20-tach water line is scheduled to go in construction in the first week of
October 2000 m the annexation area (See Exlublt l) Ttus 20-mch water line will
extend to approximately 2,000 feet north of Cmwford Road Tlus line will be
avmlable for service April 2001 Existing developments that are on ~ndlvldual water
wells or pnvate water systems will be allowed to continue to remam on these systems
until they fail or a request t~om the owner or TNRCC for water service is made to the
City of Denton These requests for service will be handled m accordance with the
applicable utthty service line extension and connection pohctes currently m place at
the tune the request for semee is received
2 What ~s the nearest City of Denton sewer hne9
3
The nearest City of Denton sewer line (shown in Exhibit 1) serving the northern
pomon of the annexation area ~s the H~ekory Creek Interceptor Ttus 21- upto 27-tach
size sewer line hms fiom the northwest near the UNT campus generally flowmg to the
southeast along the route of Hlckery Creek Tbas sewer lme ends at the Hickory Creek
Llf~ Station
The nearest City of Denton sewer line (shown in Extublt 1) to serve the southern
pomon of the aunexatmn area will be the proposed Graveyard Branch Sanitary Sewer
Line Ttus 18-upto 36 inch size sewer line will mn t~om Crawford Road north along
US Highway 377 across to Denton Country Club then along Brash Creek Road where
at approxunately 4,500 feet east of US Highway 377 the alignment will change to a
northeasterly dhreetlon where it will tie into the existing Hickory Creek Interceptor
The constmclaon oftlus sewer line is scheduled for November 2000 Tins sewer line
will be available for service m April 2001 Ex~stmg developments that are currently on
septm systems will be allowed to remmn on these systems until they fml or until a
request for wastewater services from the owner is made to Denton These requests for
servme will be handled m accordance w~th the applicable utdlty sermce hne extension
and connection pohclas currently m place at the tune the request for service is
received
According to the C~ty of Denton master plan what type ofhnes and facilities would be
reqmred for flus area and when are those hnes and factht~es proposed for construction
Water Distribution System Master Plan
The Water Distribution System Master Plan includes the 20-tach water main along US
Highway 377 discussed m Item 1 above The proposed annexation areas (northem&
southern) could be served by tapping into the 20-tach water mare However, flus 20-
tach line by itself cannot provide service capacity for the entire annexation area The
Master Plan also mcludes a 16-tach water line along Bonme Brae, a 12-mch line
through the Vmtage Sub-chxas~on and a 20-tach lme along IH-35W that will end at
26.
Crawford Road These lines are not currently ~n the FY 2000-2004 Capatal
Improvements Plan The proposed master plan water lines m the annexahon area are
shown m Extnb~t 1 The City of Denton will be the retad prowder of water utthty
service for all future developments m the area since they wall be annexed into the Caty
lmuts and he watlun Denton's CCN for water utflxty service
Wastewater Master Plan
The Wastewater Master Plan shows the Roark Branch Interceptor sewer that will tm
into the emstmg Hmkory Creek Interceptor (See Exhtb~t 1) However, the Roark
Branch lntemeptor ~s not wlthm the FY 2000-2004 Capital Improvements Plan The
wable wastewater servme may ~nvolve constructton ofhft station and force mare to tm
into the ex~stmg Hmkory Creek Interceptor Also, cost partm~patlon for the
construction of the Roark Branch Interceptor an heu of lift stahon and fome mann may
be negotaated wath the developers The C~ty of Denton wall be the retml provader of
wastewater utility sennce for all future developments m the area since they wall be
annexed anto the City lnmts and lie wattun Denton's CCN for wastewater utthty
service
4 Are there any City of Denton lines included m the proposed annexaUon~
The only exastmg City of Denton utflaty hne that hes watlun the proposed annexatuon
area as the Hickory Creek Interceptor sewer hne
5 Please comment on cumulalave nnpact of annexation and development
For wastewater service the mapact of annexation and development of the subJeCt tract
can be accommodated by the proposed Graveyard Branch Sewer Line and the emst~ng
Haekory Creek Interceptor The Wastewater Master Plan shows samtary sewer mmn
along the Roark Breneh, wtuch as not wlttun the 5-year Capital Improvements Plan
For water sermce at wall be necessary to extend the 16qnch water line along Bonme
Brae and the 12-meh water through the V~ntage property Also, depending on the
eonstmetaon density, it may be necessary to extend the 20-mch water line along IH-
35W up to the Vintage property These water hnes are not ~ncluded m the FY 2000-
2004 Capatal Improvements Plan
No adrhtlonal eqmpment wall be needed for water or wastewater to serve the
annexation area.
If you have any questions, please contact the person below
P $ Arom, P E Engmeenne Admnustrator
Person to contact afthere are questtons
10/06/00
27.
WATER/WASTEWATER
SERVICE PLAN
Water and wastewater utxlxty services will be prowded to the annexed pmperttes ~n
accordance w~th the following state and local laws and current service pohc~es and
master plans
The Texas Local Government Code
Chapter 43 - Mummpal Annexation
Chapter 395 - Impact Fees
The C~ty of Denton, Texas Code of Ordinances, as adopted May 7, 1991
Chapter 26 - Uuht~es
Chapter 34 - Subdivision and Land Development
The C~ty ofDanton Mmcxpal Utilities Pohcy/Pmcedures Manual, as rewsed July 1992
Water/Sewer Line Extans~on Pohcy, as revtsed June 1985
Infrastructure Financing Pohcy, as adopted by C~ty Council Resolution #R91-008
The Ctty of Denton, Texas Ordinance 98-301, as adopted September 15, 1998
Amending Chapter 26 - Utahttes, Adopting Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
The C~ty of Denton Mumctpal Utthtles Master Planmng Documents
Water D~smbutton System Master Plan, October 1999, by Alan Plummer Assomates,
Ine
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, July 1985, by Fmese and Nichols, Inc
Wastewater Trealment Planmng Report, December 1998, by Alan Plummer Assoctates,
Inc
Prelmmmry Design Report for Lake Ray Roberts Water Treatment Plant, March 2000,
Freese and Nmhols, lne
Denton Mummpal Uttht~es 2000-2004 Capaal Improvements Plan
28
1 What IS the nearest City of Denton water line9
There are no existing City of Denton water lines m the proposed annexation area
There is a 20-meh water line scheduled to begin construction m the last week of
October 2000 (See Exlublt 1) Ttus 20qnch water line will extend to approxmaately
2,000 feet north of Crawford Road Tlms line will be avmlable for service Apn12001
The proposed annexation area lies watlun a dually certified area, wluch can be served
by either the Argyle Water Supply Corporation or the City of Denton Existing
developments that are connected to Argyle Water Supply Corporation (AWSC) will
remain on ttus system It is anticipated that the City of Denton will ultimately
negotiate an agreement with AWCS to eliminate dually certified areas that affect both
water systems Tl~s agreement will affect the proposed annexation area In
prelmmutry discussions with AWSC, it is expected that the City of Denton will
ultmaately serve the properties within flus service area If the City of Denton
successfully negotiates this understanding, it is anticipated that Denton will need to
prowde AWSC sufficient compensation for acqumng any portion of their system that
is transferred to the City of Denton's water system in the future However, cresting
developments that are on mchvidual water wells or private water systems wall be
allowed to continue to remain on these systems until they fail or a request from the
owner or TNRCC for water service is made to the City of Denton These requests for
serwee will be handled m accordance with the applicable utility service line extension
and conneetmn policies currently m place at the time the request for sermce is
received
2 What is the nearest City of Denton sewer line9
There are no existing City of Denton sewer lines in the proposed annexation area The
nearest City of Denton sewer line (shown m Exhibit l) to serve th~s annexation area
wall be the proposed Graveyard Branch Samtary Sewer Line Th~s 18-upto 36 inch
sewer line wall mn from Crawford Road north along US Highway 377 across to
Denton Country Club then along Brash Creek Road where at approxanately 4,500 feet
east of US Highway 377 the alignment wall change to a northeasterly direction where
it will tie into the existing Hickory Creek Interceptor The construction of flus sewer
line is scheduled for November 2000 Tlus sewer line wall be available for serwce in
April 2001 Emstmg developments that are currently on septtc systems wall be allowed
to remain on these systems until they fail or until a request for wastewater senaces
from the owner is made to City of Denton These requests for service will be handled
m accordance with the applicable utility service line extension and connection pohmes
currently m place at the time the request for service is received
29.
Ae~,ordmg to the City of Denton master plan what type of lines and facilities would be
reqmred for thts area and when are those lines and facilities proposed for construction
Water Distribution System Master Plan
The Water D~stnbutaon System Master Plan includes the 20qnch water mmn along US
Haghway 377 discussed m Item 1 above The proposed annexatton area could be
served by tapping mto the 20-tach water ma~n The City of Denton will be the retail
provider of water utility serrate for all future developments in the area since they will
be annexed anto the City lnmts and he watlun Denton's CCN for water utflaty service
Wastewater Master Plan
The Wastewater Master Plan shows the Graveyard Branch Samtary Sewer Lme that
will t~e mto the exmmg Haekory Creek Interceptor (See Extublt 1) Ttus 18-upto 36
meh sewer line wall mn from Crawford Road north along US Highway 377 across to
Denton Country Club then along Brash Creek Road where at approxnuately 4,500 feet
east of US Haghway 377 the alignment will change to a northeasterly direction where
at wall t~e into the exastmg Hickory Creek Interceptor The constmctaon of tins sewer
hne as scheduled for November 2000 Ttus sewer line will be available for serrate m
April 2001 The Caty of Denton will be the retml provider ofwastewater utflaty service
for all future developments m the area since they wall be annexed mto the Caty lmuts
and he wlttun Denton's CCN for wastewater utflay semce
4 Are there any City of Denton lines included m the proposed annexation9
There area no exastmg Caty of Denton utility lines w~th~n the proposed annexation
area
5 Please comment on cumulatave impact of annexation and development
The unpaet of annexation and development of the subject tract can be accommodated
by the proposed US Highway 377 Water Lane, the proposed Graveyard Branch
Interceptor and the emstmg Hackory Creek Interceptor
No adcht~onal eqmpment will be needed for water or wastewater to serve the
annexation area
If you have any questaons, please contact the person below
P S Amra, P E Engmeenng Admunstrator
Person to contact afthere are questmns
10/06/00
30.
--4
ITl
rtl
x
Z
Z
nl
z
nl
m
m
DRAINAGE
SERVICE PLAN
2
3
4
7
Annexation of this area includes one subdivision that contains several small drainage
d~tches Some areas could be substandard and suscepbble to flooding Major
channel or storm dram systems may be required Correcbon of these problems w~ll
require expend;ture of City funds In addition, easements may not ex~st to perform
mamtenanca of channels or storm drains
until sewer or water service ts provided to these areas, no funding mechamsm ts
available to prowde drainage maintenance
Easements may not exist to perform maintenance of channels or storm drains
This area contains creeks that do not have a detailed flood study Add~bonal cost w~ll
be added to the Master Drainage Plan Update to ~nclude these areas in a detailed
flood study
Areas currently expenenc~ng moderate to severe erosion could possible need repair
New subdivisions would be subject to the C~ty's Drainage Criteria, subd~wsion
regulations, and intenm regulations
The Happy Acres annexation area would be subJeCt to the C~ty's Drainage Cntena,
subdivision regulations, and interim regulations The southeast corner of the
annexation area along Brush Creek Road contains 8 6 acres of 100-year floodplain
In~addition, this area is within the designated environmental sensitive areas The
floodplain has a contributing drainage area of greater that one square mile The
proposed development code will essenbally prohibit any disturbance of the floodplain
arld environmentally sensit~ve areas m these areas Structures, parking lots, fill,
excavation, land disturbance, fences, decks, pools, and other aboveground
manmade structures w~ll be prohibited m the flcodpla~n
33.
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A- 1-35/Hwy 377
ENGINEERING AND TRANSPORTATION
What ex,sting roads, bridges and other transportabon faclhbes wdl be ~mpacted by th~s
proposed annexation and development ~n terms of needed improvements or upgrades?
Name arid location
Type of Improvement
Approximate Cost
See Attached Table
2
Are any of these ~mprovements presently scheduled to be done at state or federal
expense? No If yes, please ~denbfy facd~ty and anticipated date improvements
beg~n
Will additional eqmpment and fac~hbes be needed as a specific result of this annexation
and development? Yes If yes, what type of equipment or facility?
The City of Denton currently maintains 335 m/les of road The SUblect area currently contam~
5 3 miles of public roads that are maintained by the County, however would become the City of
Denton's responsibility upon annexation There are currently less than 200 res/dents living/n
the sublect area Based on exist/n,cl cond/bons no add/bonal equipment or facfl/bes would bo
required to S¢rvlce the area Immediately upon annexation Based on a prolected ultlmato
population o~13,827, and 304,920 square feet of industrial development, assurmng that
additional roads w/Il be constructed as a result of development, we anticipate equipment for at
least two add~bonal street crews and two office personnel will be required at full development
This would include 2 dump trucks, 2 backhoes, field supplies, office supplies, and two
computers The est/mated cost of additional equipment/s $650 000 O0
4
Please comment on the cumulative ~mpact of annexation and development
At what population level would add~bonal equipment be required? The area currently
has less than 200 res/dents w/th an u/t/mate prolected population of 13,827 Lookinq at
the cumulative effect of all three areas under cons/darer/on for annexation at this t/me,
based, on the length of exist/nc/roads, equipment for an additional street crew would b~
rec~u/red in the near future, This would Include a dump truck, backhoe, and normal
o~erabno supplies est/mated to cost $300,000 O0
Is there an accepted equipment to populabon ratio that can be used for planning
purposes? N/A
Is there an accepted employee to population ratio that can be used for planmng
purposes? Current ratio of En,qineennq & Transportation employees to population/s 1
emDlovee for each '1700 citizens, The ret/o of employees to m/les of road maintained by
the c/tV rs I employee Per 7 5 m/les of Road Based on ex/st~nq and proposed
~oDuldtion for the area, no additional personnel will be necessary Immediately upon
Annex Service Info Request west doc
34.
annexation of this area, however we estimate that ultimately the Department would
need 8 additional employees to maintain the current level of services Looking at the
cumulative effect of all three areas being considered for annexation at this t/me, basert
on the lenoth of exishn,.q roads, an additional 3 person street crew may be required/n
~he near future If all three areas are annexed In order to maintain ex/st~ng service levels
David Salmon, City Engineer
Person to contact ~f them are questions
Date 9/21/00
Annex Service Info Request west doc
35,
US 377 / 1-35 W Annexabon Area
Affected St r.~,ts
Not Te 8(~e
'A-/City bruits
36.
Happy Acres Area Annexation Affected Str~-..ts
~ E~s~ng Streas
/ \/Ranned Thoroughfa'es
/~../, Planned Collectors
~ City Llmits
Not To Scale
37.
SERVICE ANALYSIS
377 & 135W Annexation Area
PARKS ANDIRECREATION
1
What neighborhood park and recreabonal faclhbes are currently serving th~s area or are
capable of serving th~s area ~f annexed and/or developed (federal, state, or local)?
None are within the proposed annexation The closest Denton Park properties are
Denla 'Park I 2 miles, and undeveloped Bent Creek Park, located adjacent to the
annexation area. Current residents will be able to use existing City of Denton
parks~ facilities and programs.
2
What projects and/or equipment will be needed to adequately serve th~s area ~f annexed
and/or development based on the parks and recreation master plan or similar
standards? The current 2000 Park and Recreation Master Plan Indicates a need
for a c~ommunity park in this general area Population projections propose 13,827
people living In 5,474 housing units Based on service standards set in the Park
and Recreation Master Plan, 34 56 acres of new park land will be needed for
neighborhood parks. Since the Park and Recreation Master Plan Indicates a need
for a Community Park in this area, a Park with a minimum of 30 acres will be
necessary in this general area.
Servme Standards
Neighborhood Parks 2 5 acres per 1,000 populabon (to be dedicated at time of
development)
5 acres minimum size
(by developer) cost per acre
Commumty Parks 3.0 acres per l,O00 populabon
30 acres minimum
3
How much additional funding will be needed for maintenance ~f addlbonal park facilities
are developed to serve th~s area? $119,370 00
Service Standard Based on $3,454 (developed) cost per acre
4 How many additional personnel would be needed to properly serve th~s area ~f annexed
and developed? 9.67FTE at full development
Service Standards 0.5 to 0.7 FTE add~bonal personnel per 1,000 population
(depending on type of serwce)
$38,000 per year cost per addibonal personnel
Additional Comments Road right of way requiring mowing is 9 86 miles or approximately
26 acres Cost estimate for mowing Is $$3,250 00
Bob T~ckner,! 940-349-8275
Person to contact if there are questions
9~20-00
Date
SERVICE ANALYSIS
Happy Acres Annexation Area
PARKS AND RECREATION
What neighborhood park and recreabonal faclhbes are currently serving th~s area or are
capable of serving this area ~f annexed and/or developed (federal, state, or local)?
None are within the proposed annexation The closest Denton Park properties are
Undeveloped Cross Timbers Park and Bent Creek Park, which are adjacent to the
annexation area. South Lakes Park, located at Hobson at Santa Momca (approx
1.2 miles), Denla Park, located at 1001 Parvln (approx, 1 m~le away) Current
residents will be able to use existing C~ty of Denton parks, fac~hbes and
programs.
2
What projects and/or equipment w~ll be needed to adequately serve th~s area if annexed
and/or development based on the parks and recreabon master plan or s~m~lar
standards? The current 2000 Park and Recreation Master Plan indicates a need
for a community park In this general area Population projectmns propose 272
people living in 47 housing units for the Happy Acres subd~vision Based on
sen/Ice standards set in the Park and Recreation Master Plan, 32 acres of new
park land will be needed for neighborhood parks Since the Park and Recreabon
Master Plan indicates a need for a Community Park, a Park w~th a minimum of 30
acres will be necessary In this general area No park ~s planned within the
immediate area of the existing Happy Acres subdivision
Service Standards
Neighborhood Parks
Commumty Parks
2,$ acres per 1,000 population (to be dedicated at time of
development)
5 acres mlmmum s~ze
(by developer) cost per acre
3.0 acres per 1,O00 populabon
30 acres minimum
3
How much addlbonal funding will be needed for maintenance ~f additional park fac~htles
are developed to serve th~s area? N/A
Service Standard Based on $3,454 (developed) cost per acre
4 How many additional personnel would be needed to properly serve th~s area ~f annexed
and developed? NIA
Service Standards 0,5 to 0 7 FTE additional personnel per 1.000 populabon
(depending on type of service)
$38,000 per year cost per add~bonal personnel
Additional Comments Road right of way requiring mowing is 6 85 miles or approximately
9 acres Cost estimate for mowing Is $1,125 00
Bob T~ckner. 940-349-8275
Person to contact if there are questions
9-20-00
Date
40.
SOLID WASTE
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A-102 US 377/I 35 W
How many dwelhngs and/or businesses are currently located m the area, and what are the
charactenstms of current sohd waste services being prowded to the area0
The area ~ncluded xn this annexation consists of approximately 26 dwelhng umts and no
apparent busxnesses These dwelhngs are currently servmed by res~dentxal automated
private service provtders, wxth the exceptxon of two served by the C~ty of Denton Service
~s typmally prowded one t~me per week at a rate of approximately $53 per three months
Penodm bulky ~tem servme ~s included wxthout addxtmnal charges
2 Will additional resources be needed to serve this area?
The resources prowded ~n the 2001 fiscal year budget will be adequate to prowde sohd
waste services to this area A description of the scope of servme along w~th residential
collection pohmes and procedures ~s presented below however, two bridges ~n this area
have a load hm~t of 50,000 lbs and our vehicles can weigh up to 60,000 lbs when fully
loaded
RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE INFORMATION
To enroll for servme the customer should go to any of the Customer Servme locations and
complete a request for sohd waste services
Rcmdentml Sohd Waste ~s an entirely fee-for-service supported subscriber servme
prowdmg trash collectton to single-family, duplex, and four-plex residences w~thln the
C~ty limits All occupied dwelhngs ~n the C~ty not serviced by Commercml Sohd Waste
are requrred to subscribe to th~s service Unoccupied dwelhngs and/or premises that are
not subscribers wall not receive service without prior arrangement
Our servme ~s designed for twine per week collection of household waste generated at the
remdentml premise by an average famdy, which ~s about four bags per week This
serwce ~s not for collection of remodehng, demoht~on, or roofing debris Contact our
Commermal Sohd Waste D~vxs~on to arrange for collection of this type of debris
The Res~dentml Sohd Waste Dtvls~on also provides automated collection serwces umng a
roll-out cart wtth wheels in designated areas of the city At this t~me the automated
servme fi'equeney will be the same as bag service
41.
Service Days
Generally, residences located north of Hickory and north of Mingo Road receive regular
collection on Mondays and Thursdays Residences south of this boundary receive
collection service on Tuesdays and Fridays
Containers
Residential customers receive two free rolls (104 bags) of plastic trash bags annually
These bags, or bags of comparable strength and size, are the only containers, which may
be used for trash collection Trash will not be collected in brown paper bags, cardboard
boxes, garbage cans or any other such containers Garbage cans left at the curb on
collection day will be d~sposed of properly A trash bag and its contents may not exceed
50 pounds
Resldentaal customers using the automated roll-out cart collection will not be eligible for
free bags, but are required to contain the trash ~n the roll-out cart with plastic bags to
prevent spillage and httenng
Distribution of Plastic Bags
Customers are given one roll of plastic bags when they sign up for service The City
distributes additional roles of plastic bags twice a year Usually the bag distribution is
held m the parking lot of the Civic Center at 321 E McKanney To receive these
additional bags, each customer is required to present the customer copy of their prior
month's utility bill wi'ach will state "bnng receipt to Civic Center parking lot for trash
bags" Bag dtstnbut~on dates are pnnted on utility bills issued m February/March and
September/October Additional rolls of bags may be purchased at Customer Service at
601 E H~ckory, City Hall in the Mall at the Golden Triangle Mall, or at any of the City's
fire stations If you receive bags that are defective, please call 349-8210 for
replacements Not available to customers served with automated carts
Placement of Bags for Collection
CUSTOMER GUIDE TO RESIDENTIAL SERVICES
All bags of garbage must be placed just behind the curb In front of your residence prior to
7 00 a m on your collection day or as designated Fmlure to do so can delay collection
until your next collection day Garbage should be put out no earlier than the night before
Loose material and individual p~eces that can be placed in bags will not be collected until
properly bagged
Unusual Accumulations
Please call our office at 349-8420 if you have an unusual accumulation of waste (not yard
trimmings) for preparation and collection instructions Depending on the circumstance,
there may be a fee charged for collection
42.
Large Household Appliances
You may call in and make special arrangements for the collection of large appliances
Large appliances include items such as refrigerators and freezers, dishwashers, washers
and dryers, stoves, air conditlomng units, and hot water heaters Please place the item at
th~curbforcollectlon It wlll be plcked up wlthm 48 hours ofyour request Aonetime
fee of $50 00 per item will be added to your monthly utility bill for appliances, which
contmn ehlonnated fluorocarbons (CFC) and polychlonnated blphenyls (PCB) This fee
defrays the cost of our compliance with federal and state regulations prohibiting the
dmposal of CFC and PCB ~n municipal landfills The CFC is removed and recycled and
the PCB is disposed of at a hazardous waste disposal faclhty Metals and components
from the appliances are recycled or reused There is no charge for appliances without
CFCs or PCBs
Yard Trimmings
Brash, tree limbs, grass and leaves are collected on Wednesdays
Customers may place up to eight cubic yards (one yard equals 3'x3'x3') ofbmsh out for
collection each Wednesday for free If the brash exceeds eight cubic yards, you will be
charged $5 00 per cubic yard Please cut brush and limbs into 4' lengths and stack ~n one
pile behind the curb in front of your residence with the cut end towards the street For
customers who are on the automated cart collection, the yard trimmings should be
stacked on the curb, and not placed in the roll-out cart
The first forty-eight bags of leaves and grass are collected free of charge After the first
forty-eight free bags, there is a charge orS 50 per additional 30-gallon bag Bags of grass
and leaves must be placed m front of your residence at the curb for collection Prior to
collectxon, customers will be asked to approve charges over $20
Protection of Bags
To protect bags from damage by animals, spray the exterior of bags with bleach or some
similar product Call Animal Control at 349-7594 for persistent problems with dogs or
cats getting into your bags
Animal Manure
Small amounts of animal manure may be placed for collection The manure should only
make up 20% of the garbage and be mixed with other solid waste inside a plastic bag
Manure will not be collected if not prepared in this manner Large amounts ofammal
manure must be properly disposed of by the property owner
Prohibited Items
Bodaes or portions of dead animals may not be placed for collection Call Ammal
Control for collection of dead animals We do not collect rocks or dirt, car or truck
batteries or tires, lead amd batteries, motor or other automotive oil or fluids, oil filters,
43.
ammumtton, fireworks, any other flammable material, or non-dried pmnt Ashes must be
cooled for at least 48 hours before being placed for collection Contact the Fire
Department for disposal information regarding flammable matermls or hqulds Motor oil
and filters can be recycled at the City's four used ell recycling centers Used batteries
can typically be recycled at the tlme a new battery is purchased from a retmler or at
various scrap dealers m the City Leftover paint should be allowed to dry completely
before being placed for collection with the lid unfastened
Sharps
To dispose of needles and synnges used for Injections, please break offthe needle and
place it in a puncture proof container This will help to prevent injuries to sanitation
employees Bags should not have sharp objects protruding from them and bags
contmmng glass should be clearly labeled
Landfill Hours
Landfill hours of operation are 7 00 a m to 4 00 p m Monday through Friday, 7 00 a m
to 12 00 p m on Saturdays For information regarding charges, call the Landfill at 349-
7510
Theft of Service
The green dumpsters that you see around town are rented by specific Denton
businesses. They are solely for the use of the businesses paying for their serwce It
~s unlawful for anyone else, whether another bus~ness or a citizen, to put anything
these dumpsters
44.
SOLID WASTE
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A-102 Happy Acres
How many dwellings and/or businesses are currently located ~n the area, and what are the
characteristics of current solid waste services being provided to the area*
The area included m this annexation consists of approximately 47 dwelhng units and no
apparent businesses These dwellings are currently serviced by resldentml automated
private servme provaders w~th the exception of one or two who use a dumpster servace
Service ~s typmally provided one time per week at a rate of approximately $53 per three
months Penodm bulky item service as included wathout additional charges
2 Wall addat~onal resources be needed to serve this area9
The resources provided in the 2001 fiscal year budget will be adequate to provide sohd
wasto servaces to this area A description of the scope of servace along wath resadentlal
collection pohmes and procedures is presented below
RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE INFORMATION
To enroll for service the customer should go to any of the Customer Servme locations and
complete a request for sohd waste servaces
Resadentlal Solid Waste ~s an entirely fee-for-service supported subscriber servace
provadmg trash collection to single-family, duplex, and four-plex residences watban thc
CaW hm~ts All occupied dwellings m the C~ty not serviced by Commercaal Sohd Waste
are reqmred to subscribe to thts servtce Unoccupied dwelhngs and/or premases that are
not subscribers wall not receive service without prior arrangement
Our service as designed for twace per week collectaon of household waste generated at the
ros~dentml premise by an average family, which ~s about four bags per week This
sorvlce as not for collection of remodeling, demohtmn, or roofing debris Contact our
Commereml Sohd Waste Dawsmn to arrange for collection of this type of debris
The Residential Sohd Waste Daxaslon also provides automated collection servaces using a
roll-out cart with wheels in designated areas of the city At this tame the automated
servaee frequency will be the same as bag servace
Service Days
Generally, resadences located north of Hackory and north of Mango Road receive regular
collectmn on Mondays and Thursdays Residences south of th~s boundary receave
colleotton servace on Tuesdays and Fridays
45.
Containers
Residential customers receive two free mils (104 bags) of plastic trash bags annually
These bags, or bags of comparable strength and size, are the only containers, which may
be used for trash collection Trash will not be collected in brown paper bags, cardboard
boxes, garbage cans or any other such containers Garbage cans left at the curb on
collection day will be disposed of properly A trash bag and its contents may not exceed
50 pounds
Residential customers using the automated roll-out cart collection will not be eligible for
free bags, but are required to contmn the trash in the roll-out cart with plastic bags to
prevent spillage and httenng
Distribution of Plastic Bags
Customers are given one roll of plastic bags when they sign up for service The City
distnbutes additional roles of plastic bags twice a year Usually the bag distribution is
held In the parking lot of the Civic Center at 321 E McKlnney To receive these
additional bags, each customer is required to present the customer copy of their prior
month's utility bill which will state "bnng receipt to Civic Center parking lot for trash
bags" Bag distribution dates are pnnted on utility bills issued in February/March and
September/October Additional rolls of bags may be purchased at Customer Service at
601 E Hickory, City Hall in the Mall at the Golden Triangle Mall, or at any of the City's
fire stations If you receive bags that are defective, please call 349-8210 for
replacements Not available to customers served with automated carts
Placement of Bags for Collection
CUSTOMER GUIDE TO RESIDENTIAL SERVICES
All bags of garbage must be placed just behind the curb in front of your residence prior to
7 00 a m on your collection day or as designated Fmlure to do so can delay collection
until your next collection day Garbage should be put out no earlier than the mght before
Loose material and individual pieces that can be placed in bags will not be collected until
properly bagged
Unusual Accumulations
Please call our office at 349-8420 if you have an unusual accumulation of waste (not yard
trimmings) for preparation and collection instructions Depending on the mmumstance,
there may be a fee charged for collection
Large Household Appliances
You may call m and make special arrangements for the collection of large appliances
Large appliances include items such as refrigerators and fi'eezers, dishwashers, washers
46.
and dryers, stoves, air condltlomng units, and hot water heaters Please place the ~tem at
the curb for collection It will be picked up within 48 hours of your request A onetime
foe of $50 00 per item will be added to your monthly utility bill for appliances, which
contain chlonnated fluorocarbons (CFC) and polychlonnated blphenyls (PCB) Tlus fee
defrays the cost of our compliance with federal and state regulations prohibiting the
disposal of CFC and PCB in mumclpal landfills The CFC is removed and recycled and
the PCB ~s disposed of at a hazardous waste disposal famhty Metals and components
from the appliances are recycled or reused There is no charge for appliances without
CFCs or PCBs
Yard Trimmings
Brush, tree limbs, grass and leaves are collected on Wednesdays
Customers may place up to eight cubm yards (one yard equals 3'x3'x3') of brush out for
collection each Wednesday for free If the brush exceeds eight cubm yards, you will be
charged $5 00 per cubic yard Please cut brush and limbs into 4' lengths and stack in one
pile behind the curb m front of your residence with the cut end towards the street For
oustomers who are on the automated cart collection, the yard trimmings should be
stacked on the curb, and not placed m the roll-out cart
The first forty-eight bags of leaves and grass are collected free of charge After the first
forty_elght free bags, there is a charge of $ 50 per additional 30-gallon bag Bags of grass
and leaves must be placed m front of your residence at the curb for collection Prior to
collection, customers will be asked to approve charges over $20
Protection of Bags
To protect bags from damage by animals, spray the exterior of bags w~th bleach or some
similar product Call Animal Control at 349-7594 for persistent problems with dogs or
cats getting into your bags
Animal Manure
Small amounts of animal manure may be placed for collection The manure should only
make up 20% of the garbage and be mixed with other solid waste inside a plastic bag
Manure will not be collected if not prepared m thru manner Large amounts of ammal
manure must be properly disposed of by the property owner
Prohibited Items
Bodies or portions of dead animals may not be placed for collection Call Animal
Control for collection of dead animals We do not collect rocks or dirt, car or truck
batteries or tires, lead acid batteries, motor or other automotive oil or fluids, oil filters,
ammumtton, fireworks, any other flammable material, or non-dried pmnt Ashes must be
cooled for at least 48 hours before being placed for collection Contact the Fire
Depa~hnent for disposal information regarding flammable materials or liquids Motor oil
and filters can be recycled at the City's four used oil recycling centers Used batteries
47.
can typically be recycled at the time d new battery is purchased from a retailer or at
various scrap dealers m the City Leftover paint should be allowed to dry completely
before being placed for collection with the lid unfastened
Sharps
To dispose of needles and synnges used for injections, please break off the needle and
place it m a puncture proof contmner This will help to prevent injuries to sanitation
employees Bags should not have sharp objects protruding from them and bags
containing glass should be clearly labeled
Landfill Hours
Landfill hours of operation are 7 00 a m to 4 00 p m Monday through Fnday, 7 00 a m
to 12 00 p m on Saturdays For information regarding charges, call the Landfill at 349-
7510
Theft of Service
The green dumpsters that you see around town are rented by specific Denton
businesses. They are solely for the use of the businesses paying for their service. It
is unlawful for anyone else, whether another business or a citizen, to put anything in
these dumpsters.
48.
Annexation Plan 2000 - Environmentally Sensit~ve Areas
Value-~ itl/~cre~ ~ " ~ 377,& 135W Happy Acres Ryan & 1830 Pnonty Totals
Stream Buffer ~ ~ 182 79~ 8 459 106 421 28 915 326 591
DevelopedFIoodpla/n ~ "~16 853 8 609 13 449 5 728 44 63u
Large Floodplain ~ -~ ~600 88.~ 0 000 448 567 24 799 1074 24u
Small Floodplain '~'~ 124 00,~ 0 000 13 084 0 000 137 08 ~
Upland Habttat ..... 7 228 0 000 5 72~ 10 060 23 013
Riparian Habitat ~ 78 079 0 000 0 137 3 006 81 222
totals 1009 843 17 068 587 383 72 508 1686 802
(-8:3+ acres) (+83+ acres)
Total Land Area (Annex) ~ 1606 891 153 560 1075 522 215 609 3051 582
ESA % of Total Land Area ~ ~62 8% 11 1% 54 6% 33 6% 55 3DA
Population forecast for 377 & I35W Annexation Area
Assumptions'
1 Future zomng districts were used to determine land use
2 Approx 50 acres ofRCR-1 ~ 30 units per acre and no ESA's
3 Approx 20 acres o£IGG ~ 0 4 FAR and 25 % ESA's (5± ae )
4 Average density of remainder of area is 4 0 units per acre
5 Average single-family household - 2 8 people/unit
6 Average multi-family household = 1 8 people/umt
7 50% density transfer within ESA's
8 Total area = 1,524 + acres
9 Total ESA = 926 ± acres
10 Total area developed for single family = 1,454 acres (Total area - (RCR-1 and IGG)
11 Total ESA area within mngle-famdy area = 921 acres (Total ESA - 5 ac )
12 4% growth per year
Single-family development
1,454 acres - 921 (ESA area) = 533 ~ 4 umts/ac = 2132 units
921 acres (ESA) ~ 2 malts/ac = 1842 units
Total single family units = 3974 units x 2 8 = 11,127 people
Multi-family development
50 acres ~ 30 umts/ac =
TOTAL POPULATION
1,500 umts x 1 8 =2,700 people
13,827 people
Industrial development
20 acres - 5 (ESA area) = 15 ~ 0 4 FAR = 6 ac (261,360 sf)
5 acres ~ 0 2 FAR = 1 ac (43,560 st)
304,920 sf of Industrial development
At 4% per year
160-~: SF units per year (448 people)
60+ MF units per year (108 people)
12,200 sf of Industrial per year
49.
Annexation Plan 2000 - Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Values'In Act'ee~'~ ' ~ ~ 377 & 135W Happy Acres Ryan & 1830 Priority Totals
StreamlBuffer 182 796 8 459 106 421 28 91~ 326 591
Developed Floodplain 16 853 8 60g 13 44g 5 728' 44 639
Large Eloodplaln 600 883 0 000 448 567 24 799 1074 249
Small I~loodplaln 124 004 0 000 13 084 0 000 137 088
UplandiHabltat 7 228 0 00(3 5 725 10 060 23 013
Riparian Habitat 78 079 0 000 0 137 3 006 81 222
Totals 1009 843 17 068 587 383 72 508 1686 802
(-83± acres (+83+ acres
Total LandArea (Annex) 1606 891 153 56C 1075 522 215 609 3051 582
ESA %lof Total Lend Area 62 8% 11 I°A 54 6°A 33 6% 55 3%
Population forecast for Happy Acres Annexation Area.
Assumptions:
I Future zoning dlstrtcts were used to determine land use
2 Approx 32 acres of NCR-2 ~ 2 units per acre with 17 acres of ESA's
3 Approx 121 acres ofNR2 ~ 2 units per acre with no ESA's and 50% developed
(50± lots)
4 Average density of remainder of area is 4 0 units per acre
5 Average single-family household = 2 8 people/umt
6 50% density transfer within ESA's
7 Total area = 153± acres
8 TotalESA= 17±acres
9 4% growth per year
Single-family development
32 acres - 17 (ESA area) = 15 ~ 2 umts/ac = 30 units
17 aer~s (ESA) ~ 1 umts/ac = 17 units
Total single family units = 47 units x 2 8 = 132 people (additional, 140
existing)
At 4% per year
2 units per year (6 people)
50.
TAX FINANCIAL IMPACT
The ~nformation provided below provides a bnef overwew of the financial impacts of the
proposed annexation on the affected property owners, acknowledging the fact that
~nd~wdual c~rcurnstances may vary More detailed ~nformabon ~s available
POTENTIAL FINANCIAL IMPACT FOR PROPOSED ANNEXED AREAS
A Base Tax
Formulation
City of Denton Tax Information
Taxable Tax Tax
Value Rate Levy
*Agriculture, Acreage $ 10,000
Ummproved, Platted Lots $ 25,000
Improved, Residential $100,000
052815/5100 52 82
052815/$100 132 04
05281~$100 528 13
Annexed property must be on the tax roll on January 1 ~n order to be taxed for that year
Therefore, property annexed dunng the year would not go on the roll unbl the January
2001 and not be taxed unbl October 2001 for the fiscal year 2001-2002
B Rollback Taxes
Yearly Rollback &
Tax Year Tax Interest Total
1999 48 27 + 49 95 98 22
1998 48 27 + 5718 105 45
1997 48 75 + 64 09 112 84
1996 50 20 + 73 04 123 24
1995 51 39 + 81 96 133 35
$246 88 $326 22 $573 10
A property owner with an AG exemption on a single acre w~th an AG value of
$500/acre will pay approximately $573 10 if property changes use on March 31, 1999,
and the non-AG value of the acre is $10,000/acre
10/19/00
annex ~1 xls
LU
LU
000000000~
52.
54,
55°
Attachraent 5
Petitions Against Annexation A-102
Tract #2 - South Bonnie Brae
56.
Annexation A-102 US 377 1-35W
Date October 17, 2000
My name IS Tommy R Holamon My wife
Brae St, Denton, Texas 76207 My neighbors and m-laws are Asa and Charlene Yount residing
at 3208 S Bonme Brae, Denton, Texas 76207
Our property(s) are in A-102 of the proposed annexation The property(s) are on the west s~de of
S Bonnie Brae, generally ~n an east/west hne south of Roselawn Road and bordered on the south
by Hickory Creek
Our family(s) have hved here for some 20 years Most of the property immedmtely around me,
including ours, ~s e~ther wthm or ~mmedlately adjacent to the Hickory Creek FLOOD PLAIN
Other than the homes already emstlng m our neighborhood, addmonal development wth~n the
area ~s ~mposs~ble because of the Hmkory Creek FLOOD PLAIN In addition, due to the
potentml of flooding at Bonnie Brae and Hickory Creek, the c~ty will very likely open ~tselfto
lawsmts ~f Hickory Creek Flooding causes any FATALITIES vathln the future annexed c~ty
hm~ts
Stnce the emstmng residences ~n our neighborhood already have Deep water wells (expensive),
elaborate septic waste water systems and adequate fire and sheriff protection, the City of Denton
would only be annexing us m order to ~ncrease their tax base The C~ty knows that No services
will ever be needed or prowded to these residents unth developed property The C~ty also knows
that services will never be needed for undeveloped property because it ~s wtthm the FLOOD
PLAIN The C~ty knows that Bonme Brae FLOODS at H~ckory Creek and roll be forced to
upgrade the roadbed or face another lawsmt/settlement s~mflar to the settlement between the
C~ty and Mr Kelsoe after a fatahty on Corbon Road Furthermore, ffthe City annexes S
Bonme Brae, ~t will be reneging or backing out ora 1990 verbal agreement/commttment to the
residents affected by the voluntary annexation of land on the West side of Bonme Brae, North of
Allred Road under the 10 year old Annexation # A-59
In 1990, some 10 years ago, at the voluntary request by the Perot Group and the Henry S 1Vhller
Group, the C~ty of Denton agreed to annex a large track of land between S Bonme Brae and 1-35
generally south of Roselawn and bordered on the South by Allred Rd (Commonly known as
Annex A-59-now the Vintage Development) At the pubhc heanngs in November 1990, the
residents did not object to the annexation ( though many of us were present and concerned)
because City offimals, mcludlng Mayor Castleberry and D~rector of Planmng, Mr Frank Robins
and staff, offered assurance to all of us that the voluntary annexation orA-59 would have no
immediate or long-term ~mpact on the residents adjacent to the A-59 area when the C~ty
ultimately arranged to prowde services to the A-59 annexed area ,V~ntage Development
In my dlscass~ons w~th Mr Robins and his staff In 1990 (and those of several other residents),
we expressed considerable concern about the doughnut hole that would ex~st ffthe City annexed
A-59 and later attempted to prowde servtees to the proposed development (later known as the
Vintage Development) The voluntary annexation of A-59 would have to go around our
ne~ghborhood, creatmg a doughnut hole of cotmty area surrounded by Ctty property The
residents were concerned that we would ultimately be annexed in order to close the doughnut
57.
hole and provide services to the V~ntage Development C~ty officli
had no plans to annex us in the future just to provide servmes to the
~sured US that the City]
DEVELOPMENT
Development These same officials indicated that the C~ty would I
corndor along Bonme Brae to furnish services, since the City could use the existing comdor
along 1-35 to deliver services to the new development NOW, 10 years later, the City decides to
Annex us, for no reason other than, to close the doughnut hole created when the C~ty voluntarily
annexed A.59 at the request of two wealthy developers
The C~ty knows that the residents in th~s FLOOD PLAIN area wdl never need or desire primary
services for water and sewer, since these resident have already expended large sums of money
for a deep water well and septic systems What's more, the C~ty knows that these residents
cannot and will not be able or even valhng to afford the overpriced expense the City charges to
connect to water and sewer services City connect fees are based on hnear feet of frontage to the
available services and these residents have large hnear feet of frontage
Summary
The C~ty of Denton does not plan to offer the floodplain residents in my neighborhood any
useable services They s~mply want our taxes Further, the C~ty ~s deliberately reneging on
assurances given to the floodplain area residents in the doughnut hole around A-59 (Vintage
Developmen0 that Denton would not later close the doughnut hole simply to provide services to
the voluntarily annexed area -A-59 Vintage Development
The City will be opening itself to Iawsmts when Hickory Creek FLOODING causes additional
fatahties Especially s~nce the City is aware of the FLOODING before annexation The City
also knows that most residents of proposed Annexation A-102 currently possess all necessary
services the City offers (for a high connect charge) and the City knows that future services wffi
not be needed for the area because all undeveloped land is in the floodplain and cannot be
developed m the future Accorahngly, the residents cannot and w~ll not gain anything from the
C~ty in return for the taxes we will have to pay
S Bonnie Brae
Concurring unth the above comments are Asa and Charlene Yount/..~s~dmg at 3208 S Bonn e
Brae St, Denton, Texas 76207
Asa W Yount, 3208 S Bonnie Brae
Charlene Yount, 3208 S Bonnie Brae
58.
October 16, 2000
I°cT 1'
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
To Members of the Denton C~ty Council
Re Annexatton of the property south of Roselawn Drive (west et the rmlroad tracks) and west et
Bonme Brae The area extends south to Hwy 377
Last week the restdents recetved a nottce that the city ts constdenng annerdng tins area The
nottce did not tell us why nor dtd tt advise of any benefits such as water, sewer, etc At least one
property owner dtd not recetvea not,ce
Actually, we don't need any et these sermces We all have our own wells, septm systems, and
IXU elecmc lhe only servtce we nught recetve ts garbage ptck up We would be paying a very
bash price for tins one servace
My brother and I have canvassed a majority o~ the people m th~s area and can thud no one tn raver
of bern8 annexed One person we talked to w~th the ctty dtd menuon pohce and fire protecUon
The only pohce related problem we've had was the "Hog Valley" area The beer drinkers and
dopers have Ion8 since move on lhe nearest fire hydrant ts approxarnately 'A male to the nearest
house and approximately ~ nnle to the others I don't tinnk the trucks carry that much hose It
they did my house would burn down betbre they could smng tt out
1 reel the mare reason tbr tins proposal ts to provtdc water and sewer to the Vantage ProJect
Ross Peter 8et tins area armoxed w~th very httle tantare That was so easy he now wants to 8et
tins area annexed so the sewer c~an be extended from the Brush Creek Road area
All we ask is that you vote tbr what the property owners tn tins area want And that is to stay the
way we are It mtsht be dfilerent ~t we could be assured et the same benehts that the mare stream
Denton residents are provtded
Ward Parlms
3989 Roselawn Dnv~
Denton, TX 76207
3129 South Bonme Brae
Denton, TX 76207
P b 1 just talked to Mrs Pttner at Roselawn Lcmetc~ and she smd the cemetery ts m the ctty
hnuts and pays ctty taxes However, they have to pay a private hrm to ptck up the 8arba8e 1
guess we can take that off of the services we maght recetve
59.
Monday, October 16, 2000
Ms. Marct Ratcltff
222 North Elm
Del~ton,
Texas 76202
OCT 1 9 7000
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Dear Ms Marci Ratcliff,
As a property owner (8999 Roselawn, Denton, Tx,76~.07) in the Al02 area that ~s
being considered for annexation into the City of Denton, I would like to state that I do
not want my property annexed, I am content with my property as it is and can think of
no, advantage to being m the city,
Thank you for the opportunity to voice my opinion
Sincerely,
Jule M Sewe~t
60.
~ECEIVED
~L]~ 1. 9 2000
,NN1NG & DEVELOPMENT
62.
Sandra S. and William C. Lewis
900 Brush Creek Road
Argyle, Texas 76226
940-387-8834
Office 817-431-2231
Fax 817-431-5534
Kmt~zen@aol.com
RECEIVED
OCT 1~ 2000
October 17, 2000
~NNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
The Honorable Euhne Brock
Mayor
City of Denton
215 East MclQnney
Denton, Texas 76201
Dear Mayor Brock
RECEIVED
OCT 1 9 2_000
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
We have received a Notice of Intent to Annex (A-102 US 377 1-35W) We are writing to
ask you to exclude our property at 900 Brash Creek Road from that annexation
The annexation notice contmned no explanation of the reason for the annexation Since
there appears to be no good reason for the C~ty of Denton to annex our property and we
can think of no good reason why our property should be annexed, we ask that the City of
Denton modtfy ~ts planned annexation to exclude our property
Regards,
Sandra S ~Lewis
William C Lewis
cc Planning and Development Department
63.
I M~cy R~icl'ff ' NOTICE.9~'jN~E~T T~ AN~E~; A:!~ .US 3~7~ 1~35W Page 1
From "McGee, Lonny" <Lonny McGee@teleglobe com>
To "'dspowell@cityofdenton com"' <dspowell@cityofdenton corn>,
"'lcreichh@cityofdenton com'" <lcreichh@cityofdenton com>, "'marcy rafllff@c~tyofdenton com'"
<marcy ratllff@cityofdenton com>, "'nkmcbeth@cityofdenton corn'" <nkmcbeth@cityofdenton corn>,
"'blross@cltyofdenton corn'" <blross@cityofdenton corn>, "'ddraglan@cltyofdenton com"'
<ddraglan@c~tyofdenton com>
Date 10/3/00 8 11AM
Subject NOTICE OF INTENT TO ANNEX - A-102 US 3771-35W
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
Please review the attached letter which we sent to each member of the Denton
C~ty Council
Lonny & Terri McGee
<<Letter to Denton City Council doc>>
64.
M~rcy Rat~llff - Leffer t6 D~n{0n~itY ~U~Ci(~d6~~ Page 1
October 3, 2000
Lonny & Tern McGee
1200 Brush Creek Road
Argyle, TX 76226
City Council Members
Caty of Denton
Denton, TX 76201
REF Notice of Intent to Annex
Dear Honorable Council Members,
On September 24, 2000 we receaved a letter from the City of Denton
Planmng and Development Department concermng your c~ty's intent to
force annex the property where we currently reside This property is
located at 1200 Brush Creek Road, Argyle, Texas
We want you to know we strongly opposed to your antent to annex and wall
seek whatever legal remedy possible to prevent th~s from occurring The
reasons for our oppomtlon are as follows
We already have water from Argyle Water Supply, so you can't help us
there
We have already spent a considerable amount of money putting in a septm
system, so you can't help us there If anything we are concerned you will
force us to abandon thas system and then pay a ndmulous rate to hook up to
Caty of Denton Sewage
We are much closer to the Argyle F~re Department, so there as nothang to
gain there wath the Caty of Denton Fare Department
We are far enough out that any police protection would be much to far away
to be of any benefit Anythmg that m~ght happen would be long over before
a pohce officer could make at to our property
Smce we are not m c~ty limits today, we can enjoy fireworks, shooting a
weapon, and open fires W~th your annexation all of these rights and
pnwleges dasappearm
65.
I Ma[~Y R~tcliff- Eette? t~'~'~,nt~'-~.i~tYlb..-.g..unc? doc , Page 2
October 3, 2000 Letter
City Council for City of Denton
Page 2
Today we can make improvements to my property without having to ask
permission After your proposed annexation not only would I have to ask
permission, but I'd have to pay for the right to improve th~s property in
bmldlng fees/permits and then slow down construction while wmtlng for an
inspector
We already have our trash taken care of by someone else, so you can't help
us there
My property includes a creek on the back of the property The only
organization that can do anything to this creek today is the Corp of
Engineers If you annex my property you, the City of Denton, will then
control this Unfortunately, I have seen what mty 0ncludlng the City of
Denton) often do to creeks - concrete everything, take away the natural
beauty - and then often expect the property owner to pay for ltl*
The same thing applies to streets/roads You annex the property into your
city limits, demde the road needs curbs and gutters, and then .force the
property owner to pay for them~
So it becomes very obvious - This annexation brings noth~ne to the
property/home owners except ~ restrictions The primary thing
your city is after is the tax dollarsl.
The area we live in consist of very nice homes with some fairly strict
restrictions about development, building, and land use We don't need or
want the City of Denton telling us how or what should be done on our land~
Incidentally, we are not alone in this conclusion and are not alone in the
intent to fight this annexation by whatever means are necessary~
Sincerely,
Lonny & Tern McGee
66.
Attachment
Petitions Agmnst Annexation A-102
Tract g4 - Happy Acres
67.
To Whom it May Concern
As residents of flus southwest section of Denton County, we have been informed of your
plans tO .nnex our area into the city of Denton For a x)umber of reasons we are strongly
opposed to th~s maneuver and are prepared to take whatever action necessary to protect
our mdMdual rights
Presently, we are confined to a septic sewer system and have been instructed that Denton
does not plan to supply sewer serwce ffwe are annexed Tlus is illegal and a defimte
m~mgcment of any attempt to benefit our personal welfare m the process of expanding
your tax base
We cu~ently are affihated with the Argyle Water Department and understand th~s too
will not change under your annexation proposal We do not understand how you can
consider snnexation w~thout the addition ofbamc services to our commumty Such an
action would be tantamount to taxation without representatlon~ You ask for our tax
dollars, we receive nothing m return
We, the undersigned want at made known that we strongly oppose any action on the
annexation of our commumty The loss to our personal rights far outweighs any benefit
to you as a c~ty
Respectfully submitted,
To Whom tt May Concern
As residents of this southwest section of Denton County, we have been reformed of your
plans to annex our area rote the city of Dcntor~ For a number of reasons we are strongly
opposed to tins ~aneuver and are prepared to take whatever action necessary to protect
our mdlwdual rights
Presently, we are confined to a septic sewer system and have been instructed that Denton
does not plan to supply sewer sexwce ffwe are annexed Tlus m illegal and a definite
infringement of any attempt to benefit our personal weffare m the process of expanding
your tax base
We currently are affihated w~th the Argyle Water Department and understand flus too
will not change under your annexation proposal We do not understand how you can
consider annexation without the addition of basra services to our commumty Such an
action would be tantamount to taxatmn w~thout representation You ask for oar tax
dollars, we receive nothing m return
We, the undersigned want it made known that we strongly oppose any actmn on the
annexation of our commumty The loss to our personal rights far outweighs any benefit
to you as a c~ty
Respectfully submitted,
II
To Whom ~t May Concern
As residents of flus southwest section of Denton County, we have been m_formed of your
plar~ to annex our area into the city of Denton. For a number of reasons we are strongly
opposed to tins maneuver and are prepared to take whatever action necessary to protect
our individual rights
Presently, we are confined to a septic sewer system and have been instructed that Denton
does not plan to supply sewer serwce rf we are annexed Tlus ~s dlegal and a defimte
infringement of any attempt to benefit our personal welfare m the process of expanding
your tax base
We currently are affihated w~th tho Argyle Water Department and understand flus too
will not change under your annexation proposal We do not understand how you can
consider mmoxat~on w~thout the addition of basic serwces to our commumty Such an
action would be tantamount to taxatmn w~thout representation You ask for our tax
dollars, we receive nothing m return
We, the undermgned want ~t made known that we strongly oppose any action on the
annexation of our commumty The loss to our personal rights far outweighs any benefrt
to you as a city
Respectfully submitted,
70.
To Whom ~t May Concern
As residents of flus southwest section of Deflton County, we have been reformed of your
plsn.~ tO. nnnex our area into the mty of Danton For a number of reasons we are strongly
opposed to flus maneuver and are prepared to take whatever actlo.n ffecessary to protect
our mdlwdual rights ..
Presently, we are confined to a septxc s~wer sy~e~n and have been mstrocted that Denton
does not phn to supply sewer service ffwe are annexed Th~s ~s illegal and e~ definite
mfi'mgemant of/my attempt to benefit our personal welfare m the process of expanding
your tax base
We currently are affilhted x~nth the Argyle Water Department and understand tins too
will not change under your aunexatlon proposal. We do not understand how you gan
consider annexation w~thout the addft~on of hasw serwces to our commumty Such an
action would be tantamount to taxation w~thout representat~or~ You ask for o~r tax
dollars, we receive nothing m return
We, the undersigned want it made known that we strongly.oppose any act~od oh the
/mnexatlon of our commumty. The lqss to our personal rights far outwmghs any benefit
to you as a c~ty
Respectfully subnutted, '
71.
NOT]:¢E OF ]::NTENT TO ANNEX
A-102 US 377 1-35W
The City of Denton Is giving you wntten not~ce of ~ts ~ntent to consider annexabon of the property shown
on the map below This nobce ~s being sent to all the property owners m the area proposed for
annexation as indicted by the appraisal records, each pubhc or private enbty that prowdes services m
the area and each railroad company within the area The first pubhc heanng ~s scheduled for Tuesday,
October 24, 2000 The pubhc hearing w~ll start at 6 00 p m m the City Council Chambers of C~ty Hall
located at 215 E McKinney Street, Denton, Texas Add~bonal nohces w~ll be sent to nobly you of all the
City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission pubhc hearings If you have any quesbons, please
contact Lar~y Re~chhart, Assmtant D~rector or Marcy Ratchff, Development Rewew Manager of the C~ty
of Denton Planning and Development Department at (940) 349-8350
ClTY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALLWEST ° DENTON TEXAS 76201 · 9403498350 ° (F)9403497707
CV~4yDocuments~Annexatlon$~2OOOSouthwestAnnexatlon~-102 US377135WWobceoflntentdoc
72
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
Agenda No
Agenda Item ,,,
Date
AGENDA DATE.
DEPARTMENT:
CM/DCM/ACM:
October 24, 2000
Planmng Department
Davad Hall, 349-8314
SUBJECT - A-100 (Forester Tract)
Consader adopting an ordtnance to annex an approxamately 37 8 acre tract of land located
southeast of the comer of Teasley Lane and Hmkory Creek Road m the extratemtonal
jurisdiction of the City of Denton, Texas, to approve a servace plan for the annexed property, to
provtde a severabflaty clause and to provide for an effectave date Farst reading of ordinance (A-
100)
BACKGROUND
The applmant has requested that the property be annexed The property as currently undeveloped
and as completely surrounded by property wathtn the Caty's hmats The developer's stated
purpose of the annexatmn as to create a Planned Development wtth commercial, office and
restdentml uses, an addition to a school s~te The zomng at the tame of annexataon will be
Agricultural (A) The developer bas submatted a zoning plan under separate petmon The
development, as proposed, would also require the approval of a comprehensave plan amendment
The Teasley Lane Traffic Study has m~hcated a need for retail servmes m thts general area tn
order to reduce travel demand caused by trips to existing retail at 1-35E and Lflhan Miller or tn
Connth
The development as proposed will reqmre pubhc ~mprovements The followang ts a prehmtnary
last oftho~e amprovements whleh may be triggered by the plattang process
1 Raght-of-way dedacatmn along Teasley FM 2181
2 Raght-of-way dedaeaUon for future extensaon of Hickory Creek
3 Pameapataon m a future traffic signal at Teasley and Hmkory Creek
4 Constmctaon ofmtemal streets
5 Constmctaon of s~dewalks along all pubhc streets
6 Extension ofpubhc utflitaes to servme the development
7 Possable ups~zmg ofemstmg public utflatms
8 Installataon of fire hydrants
9 Dedmat~on ofpubhc utflaty easements
Any resadentml development of the property would be subject to the land dedacataon portion of
the Park Declination Ordinance (Ord 98-039) Although an appllcatmn for platttng has not been
submatted, if platted prior to annexataon the proposed development would be exempt fi.om the
park development fees of the Park Dedacataon Ordinance, because tt as located m the ETJ If it
were wathm the Caty, park development fees ($187 per resadentlal lot and/or umt) would be
collected'when braiding permats were assued
In accordance wath the Caty's annexatton pohcy plan, approved tn June 1993, the Caty will
"assess on a case by ease basas the annexataon of areas tn the ETJ when slgmficant developments
are proposed"
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Denton Plan antmlpates this property to be within a Neighborhood Centers area Since this
property is outside the e~ty hm~ts, annexation is the logical step to ensure development consistent
with The Denton Plan This aunexatmn would consolidate the city's junsd~ctmn by ehmlnatmg a
"hole" m the C~ty's land area and prowde the City of Denton the authority to regulate land use
based upon zomng elasslficatmn Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council mst~tute
aunexatmn proceedings for the aforementioned property
PRIOR ACTIONfREVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions)
September 5, 2000 C~ty Council lnst~tutes annexatmn proceedings
September 26, 2000 C~ty Council holds first pubhc heanng on proposed annexation
September 27, 2000 Planmng and Zomng Commission holds a public hearing on the proposed
annexation and recommends approval (7-0)
October 3, 2000 C~ty Council holds second pubhc heanng on proposed annexation
FISCAL INFORMATION
None at th~s t~me
OPTIONS
1 Approve as submitted
2 Approve w~th conditions
3 Deny
4 Postpone consideration
$ Table item
ATTACHMENTS
1 Location Map
2 Zomng Map
3 Utility Map
4 Denton Mobility Map
5 Annexatmn Schedule
6 Servme Plan
7 Departmental Service Analyses
8 Petltmn for Annexation
9 Draft Ordinance
Prepared by
/~hom~is B ~ray ~'
Planner I
R~~ectfully subuntt . ~
Director of Planning and Development
A-lO0
(Forester Tract)
ATTACHMENT 1
NORTH
SITE
LOCATION MAP
Agenda Date October 24, 2000
Scale None
A-100
(Forester Tract)
ATTACHMENT 2
NORTH
SITE
ZONING MAP
Agenda Date October 24, 2000
Scale None
A-lO0
(Forester Tract)
ATTACHMENT 3
NORTH
SITE
UTILITIES MAP
Hydrants
Water Line (W L )
Sewer Line (S L)
Agenda Date' October 24, 2000
Scale None
ATTACHMENT 4
~,-100 (Forester Tract)
NORTH
SITE
DENTON MOBILITY PLAN MAP
Freeways
Primary Major Arterials
Seconda~ Major Arterials
Collectors
Agenda Date October 24, 2000
Scale None
ATTACHMENT 5
A-lO0
ANNEXATION SCHEDULE
July 6, 2000
September 5, 2000
September 15, 2000
September 16,2000
September 26, 2000
September 22, 2000
September 27, 2000
October 3, 2000
October 27, 2000
Staff receives annexation pet~bon
C~ty Council receives a prehm~nary assessment, g~ves d~recbon to
staff and considers approval of a schedule for pubhc hearings
regarding the proposed annexabon
r~ Prehmlnary Annexation Assessment prepared
r~ Annexation Schedule prepared
Not~ce pubhshed in Denton Record-Chromcle for first pubhc heanng
[3 Annexation Study prepared and available for pubhc rewew
r~ Serwce Plan prepared and avmlable for pubhc review
Nobce published ~n Denton Record-Chronicle for Planmng and
Zoning Commms~on public hearing
C~ty Council conducts first public hearing
· Pubhc not~ce must be no less than 10 days and no more than 20
days before pubhc hearing
Not~ce pubhshed ~n Denton Record-Chromcle for second C~ty Council
public hearing
Planmng and Zomng Commission holds a public hearing and
considers making a recommendation to the C~ty Council regarding
the proposed annexation and the proposed zomng
· Public nobce must be no less than 10 days before pubhc heanng
C~ty Council conducts second public heanng
· Public not~ce must be no less than 10 days and no more than 20
days before pubhc hearing
by a feur-flfths vote institutes annexation proceedings
of annexatmn ordinance
· ~more than 20 days after the second public hearing
from the first public hearing
Publication of annexation ordinance in Denton Record-Chromcle
· Send text to paper by October 18 to ensure ~nclus~on
November 28, 2000
C~ty CouncIl by a four-fifths vote takes final action Second reading
and adoption of the annexabon ordinance C~ty Council considers
approval of zomng request
· Council acbon must be more than 30 days after pubhcat~on of
ordinance and less than 90 days after council ~nsbtutes
annexation proceedings
7
ATTACHMENT 6
ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN
CASE NUMBER
AR~A
LOCATION
A-100 (Forester Trac0
approximately 37.8 acres
Southeast of intersection of Teasley Lane (FM 2181) and Hickory Creek
Municipal services to the site described above shall be furnished by or on behalf of the City of
Denton, Texas, at the following levels and in accordance w~th the following schedule
A. Police Protection
1
Police service, including patrolling, response to calls, and other Wutlne functions, will
be prowded to the property within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the
annexation using existing personnel and equipment
B. Fire Frotection
Fire protection (within the hmlts of omstmg hydrants) and emergency medical services
will be provided to the property wlthm mxty (60) days after the effechve date of the
annexation usmg existing personnel and eqmpment
Solid Waste Collection
1 Sohd waste collection service wll be prowded to the property w~thin sixty (60) days
after the effective date of the annexation usmg exmtmg personnel and eqmpmant
De
Waterf~Vastewater Facilities
1 Mamtenance of water and wastewater ~amhhes m the area to be annexed that are not
withm the serwce area of another water or wastewater utility will be begm witlun sixty
(60) days after the effective date of the ~nnexahon using existing personnel and
equipment
E. Roads and Streets
1 Maintenance of wads and streets, includmg road and street hghtmg, m the area to be
annexed will begin within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the annexation using
emstmg personnel and equipment.
¢
F. Parks and Recreation Facilities
1 Mamtenance of parks, playgrounds, sw~mm,ug pools, and other recreational facilities in
the area to be annexed will begin withm mxty (50) days after the effective date of the
annexation using existing personnel and equipment However, there are no existing
parks, playgrounds, swimming pools, and other recreational facilities in the area
ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN
(A-lO0)
Forester Tract
Electric Facilities
1 Electric utihty serwce will be provided witban sixty (60) days after the effective date of
the annexation using existing personnel and equipment
Library Services
1 Library services will be provided within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the
annexation using existing personnel and equipment
Code Enforcement, Building Inspections and Consumer Health Services
1. Code enforcement, building :nspoctions and consumer health serv:ces will be provlded
within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the annexation using existing personnel
and equipment
Planning and Development Services
1 Planmng and dovelopment sorvmes will be pmwded w~ttnn s~xty (60) days after the
effective date of the annexation using existing personnel and equipment The Planning
and Development Department currently prowdes services tlus property by way of
adnnmstrahon of Chapter 34 of the Code of Ordinances, concerning sub&wslon and
land development regulations
Capital Improvements Program (CIP)
The CIP of the city is prioritized according to the following guidelines
(I) Provision of Capital Improvements as compared to other areas wall be based on
charactedstms of topography, land utihzatlon, population density, magratude of
problems as related to comparable areas, established techmcal standards and
professional studies
(2) The overall cost effectiveness of providing a specific facility or unpmvement
The annexed area will be considered for CIP improvements in the upcoming CIP plan Tins
property will be considered according to the established gmdelmes
~4.100,4nnexatlon Scm lee Plan
ATTACHMENT ~7
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A-tO0
ENGINEERING AND TRANSPORTATION
What roads, bridges and other transportabon fac~hbes w~ll be ~mpacted by this proposed
annexabon and development ~n terms of needed improvements or upgrades?
Name and location
_FM 2499
Teaslev Lane
_Hmkory Creek Road
TvDe of Imorovement Aooroximate Cost
ConstructIon & R~ght of way Dedication $485,000 O0
R~ght of Way Ded~cat~on/Capac~tv Improvements $75.000
Construcbon & R~ght of Way Dedication $950 000 O0
2
Are any of these improvements presently scheduled to be done at state or federal
expense? Yes If yes, please identify fac~hty and anticipated date improvements will
begin The City of Denton is currently working w/th TXDOT and is offering to peri/c/pate
in the W;denlng of Teasley Lane This prolect has an est/mated t/me frame of 6 to 8
years TxDO T is a/so performing the Enwronmental Study for the construct/on of FM
2499 C~t¥ parhci~abon has been ~ro~osed for that prolect as well That pro/ed has an 8
to 10 yeart/me frame
3
Will addit~onal equipment and famhtles be needed as a specific result of this annexation
and development? No if yes, what type of equipment or facility? N/A
4 Please comment on the cumulative Impact of annexabon and development
At what population level would additional equipment be requlred? In orderto maintain
the currerlt level of service, an additional employee would be needed for each 1700
res/dents
Is there an accepted equipment to population ratio that can be used for planning
purposes? N/A
Is there an accepted employee to population ratio that can be used for planning
purposes? The current ratio of Ern~/ovees in the Enqineenn,q & Transportation
Department to ~o~ulahon Is I to 1700 We do not ant/c/pate the need to add add;t/onal
staff due to annexation of the ~ror~ert¥ based on the proposed zoning The proposed
zoning would allow retail, office and school uses In addrtion, only a small amount of
additional public street is ~ro~osed,
Add~bonal Comments Construct/on of ~/3 of hicko~ Creek road, m add/t/on to ~ of the rioht of
way dedication would be required of the developer for the development of this tract The
developer would a/so be requ;red to dedicate rloht of way for FM 2499 and an add;tlonal fO
feet of ri,qht of way on Teaslel/ Lane Based on a Traffic Impact Analysis, the developer may be
required to provide capacity improvements on Teasley Lane
Person to contact If there are questions, David Salmon, PE, C~ty Engineer 9/21/00
Transportation Analysis doc
10.
Service Analysis
A-lO0
FIRE
1. F~re and Bmergency Medical Serwces can be provided to the area from Stahon
Slx, located at 3232 Teasley lane.
2 BstLrnated response time 4-Smmutes
3. Appropriate response time in the city. .4 minutes
Th~s annexation would not adversely effect F~re Department operations
Cinef Jones
349-8115
11.
WATERNVASTEWATER
SERVICE PLAN
1 What ~s the nearest City of Denton water hne9
The nearest C~ty of Denton water hne (shown m Exl~blt 1) is located along Teasley
Lane The raze of' the emstmg water line ~s 8-tach The emstmg line ~s located on the
west side of Teasley Lane and extends south past the proposed annexation area
2 'What ~s the nearest City of Denton sewer hne9
3
There are no existing City of Denton samtary sewer lines that could serve the
proposed annexation area However, a 15-tach gravity samtar~, sewer line ~s
scheduled to begin construction in October 2000 Tlus proposed samtary sewer line
wll pm,nde service for various developments along Teasley Lane Comdor including
the proposed annexation area Tlus alignment (shown m Exlmb~t 1) xxall be located on
the east side of Teasley Lane flowing In a southerly directxon Thas samtary sewer line
would be avmlable for semce by February 2001
According to the C~ty of Denton master plan what type of lines and faclhues would be
required for this area and xvhen are those lines and faclllhes proposed for constmctaon
Water Distribution System Master Plan'
The Water Distribution System Master Plan shows no future water lines xnthln the
proposed annexation area However, the proposed annexation area can be served by
tapping into the existing 8qnch water main
12.
WastewaterMasterPlan
The Wastewater Distribution System Master Plan shox~s no future samtary sewer lmes
w~thm the proposed annexation area However, the proposed 15-tach sanitary sewer
line will have the capacity to accommodate the proposed unnexat~on area
4 Are there any C~ty of Denton lines included in the proposed annexation_~
There are no utd,ty hnes located within the proposed annexation area However, an 8-
meh water line is m the exastmg Raght-of-way and a proposed 15-tach sewer line wll
be located within the existing Pdght-of-way of FM 2181 (Teasley Lane) adjacent to the
proposed annexation area
5 Please comment on cumulative ~mpaet of annexation and development
The u'npact of annexation and development of the subject tract can be accommodated
by the 8-meh water lme located along Teasley Lane and the proposed 15-meh sanitary
sewer line located along the frontage of the proposed annexatton area
No additional equipment will be needed for water or wastewater to serve the
~lnexatlon area
If you have any questions, please contact the person below
P S Atom, P E Engmeenng Adrmmstrator
Person to contact if there are questions
9119~O0
13.
DRAI GE
SERVICE PLAN
1 Currently one-half of the dralnage flows toward Teasley Lane and the other
half drains to the east into a small natural stream, which flows to the south
2
Research into City's records indicates that no drainage Improvements,
including storm sewer or channels, ex~st on the property Therefore,
maintenance of drainage facihties w~ll be minimal
3
Due to ~ts location in the watershed, detention of storm water wIll be required
for the port[on of the property that dralns to Teasley Lane at the t~me the tract
develops - -
4 Development of a new subdivision would be subject to the C~ty's Drainage
Cnterla, subdivision regulations, and Intenm regulations
SERVICE ANALYSIS
Southeast of Teasley and Hickory Creek Intersection
"~ARKS AND RECREATION
1
What neighborhood park and mcreabonal facihtles are currently serving this area or are
capable of servlng this area if annexed and/or developed (federal, state, or local)?
None are within the proposed annexation. The closest Denton Parks
property to the proposed annexation area are Cross Timbers Park, l.33 miles,
Brlercllff Park, ~.73 miles, Wind River Park, 2.16 miles, and South Lakes Park, 2.75
miles. Current residents will be able to use exisbng City of Denton parks, facilities
and programs.
What projects and/or equipment will be needed to adequately serve this area if annexed
and/or development based on the parks and recreation master plan or similar
standards? The 2000 Denton Park and Recreation Master Plan Indicates a need for
a Community Park In the general area of the proposed annexation
Service Standards.
Neighborhood Parks
Commumty Parks'
2.5 acres per 1,000 population (to be dedicated at time of
development)
5 acres mlnlmum s~ze
(by developer) cost per acre
3.0 acres per ~,000 population
30 acres minimum
How much additional funding w~ll be needed for maintenance if add~bonal park facilities
are developed to serve this area? $'172,700.00
Service Standard'
Based on $3,454 (developed) cost per acre
How many additional personnel would be needed to properly serve this area if annexed
and developed? Two
Service Standards
0.5 to 0.7 FTE additional personnel per 1.000 population (depending on type of
service)
$38,000 per year cost per add~bonal personnel
Additional Comments' If the school district constructs a new school in the area of the
annexation, the City Parks and Recreation Department will attempt to coordinate
placement of park facilities adjacent to school property.
Bob Tlckner, Suoerintendent of Park Planning and Development
Person to contact If there are questions
Date, 9-1 t-00
LIBRARY
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A-'100
1. If annexed, can anticipated service demands be met using existing materials, faclhties, and
personnel? Yes
2 If not, how many additional employees and what type of facd~tles and matenals will be
needed to provide services?
3. Estimated additional funding needed strictly based on proposed annexation and
development.
4
Please comment on the cumulative Impact of annexabon and development
At what population level would another hbrary facility be required? 71,500
Is there an accepted clrculatlon to population ratio that can be used for plannlng
purposes? 6.4 0er caoita
Is there an accepted employee to population ratio that can be used for planning
purposes? Staff: one full-time eqlvalent (FTE) per 2000 populatfon
Professional librarians: comprise one-third of FTE staff
Additional Comments:
~stlons
A-100 Service Analysis
SOLID WASTE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
SERVICE ANALYSIS
A-100
Is residential solid waste service avmlable to the proposed area for annexation?
Is commercial solid waste service available to the proposed area for annexation?
What ~s the estimated cost to provide th~s area w~th sohd waste service?
Equipment and Mmntenance
Personnel
What ~s the typical revenue collected per
Household
Commercial Business
W~ll additional eqmpment be needed to serve th~s area ~f annexed or developed?
Type of Equipment
Cost of Eqmpment
W~II additional employees be needed to serve this area if annexed or developed?
Type of Employees
Number of Employees
Please comment on the cumulative impact of annexabon and development
At what population level would add~bonal equipment be required?
Is there an accepted eqmpment to population ratio that can be used for plan~ning
purposes?
Is there an accepted employee to population rabo that can be used for planning
purposes?
Add~tional Comments
P~rso~{ to co~tact if there(~re questions
Date
A-100 Service Analysls
17.
Denton I.S.D. SERVICE ANALYSIS
Servic Area A al sis
A-100 (Southeast of Intersection of Teasley and Hickory Creek)
If annexed, can anticipated service demands be met using existing materials, facilities
and personnel?
~- DISD is currently negotiating a contract on 18 + acres for a future
elementary school site DISD anticipates that the school will be opened an
2O06
Middle - Students may be served with exlshng faclhttes and personnel
High - Students may be served with ex~st~ng fa¢fl~ties and personnel
2. If not, ho~ many additional employees and what type of facillhes and materials will be
needed to provide services?
Elementary School Staffin~ 75
· Public Improvements $ 491,000
· Private Improvements $ 599,000
· Maximum EsUmated Total $ 1,090,000
· Proposed Property Purchase Price S 557,100
· School ConstmeUon Cost $11,000,000
3. Estimated additional funding needed strictly based on proposed annexation and
development. N/A
4. Will projected school taxes from this development provade that additional funding?
Commercial Development west of proposed school site would prowde additional tax
revenues Amount will be based on type and scope of commercial development
5. Please comment on the cumulative impact of annexation and development.
This proposed annexation and development as located in the southern portion of
Denton I S D
Estimated Impact within Attendance Zone: N/A
6. At what..p..o, pulation !evel would school facilities be required for the City of Denton?
New facilities are designed to accommodate the following
Elementary- 650 Student Functional Capacity
Middle - 1,000 Student Functional Capacity
High - 2,000 Student Functional Capacity
7. Is there an acceptable employee to population ratio that can be used for planulng
purposes?
Elementary- 22 Students per Teacher
Middle- 28 Students per Teacher
High- 28 Students per Teacher
18.
·leo cert~lee t~t the ~ollowl~ requi~e~ tu~o~tton concerni~ t~e i~nd ~
Ctty o~ Denton.
area o£ request? ~eS x ..... No . _ If no, What ie the status
of the applte~nt? ~ , .
How ~uy ~wellt~ un%ts are lecate~ wLtnte the area requeate~ for
at,re,at%on? _[1~'~.
the reqveet? ~ Please ~rovS~e a genera% desortptSon e~ throe
le~d urea tneLu~t~ the ~e~e(I) o~ buttresses, tf kn~ .......
Doer aree o~ request Sne%u~e at~f ter~tto~¥ ~LthLu t~e c~t~ ltmtt~ er extra-
terrttort~t ~urie4tetiom o~ ~othe~ cLt~? ~e~ No W
getL~te~ ~opulatto~ o: the area o~ request. ~ A~ulte - ~
Chtldre~ ~ ~,,~er o~ reste~er~d voters? ~
Car att or ~f ~ett o~ the ~re& reque~te~ tn thLs ~etLtSen?
for nm~e~&tton? ~es ~ , ., NO
lg.
lQ
Pe~ Ante AT~&/Or
086~2
20.
ATTACHMENT 9
ORDINANCE NO
AN ORDiNANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, ANNEXiNG 37 8 ACRES OF
LAND CONTIGUOUS AND ADJACENT TO THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, LOCATED
SOUTHEAST OF THE CORNER OF TEASLEY LANE AND HICKORY CREEK ROAD iN
THE B MERCHANT SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO 800, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS,
APPROVING A SERVICE PLAN FOR THE ANNEXED PROPERTY, PROVIDiNG A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (A-100)
WHEREAS, Mark Weatherford, on behalf of Herschel Forester, has petmoned for the
annexation of 37 8 acres of land described here~n, and
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2000, the Planmng and Zomng Commission
recommended approval of the petxt~on for annexation, and
WHEREAS, pubhc heanngs were held in the Cou. ncfl Chambers on September 26, 2000,
and October 3, 2000, (both days being on or after the 40m day but before the 20~" day before the
date of the mst~tut~on of the proceedings) to allow all ~nterested persons to state their wews and
present credence bearing upon flus annexation, and
WHEREAS, annexahon proceedings were ~nst~tuted for the property described herein by
the mtroductlon ofttus ordinance at a meeting of the City Council on October 24, 2000, and
WHEREAS, th~s ordinance has been pubhshed m full one t~me in the officml newspaper
of the C~ty of Denton on October 27, 2000, afier annexatmn proceedings were instituted and 30
days pnor to City Council takang final actmn, as required by City Charter, and
WHEREAS, the Ctty Counml finds that the annexation will allow the mty to ensure
development conmstent with The Denton Plan, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS
SECTION 1 The tract of land described in Extnb~t "A", attached hereto and
incorporated by reference, ~s annexed to the City of Denton, Texas
SECTION 2 The servtce plan attached as Exhibit "B", and tncorporated by reference,
whtch prowdes for the extensmn of mummpal servmes to the annexed property, ~s approved as
part of thru ordinance
SECTION 3 Should any part of th~s ordinance be held illegal for any reason, the
holding shall not affect the remmnmg portion of th~s ordinance and the C~ty Counml hereby
declares tt to be ~ts purpose to annex to the C~ty of Denton all the real property described ~n
Extublt "A" regardless of whether any other part of the described property is hereby effectively
p, 21.
annexed to the City If any part of the real property annexed is already ~ncluded wltlun the city
hm~ts of the C~ty of Denton or w~th~n the hm~ts of any other c~ty, town or wllage, or is not wltlun
the C~ty of Denton's junsdmt,on to annex, the same is hereby excluded from the temtory
annexed as fully as ffthe excluded area were expressly described ~n th~s ordinance
SE(~TION 4 Thru ordinance shall become effective ~mmedlately upon its passage and
approval
PASSED AND APPROVED th~s the __ day of
,2000
EULINE BROCK, MAYOR
ATTEST
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM
HERBERTy~Y ATTORNEY
Pa 22.
EXHIBIT A
J~GAL DESCRIPllON
)7 i4 .ACRES
IELD NOTES to all [hot certo~ Iota trocl or .~orce of lend
,~tuoted in the Berry ),(erc'~ant Survey, Acs[rFc[ ~ 8OO, 3eh[on
faun{y, lexas end be.rig o re-survey
~cre l*rac~ described n the dee,J to '-Ierschd / F~ester,
,rus[ee, recorded In Volume 605, Pc,:je 62:, 3ced
)ento~ County, Texos, the sub,,ect ~c'
~crbculorly descnbe~ os
)EGINNING at a 1/2 .qcn ran 'aa 'ound q "e Ecs[ hre o~:
ood u(,der opparen~ ~ubl,c dse oas[ed ~s FU ~c 21~'for
>e'n~ ,he Northwest com~ of o cc(tea 57 05 acre roct of
ond desc.tbed ,n the =eec o .oqn: '~G[Je/, et .x. 'ecorceo
n '/olume 588, Pcge '09 3eec Reccrds, ~entc~ C~nty, Texcs,
FHENCE North O1 Oegee$ 21 ~hnutes lO Seccr'ds ~'est
he [os~ hne of s~d 'ooo ~ cmstonc~ of 5~4 64 feet ~o
n~ copped reran rod set '~, the Northwest c~ner of sc~d
817 acre [Fac[,
· ENC[ NortP 89 Degrees 40 ),/,nutes al S(conds East
the Nodh lin( [boreal o (I)slen(e al :476 3~ feet {o
,ran ro~,' found n the Wes[ ~me oi' o ailed )9 24: acre
descr,b,,d ,n the de,d [o Pul[e ~ome, of T(xos, [P re oro=c
n Volume A1 )4, Po~e 94 of ih,, 9eed Reco, ds of said ,ou,'[~
,~or [he Northeast corner at sas) 37 7~) acre trac~
n'HENCE So~th 31 Degrees 57 ),hn,.,tes aa S FOnd, Ease
'.he Eo,,[ hne Iherecf and w,th Ihe ',V(st hn( of s, ld Pu 'e
~.roct, ,)distance al 650 ')3 fee' !o o 1/2- nch c)pped irc
rod set for [he Sou[heosl corn,r of ~o~d 5 817, some
'he Nc,~easl com(r of ,aid 3 'OB o, re tn,ct,
'ltENCE So.lh ~.9 [agree', 34 Hinu[e.,, 07 Second Wesl v,~b~
the Sou~h hn,s of S;ild 3] 817 acre tract ord the North h~'~ , f
so)d 3708 [fac' o dlst~ce of 2483n3 ~ee to t,e P~.; CC g'
9EGIN,'t~NO and ~ncloslng 37 34. acres of laPd mar, or I,ss
23.
EXHIBIT B
ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN
CASE NUMBER
AREA
LOCATION
A-100 (Forester Tract)
approximately 37 8 acres
Southeast of intersection of Teasley Lane (FM 2181) and Hickory Creek
Mummpal services to the site described above shall be fummhed by or on behalf of the City of
Denton, Texas, at the following levels and in accordance with the following schedule
A
Police Protection
1 Pohce service, including patrolhng, response to calls, and other routine functions, will
be provided to the property within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the
annexation using existing personnel and equipment
B
Fire Protection
1 Fire protection (wlttun the limits of existing hydrants) and emergency medical services
will be provided to the property within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the
annexation using existing personnel and equipment
Solid Waste Collection
1 Solid waste collection servme will be provided to the property wlttun sixty (60) days
after the effective date of the annexation using existing personnel and equipment
D
Water/Wastewater Facilities
1 Mamtenance of water and wastewater facilities in the area to be annexed that are not
within the service area of another water or wastewater utility will be begin within sixty
(60) days after the effective date of the annexatmn using existing personnel and
equipment
E
Roads and Streets
1 Mamtenance of roads and streets, including road and street lighting, in the area to be
annexed will begin wltlun sixty (60) days after the effective date of the annexation using
existing personnel and equipment
F
Parks and Recreation Facilities
1 Maintenance of parks, playgrounds, swimming pools, and other recreational facilities in
the area to be annexed will begin within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the
annexation using exmtmg personnel and equipment However, there are no existing
parks, playgrounds, swimming pools, and other recreational facilities in the area
24
H
I
K
ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN
(A-lO0)
Forester Tract
Electric Faciht~es
1 Electric ut~hty service w~ll be prowded w;th~n sixty (60) days after the effective date of
the annexation using ex~stmg personnel and eqmpment
L~brary Serwces
1 L~brary services wall be prowded w~th~n s~xty (60) days after the effective date of the
annexation using existing personnel and eqmpment
Code Enforcement, Braiding Inspections and Consumer Health Serwces
1 Code enforcement, bmldmg ~nspect~ons and consumer health services w~ll be prowded
w~flun s~xty (60) days after the effective date of the annexation using ex~stmg personnel
and eqmpment
Planning and Development Services
1 Planmng and development services w~ll be prowded w~th~n sixty (60) days after thc
effective date of the annexation using ex~stlng personnel and eqmpment The Planning
and Development Department currently prowdes services flus property by way of
adm~mstrat~on of Chapter 34 of the Code of Ordinances, concermng subdlws~on and
land development regulations
Capital Improvements Program (CIP)
The CIP of the c~ty xs prioritized according to the followxng gu~dehnes
(I) Prowston of Capital Improvements as compared to other areas wzll be based on
characteristics of topography, land utthzat~on, population density, magmtude of
problems as related to comparable areas, established techmeal standards and
professional studxes
(2) The overall cost effeet;veness ofprowdmg a specific facthty or ~mprovement
The annexed area wall be conszdered for CIP improvements xn the upcoming CIP plan This
property wxll be considered according to the estabhshed gmdehnes
25
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE'
DEPARTMENT.
ACM:
October 24, 2000
Utdlty Admlmstrat~on
Howard Martin, 349-8232
SUBJECT:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-126 1 OF THE DENTON CODE OF
ORDINANCES TO REQUIRE THAT NO WASTEWATER TAP FEE WOULD BE
REQUIRED UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE A TAP FEE WAS NOT REQUIRED
PRIOR TO THE ENACEMENT OF THE TAP FEE REGULATIONS, RATIFYING
PREVIOUS ACTIONS, REQUIRING THE PROPERTY OWNER TO PRESENT EVIDENCE
CONCERNING THE CIRCUMSTANCES, PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE
BACKGROUND.
Recently, Council considered the wtuver of tap fees for Mr Roosevelt Washington Council
determined that under spemal conditions where ex~sttng homes had been prowded wastewater
servme by a single service line, and to promote redevelopment of properties, that these tap fees
could be wmved The Wastewater Department has researched this issue and determined that
instances like ti'us occur very rarely The Wastewater Department will evaluate these requests for
apphcabd~ty to the amended Wastewater Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the amendment to Section 26-126 1
FISCAL INFORMATION
It IS estimated that less than 5 of these situation would occur in any g~ven year Estimated
finanmal impact is less than $10,000 annually
Respectfully submitted
Howard Martin
ACM/Utdltms
Prepared by
Jim Coulter
Director, Water/Wastewater Utilities
ORDINANCE NO
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26=126 1 OF THE DENTON CODE OF ORDI-
NANCES TO REQUIRE THAT NO WASTEWATER TAP FEE WOULD BE REQUIRED
UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE A TAP FEE WAS NOT REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE
ENACTMENT OF THE TAP FEE REGULATIONS, RATIFYING PREVIOUS ACTIONS,
REQUIRING THE PROPERTY OWNER TO PRESENT EVIDENCE CONCERNING THE
CIRCUMSTANCES, PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, a property owner - Mr Roosevelt Wasbangton - has requested the waiver of
a wastewater tap fee for the property located at 523 Ruth Street, and
WHEREAS the City Council deems it in the public interest to require that no wastewater
tap fees shall be required to be paid under c~rcumstances slnnlar to the sltuauon at 523 Ruth
Street where previously there were no requirements for wastewater tap fees to be paid when
wastewater service had been provided in the past, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS
SECTION 1 That Section 26-126 1 "Installation of taps by utility department" Chapter
26 "Uulmes" of the Code of Ordmances of the City of Denton is hereby amended by adding a
new subsection (f) wl~eh shall read as follows
Wastewater tap fees waived under certam circumstances Upon the pres-
entation of satisfactory evidence by the property owner to the City,
through its D~rector of Water/Wastewater UtihUes, that a resident had
multiple wastewater service where two or more residences had service on
a single hne prior to enactment of tap fees and the Utlhty Department de-
cides to serve the properties on multiple lines, wastewater tap fees may be
wmved and not be charged agmnst the property owner
SECTION 2 That save and except as amended hereby, all the sections, subsections,
paragraphs, sentences, clauses and phrases of SecUon 26-126 1 and Chapter 26 of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Denton shall remain m full force and effect
SECTION 3 That any action by the City Manger or the Director of WaterAVastewater
Utilities m connecting wastewater service to the property at 523 Ruth Street or lssmng certifi-
cates of occupancy are hereby retroactavely approved
SECTION 4 That tbas ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage
and approval
2
PASSED AND APPROVED tbas the
__ day of
,2000
EULINE BROCK, MAYOR
ATTEST
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM
HERBERT L PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY
BY
Page 2 of 2 3
AGENDA DATE.
DEPARTMENT'
ACM'
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
October 24, 2000
Library System
Kathy DuBose -
,8enda rdo,
Dendaltem
Date 5[-
SUBJECT:
An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, creating a rule proh]b~ttng the carrying of a concealed
handgun m a City bufldmg or port]on of a Ctty building, maktng compbanee wtth the rule
prohtbmng the ean'y]ng of a concealed handgun tn a City building or pomon of a Ctty building, a
condttton of the use of City braidings, provtdmg for a severabfl]ty clause, and providing for an
effective date
BACKGROUND:
As instructed by the C~ty Council on October 10, 2000 dunng tts work sesston, an ordtnance has
been drafted whtch will prohtbtt the carrying of a concealed handgun m a City bmld~ng The
attached ordinance ts a revtston of the concealed handgun ordinance attached to the Council
backup materials of October 10, 2000 The revtstons are minor tn nature as the legal department
only changed the statute reference tn the "Whereas" clauses and added a phrase in Sectton 5 so
that prosecutton could also fall under Sectton 30 05 or 30 06 of the Texas Penal Code
Respectfully submitted
Eva Poole
Dtrector of Ltbrary Servtces
Attachment
ORDINANCE NO
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CREATING A RULE PROHIBITING
THE CARRYING OF A CONCEALED HANDGUN IN A CITY BUILDING OR PORTION OF
A CITY BUILDING, MAK1NG COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULE PROHIBITING THE
CARRYING OF A CONCEALED HANDGUN IN A CITY BUILDING OR PORTION OF A
CITY BUILDING, A CONDITION OF THE USE OF CITY BUILDINGS, PROVIDING FOR A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the City Council, Wlth a wew towards the prevention of crime, has determined
that concealed handguns should not be carned ~n City bml&ngs or portions of City buildings, even
by those individuals with licenses issued pursuant to Subchapter H of Chapter 411 of the Texas
Government Code, as hereafter amended, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has also determined that the carrying of concealed handguns
City buildings may pose a risk to the safe and orderly use of City buildings and faethtles, and
Vv%IEREAS, the City Courlcll desires to establish a role preventmg certain mdlvlduals
lnclu&ng mchwduals with a license pursuant to Subchapter H of Chapter 411 of the Texas
Government Code, as hereafter amended, from carrying concealed handguns m City braidings,
NOW, THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS HEREBY ORDAINS
,qRC, TTONI 1. Persons, including but not limited to lndlvlduals hcensed to carry a concealed
handgun pursuant to Subchapter H of Chapter 411 of the Texas Government Code, as hereafter
amended, shall be prolublted from carrying on or about their person a concealed handgun Mule m a
City building or a portion of a City bmldmg
SF_,C2_ID.h~ The prohibition from Caliylng a concealed handgun while in a City building
or a port~on of a Caty bmldlng shall not apply to persons
1)
~n the actual discharge of his/her official duties as a member of the armed forces or
state mlhtary forces as defined by Section 431 001, Government Code, or as a
guard employed by a penal mstltutmn, or
2) a peace officer, other than a person commissioned by the Texas State Board of
Pharmacy
,ql~,C, TIC)N ':1 Compliance with the above prohibition from carrying a concealed handgun is
a con&t~on of the use of City buildings or pomons of City buildings
,qRCTION 4. The Clty Manager or his designate is directed to post appropnate s~gnage and
to provide such other notices in accordance with Secnons 30 05 and 30 06 of the Texas Penal Code
(the Cnmmal Trespass Law) to carry out the above prolubmon
SF~,CTION 5. The City Manager or his designate is authorized to take all steps reasonable
and necessary to deny entry or continued presence in C~ty buildings to any and all individuals in
violation of the above prohibition mcluchng prosecution of such violators for trespass under
Sectmns 30 05 and 30 06 of the Texas Penal Code
SECTION 6. Tlus ordinance does not In any way hm~t the power the City Manager may
have to regulate the use of City property or facilities
,qRCTION 7. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in tins
ordinance, or apphcatmn thereof to any person or mrcumstance is held invalid by any court of
competent junsd~ctmn, such holding shall not affect the vahd~ty of the remmnmg portmns of th~s
ordinance, and that City Council of the C~ty of Denton, Texas hereby declares at would have
enacted such remalmng portaons despite any such invalidity
,qI~CTION g. Th~s ordanance shall become effective ~mmethately upon ats passage and
approval
PASSED AND APPROVED ttus the .__ day of
,2000
EULINE BROCK, MAYOR
ATTEST
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM
HERBERT ~Y, CIT~TORNEY
Page 2
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
Agenda[do_ D 7'- O
Agenda Item /' .~
Date__ /~)' ~' ~
AGENDA DATE:
DEPARTMENT:
ACM'
October 24, 2000
Parks and Re~r~.~
Dave Hill .~g~
SUBJECT:
Receive a report, hold a d~sousslon and give staff direction regarding City slgnage
BACKGROUND'
Council Members will recall the staff's presentation of a signage and way-finding system that
resulted from the City's Raise the Bar Campaign At that presentation on August 22nd, the
Council directed the staff to proceed with the design and implementation of the new system,
subject to some revisions to graphics and colors We have produced two signs that reflect these
changes and will present them to you at the work session on October 24th
Should the Council approve of the revised graphics and colors, we would suggest starting the
production of the slgnage system immediately, using the funds previously allocated to the
entrance monuments Although the full cost of installing the entire system is not yet determined,
we reeommand proeeechng as follows (priority order)
1 Site monument signs, vehicular and braiding dlrect~onal signs for City Hall, City
Hall East and City Hall West,
2 "Bmadcrumb" (street directional) signs for the above sites and for the Square,
3 Site, vehicular and building signs for parks, service centers, hbranes, recreation
centers and other principal City buildings,
4 All other slgnage, as funding permits
At this t~me, funding is available to begin implementation of the new s~gnage system on a few
active capital projects at South Lakes Park, North Lakes Park, hbrarles and other CIP project
locations In addztaon, the FY 2000-01 budget includes $25,000 for interior slgnage at City Hall
The staff,will continue to look for opportunities to install the new slgnage w~th existing operating
funds, park development funds and other resources
While some funds are available to beg~n a limited implementation, we believe It would be more
cost-effective to purchase and install the slgnage on a more comprehensive scale One possible
source of money for the new slgnage system may be the bond funds presently allocated to the
Entrance Monument project It has been determined that this project cannot be bmlt for less than
$230,000 Because some might consider this cost to be excessive for just one entrance
monument, we would advise the City Council to terminate this prtohJect and redirect the remmmng
funds ($221,508) to the new signage program On September 13 , the Denton Vision Coalmon
d~scussed the monument project, dete~i~mmg that the project should be teriiimated due to cost
(Extublt A) No formal action is reqmred to terminate tlus project and to reallocate the project
OPTIONS: 1 D~rect the sta~ to begin implementation of the new slgnage system with available funds,
mcludmg those designated for the enhance monuments,
2 D~rect staffto revise the slgnage program and/or funding proposal
RECOMMENDATION:
The staffrecon~mends the first option
ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PRO~-ECT:
Staff is propared to begin the production and installation of the slgnage system munedlately
PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW:
Work session of August 8, 2000
FISCAL I~FORMATION:
The remaining bond fund balance for th~s project is $221,508 Full cost of production ~s not
known at tlus ume
EXHIBITS:
~ Minutes of the September 13, 2000 meeting of the Denton Vls~on Collaborative
Respectfully subnutted
p dar~s°~an~' eDcr~/~on Department
F ~admin~C~y Councll~Emrmce Monument 10-24 O0 do~
A VISION FOR DENTON - THE 21sT CENTURY
DENTON VISION COLLABORATIVE
Minutes of the September 13, 2000, Meeting
Members Present: Eulme Brock, Mark Burroughs, Tim Charles, Bettye Myers, Shawn
Reneau, Andy Schoolmaster (for David Hartman)
Ex Officio: M~chael W Jez, Pat Gobble
Staff Present: Betty Williams, Rodney Mitchell
Do to a lack of quorum the meeting was not officially called to order - Eulme
Brock
II
Members present reviewed the proposed brochures of the Vision Report Card
Members asked question regarding some projects listed Shawn Reneau asked
for clarification on he Loop 288/Maylull connection
Pat Gobble stated she is working on the survey for past members She
sohcited suggestions from the group about the type of questions to ask
Responses are for future Vision groups
Bettye Myers stated she was like the brochure as a record of the projects, she
went on to state that m the beginning the group decided not have a book of
items
The odscusslon continued regarding potential questions for the survey, the
following were offered
Who should be the sponsor? What orgamzation should nutlate?
Would you like to participate again?
What part odd you play? What nut,al committee Odd you serve on?
Questions about funding
The way the V~sion proJect was funded was discussed Bettye Myers stated
that the nntial organizat~on offered funding m various ways TWU and UNT
as state entrees were unable to contribute money TWU set up a special
account, and UNT offered services such as coorodnating the videos
The brochures were talked about Ivflchael Jez explained to the group the
present brochure ~s example for the group to g~ve feedback The goal is to
have the Vision comrmttee or the Mayor representing the group to establish
the "Message to the Commumty '
3
Bettye Myers suggested the lustory be added as a part of the message
Tim Charles suggested on the front the cover stated "Final Report" to the
commumty Also suggested that the sponsoring orgamzations be more
noticeable Other mention the yellow lughhght was the standard method
Charles asked what was the timeline to distribute the brochure Myers stated
the sooner the better
The committee discussed who should receive the report The d~fferent
methods of &stnbutmg the report as well as costs were chscussed The
methods discussed were a Denton Record Chromcle insert dunng the
Wednesday paper, mml outs to old con~mttec members, web site, Channel 26
bulletin board, and/or a general mml out to the public
The group &scussed that the brochure as an insert m the newspaper would not
be a good idea It was stated that many insert are tossed to the s~de and not
reviewed Also the Vision fund only l~s an estimated $3200 The cost of
printing 42,000 brochures would exceed the budget
The comrmttee agreed to send brochures to the former committee members
Bettye Myers suggested Bill Patterson of the Record Chromcle be approached
to allow the Record Chromcle as donation put together a tabloid section m the
paper regarding the Vision project She stated the Record Chronicle use to
have regular coverage of the Vision ProJect
Mayor Brock also suggested the record Chromcle do a story on the Vision
project
Jez suggested lnmtmg the brochures to the former committee members and
doing a story m the paper and using Channel 26 as an alert advertising that the
brochures are available on the c~ty's website and by mad Jez offered and
suggested printing 7000 brochures, wluch covers the former comnuttee
members, placement of brochures m public bmlding areas, and some to msal
out
Charles asked how could the brochures be g~ven to others Betty Williams
replied that brochures are typically ~,uven to clwc groups, and at tunes
speakers are scheduled to speak to the groups
Betty Wllhams and Pat Gobble mentmned madmg the surveys w~th the
brochures The surveys would be an insert w~th brochures mailed to the
former members
4
Mayor Brock began a discussion on the Entrance Markers She stated her
concerns regarding the expense of the entrance markers at their current design
When the project was initially formed several years the cost was estimated at
$50,000, one marker w~ll now cost $200,000 that is the amount that was set-
aside for the 4 markers m the previous bond package
Mayor Brock went on to say the proposed marker is not he same, other
materials have been substituted to keep the price down She requested staff to
remove the marker from a recent City Council agenda, because she felt the
item was a controversial topic due to its costs, and the City Council was
working through a controversial budget process Mayor Brock apologized to
the group for removing the entrance marker from the City Council agenda
stating the entrance marker m its current state is deac]
Charles also stated, he understands how important the markers are to the
group and for the city, but the money is a lot and believes there are other ways
to achieve the special identity
Pat Gobble mentioned having something create an interest or creativity to
create an image/markers. She offered the example of a competition between
the two umversltles to create sometlung
The question was asked what was the major cost difference m the earlier
estimate and the actual prices It was stated the price of concrete had greatly
mcreased The rum of Carter and Burgess was used m the planning
Jez state m the Rase the Bar campmgn one of the systematic and themaUc
was for more and improved slgnage He went on to say that new thematic
slgnage could re-create excitement He also stated some of the money from
the markers could be used to help create the slgnage
The committee also discussed the missed opportunity to use corporate
sponsors to have the signs bmlt and placed Myers and others stated know is
too late the excitement Is gone and the markers are too expensive
The meeting adjourned
5
AGENDAiINFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE' October 24, 2000
DEPARTMENT:
DCM
Planning & Developmen~/~a~ement
David Hill, 349-8314
SUBJECT -Krum Release of ETJ
Receive a, report and give staff direction regarding a request from the City of Krum to release
approximately 7 acres, from the city's extraterritorial junsdlcUon generally located south of FM 1173
and east of Masch Branch Road
BACKGROUND ~
A proposed residential ~levelopment is proposed on and adjacent to the subject site The majority of
the proposed development lies within Kmm's city limits or extratemtonal jurisdiction (ETJ) A
portion of the proposed development (7 122 acres) is in the City of Denton's ETJ (Attachment 1)
The City of Krum has requested that the City of Denton relinquish the subject area to them
(Attachment 2)
Chapter 42 023 of Texas Local Government Code states" The extratemtonal jurisdiction of a
municipality may not be reduced unless the governing body of the municipality g~ves its written
consent by ordinance or resolution"
The proposed annexation by Krum is the continued eastward expansion of Krum into the City of
Demon's ETJ and Certificate of Convenience and Necessity area (CCN) for water and wastewater
utility service area The tract is also inside a dually certffied area for water service by the C~ty of
Denton and Bolivar WSC, although staff does not believe that BWSC has any facilities to provide
service in this lmmechate area The City of Denton is the only wastewater CCN holder for this
area but we do not have existing facilities for water or wastewater service readily available to
serve this area at the present time The closest facility for both water and wastewater service are in
the Ranch Estates subdivision to the southeast of the subject tract This tract is within Denton's
water distribution and wastewater collection system master planning area but there are no specific
projects planned in our five year CD to serve this area with the possible exception of the 900
service plane elevated storage tank project
Releasing the portion of the ETJ mdmated could affect Denton's ability to garner improvements
for FM 2164 (North Locust) in the future through the CIP or development as it is a TxDOT road
It appears that the subject area is bordered by 2164 on its east side 2164 in this area is shown as a
primary arterial on the City's Mobility Plan Primary arterials are normally expected to have at
least 3 lanes in each direction at build out In addition, it would most likely restrict our ability to
promote connectivity between developments in that area of our ETJ The City's ability to establish
bicycle, pedestrian and public transit facilities m this area in the future will be negatively affected
It would seem appropriate that the Ctty of Demon and the C~ty of Kmm define a speetfic boundary
hne through an mteflocal agreement, stmflar to the Argyle, Connth, Shady Shores and Htckory
Creek agreements made m the past Thts would prowde both crees wath specific hm~ts to future
expanston Otherwtse, tts posstble that addlttonal ETJ release requests would be submttted tn the
future Negotaataons would also enable the e~ty to verify the extsung Krum etty limits, which are
unclear at the present ttme
OPTIONS
· Dtrect staff to enter tnto negotmt~ons wtth the Clty Of Krum to draft an lnterlocal agreement
regarding the proposed property and future hmlts of annexations
· Dtrect staff to mfonn the Ctty of Kmm that the Ctty of Denton will not release the requested ETJ
· D~rect staff to prepare documentation tndteatmg that the property will be released to the C~ty of
Krum as requested
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the C~ty of Demon should enter ~nto negottat~ons wath the C~ty of Krum to draft
an lnterlocal agreement regardmg the proposed property and future hunts of aunexat~ons
FISCAL INFORMATION
None at th~s t~me
ATTACHMENTS
1 Locatton Map
2 Request Letter from the C~ty of Sanger
Prepared by
Asststant D~rector of Planning and Development
Respeetf~lly~~.~sub.mt~ed
Douglas~S Powell, AIC~' '
Dtrector of Planning and Development
,/
Railroads
Road-network
Proposed project
Krum-Sanger
Krum
Sanger
DentorkCitylimits
COD
ETJ
Denton-Krum-Etj
DEI'~rON
[--~IKRUM
ENGINEERING & TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL WEST BUILDING
22t NORTH ELM STREET
DENTON TEXAS 76201
PHONE 940 349-8358
4000 0 4000 8000 Feet
N
1~ Volume 3, ~a&e 5 of the plat Recor~ and des~ctbed
27 an~ the East ~tne o[ ~esch ~canch Road ns monume, ted a d~stance of ~20,6~
concrete mo~Umen~ ~ound ~t iht Northeast cornet
27 a dlstance o[ ~20 B0 [~et to a conCCet~ monument :Bund et the ~outhea~t
cornet theceo~ in the ~tth Line BI Tract 3G,
TH~NC~ Ho~th 89 Degrees 53 Hinutes 33 Seconds ~es~ vith tho South Line o[ Tract
acres of
7 1~ ACRES
F~ELD NOTES tO all [hat ce~a~n tra~ o[ land being a pa~ o~ Tra~ 27 e~ L~tUe Brook Estaies Unit
No 2 an add~Uon In Benton County, Texas, according to fha plat thereof re~rded ~n Volume 3
Page 5 of fha Plat ReceSs of Den[on County, Texas as recognized and occup~e~ on the ground
the subje~ tr~c[ bemg more pa~culady described as
BEGINNING for the NoAhweSt Comer o~ the tract being descnbed here~n at a concre[e
monum~t ~ound for the NoAhwe~ Comer of sa~d Tract 27 in the Sou[h nghi-of-way of P M
H~ghway 1173 and the East ~ne of Masc~ 8ranc~ Road,
~ENCE No~h 89 D~rees 44 Mmutes 51 Seconds Ea~ with t~e Noah line of said Tra~ 27 and
fha Sout~ Imm of sa~d highway, generally alon~a ~ence a distance ol 416 47 rest to a 1/2" ~ron
rod ~[ound for the NoAheast Comer of sa~d Tract 27 same being fha No~hwest Comer o~ Tract
28 t¢o~ which [~e remoras 0¢ an old concrete monument was found lymg nea~y
THENCE Sou[h 00 Oegrees 09 Minutes 01 Seconds East w~th the ~st line Bt sa~d Lot 27 a
d~s[ance Bt 745 53 feet to a concre[e monument found for the NoAheast Comer of [hat cease
[ra~ o~ o~ sa~d Tra~ 27, ~scnbed ~n the deed to Denton Baptt~ AssOC, receded m Volume
2680 Page 583 of t~e Resl Pro~ ReceSs o~ Denton County Texas,
THENCE Norlh 89 Degrees 47 Minutes 08 Seconds West w~th the Noffh hne of sa~Q Bapbs[
tract, severing sai~ Tra~ 27 a dl~ance o~ 417 74 feet to a 1/2" i~n tod found for fha NoAhwest
Corner of said Baphst t~ct ~ fha We~t hne of sa~d Tra~ 27 and the East hne of sa~d Masch
Branch Road,
THENCE NoAA 00 Degrees 03 Mmutes 10 Seconds West ~th sa~d E~ line and the West hne
of Sa~d Tract 27, generally along a fence o~upy~ng the East I~ne
742 13 feel ~0 fha p~CE OF BEGINNING an~enclosmg 7 122 acres o¢ land
Phone (940) 482-3491
May 22, 2000
Dawd Hill
Director of Planmng
C~ty of Denton
215 E MeKmney
Denton, TX 76201
RE Annexauon Request
Mr Hill,
Fax (940) 482-3020
Enclosed please find a copy of a petition for annexauon received by the C~ty of Krum
Thas property hes w~th~n your Extra Terntonal Junsdlctmn The City of Krum would
hke to proceed with flus annexation as requested by the property owners However the
mty would first hke to deternune ffthe C~ty of Denton has an object,on to th~s
annexation
Please contact myself or Conrad Shffflett, at (940) 482-3491 to d~scuss this matter
Thank you for your prompt attentmn to th~s matter
Smcerely,
Floyd 'Watson,
Mayor, C~ty of Krum
Enclosures Annexation petition
Map of the proposed area
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE: October 24, 2000
DEPARTMENT:
DCM
P lanmng & D evelopm~ment
David Hill, 349-8314 ' xd~
SUBJECT - Singer Release of ETJ
Receive a report and give staff direction regarding a request from the City of Singer to release
approximately 670 acres, from the city's division I1 extraterntonal jurisdiction generally located west
of FM 2164 and north of Nmholsun Road
BACKGROUND
The City of Singer is workong to bnng a large retirement community to Singer The majority of the
proposed development lies within Singer's city limits or extraterntonal jurisdiction (ETJ) A port~on
of the proposed development (approximately 670 acres) is m the C~ty of Denton's division II ETJ
(Attachment 1) The C~ty of Singer has requested that the City of Denton rehnqmsh the subject area
to them (Attachment 2)
)~ Chapter 42 023 of Texas Local Government Code states, "The extraterntonal junsdmtmn of a
mumclpahty may not be reduced unless the governing body of the munlclpahty g~ves its written
consent by ordmance or resolution"
>' The subject property lies adjacent to but outside of the Certificate of Convenience and Necessity
(CCN) area assigned to the City of Denton for water and wastewater utthty servme As a result, it
also hes outside but adjacent to any service area currently being planned for in our ex]stmg and/or
draft water distribution or wastewater collection system master plans for the City of Denton
There are several small private water systems m the vicinity of this development and two larger
water supply corporations, Bolivar WSC and Green Spnngs WSC There is no current
wastewater provider m this area other than the abutting C~ty of Denton CCN for wastewater
service Denton does have a basle interest m how water and wastewater servmes will be prowded
to this property since Denton will likely be revolved m the water supply through contract
arrangements with the Upper Tnmty Regional Water District and/or the City of Singer The
siting of a wastewater treatment plant on the site adjacent to the City's CCN and ETJ is likely to
also be an issue of interest and/or concern As a mlmmum, Denton would hke to have some
mvolvemant m discharge permit limits, odor control and site screemng issues This proposed
wastewater treatment plant will discharge effluent through the C~ty of Denton's ETJ and CCN as
well as it's water supply source, Lake Lewisvllle Additional enviromnental issues and concerns
are identified m an e-marl from Juhe Smith, Enwronmental Compliance Manager (Attachment 3)
~ Releasing the subject area could reduce the C~ty's ability to garner improvements to FM 1173 or
Masch Branch Road through the CIP or development FM 1173 is a TxDOT road and is shown as
a secondary arterml on the City's Mobility Plan Secondary arterials normally have at least two
lanes an each direction at bmld out Maseh Branch Road is a county road and is shown as a
collector street on the city's mobility plan Collector streets are typically 2 or 4 lanes wide at budd
out In addition, releasing this area from the ETJ will restrict the c~t~es ability to promote
connectivity between developments m this area of our ETJ The City's ablhty to establish bmycle,
pedestrian, and public transit facilities in this area m the future will also be negatively affected
connectlvfly between developments in this area of our ETJ The City's ability to estabhsh bicycle,
pedestrian, and public transit facilities m this area m the future could also be negatively affected
It would seem appropriate that the City of Denton and the City of Sanger define a specific
boundary hne subject to ~nterlocal agreement similar to the Argyle, Corinth, Shady Shores and
Hmkory Creek agreements made m the past Tlus would provide staff the opportunity to address
the ~ssues ,and concerns ~dentlfied ~n the staff report
OPTIONS
· Direct staff to enter into negottataons v~th the City of Sanger to draft an lnterloeal agreement
regarding,the proposed property and future hm~ts of annexations
· Direct staff to inform the C~ty of Sanger that the City of Denton will not release the requested ETJ
· D~rect staffto prepare the necessary documentation to release the ETJ to the City of Sanger
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the C~ty of Denton should enter into negotiations w~th the City of Sanger to
draft an lnterlocal agreement regarding the proposed property and future hmlts of annexations
FISCAL INFORMATION
None at th~s time
ATTACHMENTS
1 Location Map
2 Request Letter from the C~ty of Sanger
3 E-marl letter addressing enwronmental concerns
Prepared by
~al~ R~elchhart
AsSistant D~rector of Planmng and Development
Respectfully submitted
! .
Director of Planning and Development
Rsilroad~
Road-network
KnJm
~ 8anger
,Denton Cltyllmlts
D~ton ~um-E~l
.~_~ DENTON
KRUM
N
8000 0
ENGINEERING & TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL WEST BUILDING
221 NORTH ELM STREET
DENTON,TEXAS 76201
PHONE 940-349-8358
8000 Feet
ATTACHMENT 2
Someptace ~p.clal
To Mike Jez, City Manager, City of Denton
From. Jack Smith, City Manager, City of Sanger
Re Release of division II ETJ
Date September 22, 2000
As you may be aware, we are actively workmg to bnng a large reUrement co~i~,~y to
Sanger The vast majority of the property lies w~hln our cn'y hmlts or extraterritorial
jurisdiction ('ET3") A portion of the proposed district (apprwgmntely 670 Acres) is located
~thm your dn~ision H of extraterntorisl jurisdiction The property we are referring to is
north of Nichoison Road and west of FM 2164 Attached is a copy of the C~ty of Denton'a
boundary map,
The City of Sanger requests that Denton relinq, lsh extratenltorisl ~misdlction to the C~y of
Sanger for four reasons First, the City of Sanger would like to be the jurisdiction that
regulates the platting of the commuRity Second, the City is desirous oflocatmg a wastewater
treatment plant in the dlvisiun II ETJ area we are reque~iag release Third, only about
eighteen, percent (18%) of the land in the community falls Ohm your ETJ Fourth, we are
currently negotiating an ~nexation agreement regardmg the affected land
As you are aware, the Local Government Code 212 007 provides that the anthonty
responsible for appro-ang a plat for a tract of land that is in more than one municipahty is the
municipality that has the largest population - in flus instance it is the City of Denton Your
subdndston regulations would apply, and it is my understanding that Denton's regulations do
not require platting in their division II ETS Therefore, the County would be the approving
authority for ~_hi~ project The City of Sanger would prefer to be the governing authority
over the platting and ~mnexation issues of the couii~ If the Cn'y of Denton rehnq,,izhes
the small pomon ofthak division II ET3 then the City of $anger would have the authority to
epprovo the plats of the coiim~unity We believe that this would result in better control and a
better project
Your ,mmedlato attention to this request would be greatly apprecmted
Please see the attached map for darification,
· ity Manager
201 BOLIVAR ~TREET 8ANGER, TEXA~ 76266 940-498-T950
P.O. BOX ~78 940.458.4180 FAX
ATTACHMENT 3
Utlhty Admxnlstratlone215 E McKlnney StreeteDenton, Texas, 76201
Telephone (940) 349-8230*FAX (940) 349-8120
MEMORANDUM
TO Larry Remhhart, Asmstant Planmng D~rector
FROM Juhe Smith, Enwronmental Comphance Manager
DATE 10 October 2000
SUBJECT Sanger ETJ Request
The 670 acre area Sanger is requesting includes significant amounts of Environmentally Sensitive Areas
(ESAs) Specifically, floodplain, stream buffers, and riparian habitats will be at risk I beheve Dale Hoeltmg
Is addressing the floodplain and stream buffer issues, I will focus my comments on the riparian habitats
The canopy associated with the creek includes species indicative of a riparian zone (Cottonwood, Green
Ash, Black Willow, Pecan) as well as a floodplain zone (Hackberry, Cedar Ehn, Bur Oak) As you know,
these bottomland hardwood ecosystems are quickly disappearing from our region Only an estimated 20%
of the original 6 5 million hectares m the entire state of Texas remain Because of the importance of these
decreasing ecosystems, discussed below, It is imperative to protect the few remammg If Denton
relinquishes ETJ m this area, Denton will obviously also relinquish irs ability to protect these vet-/
unportant ESAs
Such a diverse tree canopy and its related understory support a rich habitat for wildlife including mammals
(raccoons, opossum, armaddlo, coyote), birds (egrets, herons, and numerous song birds), turdes, snakes,
and insects Without preservation and protection, wildlife habitats and the species they support will
continue to disappear tn the face of rapid urbanization
However, habitat preservation is not the only issue The associated creeks and the watershed they drain
flow into Clear Creek Clear Creek then flows into the Elm Fork on the southern end of the Greenbelt
Elm Fork, of course, continues on to Lewisvdle Lake, the City of Denton's water supply Riparian habitat
acts as a filter, hmitmg the amount of pollutants streams receive By preserving these habitats, water quahty
can also be protected Though the Greenbelt project has preserved the riparian habitat along the Elm Fork,
this natural system cannot absorb pollutants from urban runoff and sedimentation If Clear Creek is
permitted to develop without any protection Water quality degradation will be inevitable
Should Denton approve Sanger's request, I recommend that m exchange for the 670 acre parcel, Sanger
must agree to implement protection of the ESAs as required by the Denton Development Code I also
strongly suggest that the proposed Development Code, not the interim, be the authority
If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call me
"Dedicated to Quahty Servzce"
www cttyofdenton com
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE' October 24, 2000
DEPARTMENT.
CM/DCM/ACM:
SUBJECT:
Public Informat~/~ ?rice
Michael W Jez T
View the video lntroductlon to City Cotmefl Meetings and provide staff direction on how to
proceed
BACKGROUND:
To upgrade the professional ~mage of our meeting coverage on Channel 26, an introduction to
Council meetings has been produced The introduction will air before each hve Council meeting
and also before each replay of Council meetings
OPTIONS·
1 Beg~n playtng the introduction at the November 7th meeting
2 Make any modfficat~ons to the ~ntroductlon and begin playing before the November 7th
meeting (or as soon after the changes are completed as recommended by Council)
3 Do not use proposed introduction
RECOMMENDATIONS.
Staff recommends opUon 1
ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT.
Start November 7th or as soon thereafter as posmble
PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Councfl~ Boards~ Commission) N/A
FISCAL INFORMATION: N/A
Respectfully submitted
Betty/~l]llat~
Director of Pubhc Information/Management
Prepared by~
Kelth Reeves
Cable TV Producer/D~rector
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
Agenda item-
Oate~
AGENDA DATE
DEPARTMENT
ACM
October 24, 2000
Utility Administration
Howard Martin, Assistant City Manager/Utilities ~
SUBJECT
Staff will present information regarding Phase II of the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Storm Water Program (Program) and its impact on the City
of Denton
BACKGROUND
The Clean Water Act (CWA), authorized in 1972, ongmally focused on improving water
quality by reducing pollutants from point sources, primarily discharges of andustnal
wastewater and mummpal wastewater However, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) soon realized that improving point sources was insufficient, non point sources
would also have to be addressed to meet water quality standards
Storm water runoff from large surface areas, both urban and agricultural areas, is a direct
result of land d~smrbance In the case of urban runoff, impervious surfaces replace
formerly pervious areas, eliminating the natural filtration system and increasing
pollutants such as hydrocarbons (especially from parking lots and streets) and
sedimentation from construction projects The EPA describes storm water as follows
When it rains or snows, the water that rans off city streets, parking lots, and
construction sites can wash sediment, oil, grease, toxics, pathogens, and other
pollutants into nearby storm drams Once the pollution has entered the sewer
system, it is discharged - untreated - into local streams and waterways Known
as storm water runoff, this pollution ts a leading threat to pubhc health and the
enwronment today (EPA-833-F-99-020, emphases added )
In 1987, Congress amended the Clean Water Act to regulate storm water discharges The
EPA developed a comprehensive two-phased national program Phase I of the Program
required permits for discharges associated with industrial activity such as construction
projects disturbing 5 or more acres Phase I also included mumclpallt~es of 100,000 or
more with separate storm water systems
Despite the many efforts to reduce the negative ~mpacts of storm water runoff, a 1996
national water quality inventory indicated that of the water bo&es ~n the United Sates that
do not meet water quahty standards, 40% were ~mpmred primarily because of polluted
storm water runoff Consequently, m 1998, the EPA proposed Phase II of the Program
for munlclpaht~es w~th a population of less than 100,000 For those roues, hke Denton,
that fall under Phase II of the program, the c~t~es must (1) prolub~t ~lhc~t discharges
through ordinances, (2) develop and ~mplement a regulatory program to address
constructmn sate runoff, and (3) develop programs to m~mm~ze storm water runoff from
new development In ad&tmn, storm water facfl~tms owned by a mumc~pahty (such as
vehicle mmntenance factht~es) must have a permit in place by March 10, 2003
Staff will &scuss the reqmrements of the Phase II Storm Water Program and the
assocmted costs for the C~ty of Denton
R~fully submitted
Jul¢ lt( J
E~onme'rrtaT Comphance Manager
Exhlbtt I
V~deo Presentation
Powerpoint Presentation
2
' 1
~k-k1
13
18
19
23
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE'
DEPARTMENT
ACM'
October 24, 1999
Utthty Admlmstratmn
Howard Martin, Asmstant C~ty Manager/Utfl~t~esC~X"~
SUBJECT
Staff will present information concerning the Umted States Army Corps of Engineers'
(Corps) recent Enwronmental Assessment for Lake Lewlsvllle, the City of Denton's
response, the City of D allas's response and a potentml lawsmt by a homeowners' group
BACKGROUND
As you may recall, the Corps of Engineers developed a Programmatic Environmental
Assessment (PEA) last year for Lake Lewmvflle as the second phase of a two-phase
carrying capacity and use study for the lake The two-volume draft proposal's propose
was to detenmne the carrying capacity of the Lake, w~th a supposed focus of the impact
water-related recreation has on natural resources By determ~mng the carrying capamty
for the,Lake, the Corps could then determine whether the natural resources could absorb
any further water-related development
Because the C~ty of Denton, along w~th many other ent~tms, including the City of Dallas,
found the PEA inadequate, the C~ty refused to endorse the PEA (I have attached a copy
of the City of Denton's PEA comments fi.om last year ) The Corps determined that the
Lake, despite a concurrent finding that the natural resources were negatively impacted
dunng,lugh use penods, could tolerate additional manna facilities Among other reasons
for opposing the PEA, both the C~t~es of Denton and Dallas c~ted the absence of any
water quabty data to support the Corps' conclusions An obvious omission fi.om the
report was any discussion of the Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) levels that had
become a concern to the C~tles Despite the many objections the Corps received from
various stakeholders, the Corps stood by ~ts original finding and opened the Lake for
manna development
Under the National Enwronmental Protection Act, the Corps must conduct an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for any proposed projects wluch will result ~n an
exceedence of the carrying capamty for the Lake Despite the fact that the Corps admits
that the carrying capamty for the Lake ~s currently exceeded, the Corps failed to do an
EIS Instead, the Corps only conducted an Environmental Assessment Like the PEA,
the City finds the EA not only inappropriate (an EIS should have been conducted), but
also fatally inadequate The City of Denton's comments on the EA are attached
The Corps makes it clear in the EA that they intend to avoid their legal obligation to
conduct an EIS by relying on an "alternative method" for lake development The Corps'
alternative consists of zoning the Lake into three distinct areas and considering carrying
capacaty wathln each zone only, as af the lake can somehow be physically partitioned
(Please see the attached map )
Zone A is the only zone currently excee&ng its carrying capacity, according to the Corps
The fallacy of this approach is obvious on its face regardless of where you build
mannas, boats are going to travel over the entare lake Because most of the amenities
(restaurants, boat docks, etc ) are in Zone A, it is the most popular zone on the lake
Zone A also contmns the City's intake structure for our raw water supply In other
words, the Corps' recommendatmns will result in an zncrease in the number of boats
traveling in an area of the Lake that already exceeds as carrying capacaty
Like the PEA, the EA recommendataons are driven by population/recreation demands and
fall to adequately analyze envaronmental ampacts of further development on the lake
The EA as not truly an environmental assessment but rather a lustfficatlon for more boat
shps Because the EA fmls to assess the enwronmental ~mpacts of development and
recreataon use, the City of Denton d~d not endorse the draft EA Likewise, the City of
Dallas also found the EA inadequate, citing unresolved water quahty issues
A related fihng by Jim Blackburn, representing a group of homeowners on the Lake,
outhnes beyond question the Corps' legal obligations with respect to enwronmental
assessments Similar to the City of Denton's filing, Mr Blackburn points out the
numerous inconsistencies, ambiguities and lack of supporting documentation for the
Corps' calculations and conclusions I beheve it is the intention of th~s group to sue the
Corps should the Corps attempt to issue permits for further development without first
conducting an EIS
The Caty of Denton faces serious ramlficataons from further development on the Lake
Staffbeheves that a properly conducted EIS would confirm that the Lake is sagmficantly
beyond 1ts carrying capacity with respect to natural resources, and that water quahty in
particular is negatively impacted Even w~thout water-related development, future
growth m the Lake's watershed, wath ats anevltable non-point source pollution, wall only
exacerbate water and mr quahty problems Add manna and manna-related development
on the Lake itself, and water quahty wall degrade further
With the City of Denton's only antake for ats water supply located on Lake Lewlsvflle, it
is lmperatave that the City protects tfus resource An EIS is the first step toward proper
management of a reservoir whose primary function as flood control and mumc~pal water
supply, not recreation
ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT
The Corps w~ll meet on October 18, 2000, with the Cities of Dallas and Denton and the
TNRCC and the EPA The City of Dallas requested this meeting to present additional
water quahty data Hopefully, the Cities will be able to convince the Corps to decline the
requests for additional manna slips
PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW
The Pubhc Utllmes Board recelved a report from staff on September 18, 2000 Also, the
City Council Environmental Com_mlttee (Councflmembers Cochran, Durrance, and
Knstoferson) discussed the issue at length at their meeting on September 8, 2000
MAP
A map of the Corps zones for Lake Lew~sville is attached as the last page of this packet
Respectfully submltte, rt
Smith - ~'
ronmental Compliance Manager
Exhibit I
Exlub~t II
Exhibit III
Exhibit IV
City of Denton Comments
City of Dallas' Comments
Homeowners' Comments
Lewlsvllle Lake Map
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
UtilityAdmlmstrationo215 E McKinney Street. Denton, Texas 76201
Telephone (940) 349-8230.FAX (940) 349-8120
5 September 2000
Marcia R Hackett
NEPA Technical Manager
Un~ted States Army Corps of Engineers
Ft Worth D~strmt, CESWF-EV-EE
PO Box17300
Ft Worth, Texas 76102-0300
RE
Enwronmental Assessment for Water-Related Recreation Development, Lew~swlle
Lake, July 2000
Dear Ms Hackett
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the U S Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) Environmental
Assessment for Water-Related Recreabon Development at Lew/sv/lle Lake, Lew~swlle, Texas (EA)
The C~ty of Denton (City) agrees that the Corps ~s legally bound to conduct an Environmental Impact
Statement (ELS) for any proposed projects that wdl exceed the carrying capacity for Lew~swlle Lake
(Lake) The underlying Programmatic Enwronmental Assessment (PEA) unequivocally states that the
Lake's carrying capacity will be exceeded during certain bmes of hlgh use (See Exhibit 13, PEA, w~th
emphases" ,the Corps concedes that Zone A [of the Lake] wdl sometimes exceed Its mm~mum
resource protection ") Further, logic dictates that any addlt~onal boabng-related projects w~il only
exacerbate the problem The EA ~tself states the following on the first page
The findings of the PEA concluded that the requests to Increase the number of vessels on the
Lake would exceed the carry[lng] capacity estabbshed by the Corps ~n the Lew~sv~/le Lake Water-
Related Development Pohcy
Therefore, the Corps ~s legally bound to conduct an ElS An EA simply does not fulfill the Corps' legal
obhgatlons
Alternative Zoning and Carrying Capacities
Page 1 of the EA states that "[lin order to avoid exceeding the carrying capacity of the Lake requ~nng an
ElS, an alternative was developed "It appears that the Corps' basic assumption ~s that by zoning the
Lake, the marinas located in Zones B and C w$11 not adversely ~mpact the carrying capacity of Zone A
The Corps ~s apparently of the opinion that ~ts "alternative" bypasses the necessity of an ElS The City
strongly disagrees
4
"Dedwated to ~uahty Serv,ce ,, ,.. . . ,r- ¥ I-I,,,.,,I ~ I T, ,I
Despite representabons to the contrary, the Corps' alternabve zomng scheme ~s not sufficient to remove
~ts obhgat~on to conduct an ElS There ~s no "alternative," shod of remowng boats from Zone A, that w~ll
reduce the boat traffic ~n Zone A to the Corps' own carrying capacity hm~ts Zone A exceeds ~t carrying
capacity and w~ll continue to do so In fact, the boat traffic wdl only ~ncrease ~n Zone A as water-related
fac;hbes - regardless of where they are built - are permitted to develop on the Lake Consequently, there
Is no way for the Corps to "avoid" an ElS
The bus~est and most used, Zone A contains most of the Lake's entertainment amenities (restaurants,
boat ramps, etc ), the intake structure for the City of Denton s entire drinking water supply, and the outlet
structure associated with the C~ty of Dallas' drinking supply If the Corps actually believes that boats will
stay only In the zones where their associated marina or boat ramp [s located, it could be argued that NO
more manna development be permitted in Zone A, including the 'pre-approved" 97 vessel-equivalents In
fact, the alternative" wdl only increase boat traffic in Zone A, the one zone on the Lake that the Corps
admits already exceeds its carrying capacity Instead of permitting additional boat shps on the Lake, the
C~ty beheves the Corps should be developing alternatives which would reduce the boat traffic in Zone A,
not increase It The Corps' creative alternative consists of a zoning scheme less for enwronmental
protection than as a rationale for increased boat usage on the Lake If the Corps sincerely believes the
natural resources assocmted w~th the Lake can sustain additional boating, then, at the very least, conduct
the required ElS to support those assumpbons~
The City also questions the Corps' apparent eagerness to avoid an EIS in the face of cnbcal - and
outstanding ~ environmental Issues The Corps' obligations, as you well know, include enwronmental
stewardship Avoiding environmental assessments ~s in d~rect opposlbon to the Corps' own mission The
slgmficant water quality ~ssues, many Imposed by recreahonal pressures, alone merit further
enwronmental investigation in the form of an ElS The C~ty of Denton strongly encourages the Corps to
reconsider its decision and conduct the obhgatory ElS
EA Inadequacies
Even If an EIS was not reqmred, the EA sbll falls to stand on its own merit or in conjunction w~th the
underlying PEA As you know, the City found the underlying PEA sufficiently inadequate to withhold the
City's endorsement (For your convenience, I have attached a copy of the C~ty's PEA comments )
Because the EA Is "tiered' to the PEA and relies on its findings2, the City of Denton believes the EA is
fatally flawed Even If the underlying PEA were credible, the City believes the EA could not stand on ~ts
own merits for the reasons outlined below
"Vessel Equivalent" Assumptions
The EA, echoing the PEA, continually recommends an increase of a "274 vessel equwalent" Th~s ~s
terribly m~sleadlng As noted in the City of Denton's PEA comments, the Corps uses a 1 10 ratio that ~s,
1 The EA fa~ls to note the Corps' underlying Lew[swlle Lake Future Water-Related Development Pohcy regarding
resource protect[on (See Exlubat 13 of the PEA ) That document clearly states" the Corps concedes that Zone
A w~ll somettmes exceed ars mlmraum resource proteetmn and user enjoyment level of 606 boats" (Emphasas
added ) The EA does not apparently address tins assue The onmss~on of the natural resource n:npact of the excess
carrying capaczty as troubling More confusing, however, ts the mconsastency of the Pohcy's hrmt of 606 vessel
eqmvalents and the PEA/EA's hrmt of 631 vessel eqmvalents, or the difference of 250 shps m Zone A The Caty
subrmts that the basis for deteI'lmnmg the carrying capamty of the Lake as fallacaous
From page 4 of the EA" Whenever a PEA has been prepared and a subsequent EA or EIS ts reqmred for a sate-
specffic action included vatlnn the program akeady evaluated, the more specific EA or EIS need only refer to
perttnent data from the PEA and focus on specific mapacts of the proposed project"
5
at best, arbitrary Thru "equivalent" translates into as many as 2,740 additional shps (Even the Corps'
own consultant, Geo-Manne, recommended a smaller ratio of 1 5, or 1,370 shps The s~gmficant
deferences among "experts" of what these ratios should be ~nd~cates a lack of rehabd[ty any of these
numbers can offer ) The C~ty strongly beheves that 2,740 additional shps/boat ramps/parking places
translate ~nto far more than 274 addit~onal boats Lake-wide Because the conclusions throughout the
entire EA are based on these unsupportable ratios, the EA ~tself is not supportable
Water Quahty
The City commends the Corps for analyzing more water quality ~nformatlon than d~d the underlying PEA
However, there are some slgmflcant deficiencies
The City appreciates the role of federal and state agencies in environmental protection The Corps' own
m~ss~on statement emphasizes the Importance of environmental protection
/n afl aspects of natural and cultural resources management, the Corps promotes
awareness of environmental values and adheres to sound enwronmental
stewardship, protect/on, comp/lance and restoration practices [PEA, Page 3, emphases
added ]
The City notes that the Corps' m~sslon statement stands alone It does not rely on other agencies to
determine what consbtutes environmental protection More specific to Lake Lewlsvllle ~s the Corps'
Master Plan, Design Memorandum No lC, June 1985, which states
The preservation and enhancement of natural resource values is an area which is becoming
Increasingly Important as surrounding urbanization pressures threaten to decrease their value
The Corps of Engineers has a stewardship responsibility for the natural resources of the
Lew~$ville project and should use Its professional expertise to preserve them (Emphases
added )
G~ven that "urbamzatlon pressures" are even greater now than when the Corps wrote the above
statement ~n 1985, the Corps' obhgatlons to protect the natural resources of the Lake are that much
greater If the Corps IS ~n possession of information concerning protection of natural resources, even ~f
other agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Texas Natural Resources
Conservabon Commission (TNRCC) do not currently address those enwronmental concerns, the Corps,
by ~ts own mission statement, must apply "sound environmental stewardship" in relation to these ~ssues
The City beheves the Corps rehes far too heavily on the assumptions, most of which are currently being
challenged or are under recons~deratlon, of ~ts sister agencies In so doing, the Corps ~s avoiding the
obhgat~ons set forth ~n ~ts own m~ss~on statement
For ~nstance, the d~scusslon on page 5 of the EA concermng the 303(d) hst falls to acknowledge the
~nherent problems associated w~th th~s state program from ~ts inception Though some stream segments
originally listed as degraded were questionable, the current rap~d dellstlng of segments ~n the latest
TNRCC rewew Is highly debatable To rely on the dehst[ng of these segments as an ~nd~cator that all ~s
well Jn the watershed associated w~th the Lake is questionable
The City ~s grateful for the Inclusion of at least some of the available Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE)
information However, this information ~s faulty in several areas For instance, the Corps rehes on the
EPA's range for taste and odor as being 20-40 parts per b~lhon (ppb) Th~s is extremely h~gh according to
most states that regulate MTBE and, perhaps more ~mportantly, any water suppher responsible for
dehvenng potable water to ~ts customers As you know, Dallas personally experienced MTBE
contaminated water as a result of the Lake Tawakon~ spdl Consumers of that water noted a taste
d~fference at 5ppb and an Inablhty to drink the water at rates as Iow or lower than 15ppb Extensive data
collected by the C~ty of Dallas and various other affected commumt~es ~s available and should have been
reviewed before accepting an EPA guldehne which [s even now under reconsideration The C~ty, as a
pubhc water suppher, is confident that Its citizens would rightly refuse to dnnk water w~th contamination
levels as h~gh as 20 ppb The City encourages the Corps to reconsider its rehance on the Interim EPA
guideline for MTBEs
The MTBE data proffered by the Corps does not ~nclude any recent data, data which the City believes
indicates the strong possibility of conbnu~ng increases in the level of MTBEs in the Lake The Cities of
Denton and Dallas have both continued to momtor for MTBE since the Umvers~ty of North Texas study
mentioned ~n the EA was conducted However, none of th~s data appears to be ~ncluded ~n the EA
The studies referred to ~n the EA that were conducted by the TNRCC and the U S Geological Service for
MTBEs in Texas Lakes are limited representations only because of the samphng techmque Though the
EA mentions on page 6 that the studies indicated that MTBE levels ~n 75% of Texas Lakes was barely
detectable," and that Lake Lewlswlle only showed a level of 1 14ppb, these results are questionable on
their face The scientist responsible for coord]nabng these studies at TNRCC explained to the C~ty that
these samples were taken ~n the middle of the lakes where d~lutlon m open water s~gn~ficantly reduced
levels of MTBEs3 The Corps is well aware that MTBE ~s h~ghly soluble, the very characteristic that
makes it so difficult to remove from a water supply once it has been introduced, and so therefore will
dilute quickly A more representative tesfing techmque ~s to test ~n more confined areas such as mannas
and coves (This difference ~n samphng explains why the UNT samphng m the C~ty's intake cove for its
dnnklng water had a concentration level of 13 5ppb wh~le the TNRCC only had a concentration level of
'1 14ppb in the middle of the same Lake )
Page 13 of the EA mentions that the Corps has had "personal communication" with the EPA, Region 6,
concerning the Impact of add~bonal boats on the MTI3E levels ~n the Lake The unnamed EPA
representative apparently indicated through personal commun~cafion that the ~ncrease ~n boats "would not
be expected to ~ncrease the levels of MTBE "Th~s supposed assurance ~s not very reassuring At the
very least, the EA should intimate how the EPA arnved at ~ts conclusion
The fact that the EPA "is conslderrng reducing or phasing out the use of MTBE as an addlbve in
gasohne" (page 6) is an ~nteresbng Inclus~on The Corps apparently offers th~s as m~t~gat]on for not taking
any steps toward limiting MTBEs m the Lake as part of Its recommendations Presumably, because EPA
may phase MTBE out ~n the future, the Corps wews MTBE as a temporary ~ssue The more obvious
message Is that EPA sees MTBE as a serious enough environmental problem to consider, as California
has already done, phasing ~t out (EPA clearly [s not comfortable with s~mply relying on a 20-40ppb range
to protect water quahty) Until MTBE ~s actually phased out, however, the Corps must address it as
serious ongoing water quahty issue
Conclusion
The Conclusion, on page 19 of the EA, summarizes why the EA lacks cred~b~hty Specifically, the
Conclusion states the following
The findings of the PEA concluded that requests affecting the number of vessels on the Lake
would exceed the carry[rog] capacity established by the Corps
Based upon the conclusions of potent/al impacts resulting from mult/p/e ant/ties proposed
act/v/t/es as presented m this EA and the carrying capacity policy author/zed/n the PEA, the
activities are anticipated to result in no significant adverse impacts, e/ther md/v/dual~y, or
cumulatively "(Emphases added )
3 Even the extensive MTBE spill at Lake Tawakom was s~gmficantly diluted by the tLme the plume reached the
center of the lake
The City of Denton understands that the Corps reconciles these observations - that the carryrng capacity
~s exceeded on the one hand, but that the proposed acbwt~es pose no s~gn~ficant enwronmental ~mpacts
to the Lake on the other hand - by "zoning" the Lake, thus controlling the number of boats permitted ~n
each zone Zoning the Lake is an Inadequate approach, at best, to controlling boat traffic on the Lake
Its ability to minimize adverse environmental impacts ~s even more dubious
If the Conclusion alone does not suffice to demonstrate the inherent weakness ~n the EA, perhaps the
small but revealing paragraph entitled Socioeconomic Resources on page 6 better ~ndlcates the Corps'
apparent philosophical position That paragraph details the tremendous growth expected throughout the
Metroplex
The decade [1990-2000] has brought over one m/fi/on new faces to the region, w/th 70 percent of
that growth occurnng over the last five years The four core count/es around Lew/sv/lle Lake,
Colhn, Denton, Dallas, and Tarrant, captured 85 percent of all regional growth The sigmflcance
of the population trends and projections of the Lew~swlle Lake area to this document ls
that a tremendous demand for recreational o~cortun~tles has been created by population
growth (Emphases added )
The C~ty of Denton must argue that the s~gmflcance of the population growth "to th~s document' - an
environmental assessment, not a marketing document - ~s not recreational opportun~bes but rather Its
negative ~mpact on our natural resources, specifically water and a~r quahty
The Lake's primary purposes, built and financed not only by the Corps but also by the C[bes of Denton
and Dallas, are for flood control and public water supply As the Corps' own Lew~swlle Lake Master Plan,
Design Memorandum No 1C, June 1985, states on page x-1
The Lew~swlle Lake project facilities, pubhc lands, and water areas are used ~n a w~de array of
actlwtles and purposes , and most importantly ~ts basic purpose of prowd~ng flood
protection and mumc~pal water supply (Emphases added )
In the face of cntlcal water supply and quality ~ssues for the state as a whole and our area In particular
the EA fads to consider the Impact intense growth has on both water quality and quantity
S~mply put, the Corps' EA ~s ~nadequate Furthermore, the Corps is under an obhgatlon to
conduct an ElS Until an ElS ~s conducted, the City cannot support the proposed projects for the
Lake
Sincerely,
Howard Mart~n
Assistant City Manager for Utd~tles
0~/15f2000
08 07
214-670-3515
DALLAS CITY ATTY OFC
City of Dallas
PAGE
82
August30,2000
Ms Marcia R Hackett
NEPA Technical Manager
U $ Army Corps of Engineers
Fort Worth District CESWF-EV-EE
P O Box 17300
Fort Worth, Texas 76102-0300
Re Water-Related Recreational Development at Lewlsvllle Lake
Dear Ms Hackett
We have reviewed the U S Army Corps of Engineers (COE) document entitled
"Environmental Assessment for Water-related Recreation Development" at LewIsvIIle Lake
dated July, 2000 We are both disappointed and concerned to see that the COE is
contemplating approval of water-related recreational development at Lewlsvllle Lake that
will double the number of boats in and around the lake As you are aware, Lewlsville Lake
serves as a significant raw water source for the City of Dallas and the nineteen (19)
customer cities we serve
In a letter to you dated September 14, 1999, our office submitted comments to you
requesting that any decision that would add to the number of boats using the Lake be
deferred pending the completion of'studies concerning the presence and effect of MTBE
in our lakes Further, we have since learned that the COE was apparently unaware cfa
study done by the "Blue PJbbon Panel On Oxygenates in Gasoline" (appointed by
U S E PA Administrator Carol Browner), dated July 27, 1999, wherein it was
recommended that enhanced efforts be taken "to protect lakes and reservoirs that serve
as drinking water supplies by restricting use of recreational water craft,
Since the date of Issuance of the Programmatic Envlrenmental Impact Statement, the City
of Dallas has become Increasingly concerned about the potential presence and posslbte
effects of MTBE In lakes that are used as Its water resources, including Lake Lewlsvllle,
as a result cf the experience gained by it in connection with a catastrophic release of
reformulated gasoline the resulted In MTBE entering Into Lake Tawakonl In addition,
U S E P A msued, on March 24, 2000, an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
whereln It cltad studies Indicating that MTBE can be tasted at concentrations as Iow as 2
parts per billion
Water Utilities Department
City Hall · 1500 Madlln 4AN · Da]las, TX · 214/870-3146
A ~lty utility providing Da a~ water and wastewater services vital to public health and safe~,,
E ¥ IJII3 IT II
09/15/2000 08 07 214-670-35~5 DALLAS CItY ATTY OFC PAGE 03
Ms Marcia R Hackstt
Page 2
August 30, 2000
The concern of the City of Dallas Is not only with the health of Its citizens, but also w~th the
quality and drinkability of its water supplies Accordingly, the City of Dallas d~sagrees with
the suggestion In the Environmental Assessment that further marina development will have
no significant environmental impact The City of Dallas requests that the COE defer
approval of madna development at Lewlsvllle Lake until its MTBE study, currently
scheduled to be completed In January 2001, has been concluded and Its results discussed
with both the COE and U S E P A
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this document If you should have any
questions please call me at 214-670-3144
Sincerely,
Terrace W
Director
10
Jam~ B Blackburn. Jr
Ma~5, w Can~
~'am*a E. Bradl~.y
Pdci~td 1L Momsoa. IV
BLACKBURN CARTER
A l~r~fl~lonsl Corpor~on
August31,2000
Ms Mm'ma R. Hackett
NEPA Technical Manager
U S Army Corps of Engineers
Fort Worth District, CESWF-EV-EE
? 0 Box 17300
Fort Worth, Texas 761024)300
RE Comments on the Environmental Assessment for Lewasv~e Lake
Enclosed are the cements filed on behalf of remdents hwng m and adjacent to Fiddler's Green
m response to the If S Army Corps of Engineers En, aronmental Assessment for Water Related
Recreanon Development, Levasvflle Lake, Lewsvflle, Texas, dated July 2000 These comments are
filed pursuant to a ffang extension granted to Sawme McEn~e
These commems include 16 pages of text and seven attachments These attachments are (1) an
expert report of Dr Phil Bedlent, plus resume and exbabits, (2) a document ldenufymg 100%
conservauon pool rights to Denton and Dallas, 0) an expert report or,Peter Brown plus resume, (4) a
draft study by Geo-Manne, dated November, 1998, (5) an expert report by CSTI plus resume of Arno
Bommer. (6) a map prepared by Grog Schon, and (7) a hst of persons on whose be, halt'these comments
are submitted I would apprecuate your including both the comments and all attachments ha the
adramstraUve record
If you have any questtons or w~sh any addmonal mformatlon regarding any of these
subrmmons, please do not hesitate to contact us
Smc~rely,
/Janes B Blackburn, Jr
11
I:: V LI I 1:21T III
COMMENTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT FOR LEWISVILLE LAKE
AUGUST 31, 2000
These comments are subrmtted m response to a Pubhc Nonce dated July 26, 2000,
fi.om the U S Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth Dlstnct, regarding an envtronmental
assessment uered to the Lewasv~lle Lake Programmatic Envtronmental Assessment
(PEA) fmalmed m September of 1999 Ttus en, nronmental assessment is tdentffied as
"Envtronmental Assessment - Water Related Recreation Development" (heremaf[er
referred to as "Supplemental Envtronmental Assessment" or "SEA") These comments
are submatted on behalf of a group of residents hvmg on Lewasvflle Lake mediately
adjacent to the site of two of the mannas proposed for construction m the SEA (see
Attachment 7) Thts same group of residents subrmtted written comments prewously
(dated September 16, 1999 m a letter signed by Howard Gflberg) regardmg the PEA and
we incorporate those comments hereto
As ~ be set out in detml below, we behove that the SEA is absoluteIy
inadequate to meet the legal reqmrements of the National Envrronmental Pohcy Act
There is hterally no detml regarding site specific mapacts of the water-related
development that is proposed in the SEA. Tbas document strnply f~s as a full disclosure
document and fmls as an attempt to determine whether or not slgrnficant anpacts are
generated by the proposed water-related development Addnlonally, the SEA fmls as a
follow-up document to the PEA. The FONSI associated vath the PEA lef~ certain issues
unresolved, mcludmg the lakew~de anpact of wate,-related development Those issues
were deferred to the SEA m the FONSI However, the SEA fads to correctly analyze tbas
issue and fads to fully disclose these lakew~de tmpacts Perhaps most waportantly, the
water-related development that is analyzed m the SEA generates slgmficant impacts in at
least one key respect the carrying capacity of the lake is exceeded Therefore, rather
than issue an SEA, the Corps must prepare an EIS on water-related development on
Lewaswlle Lake
These comments are dt,aded into four parts The first part of the comments
introduces the current SEA m the context of the prior PEA and the Finding of No
Stgmficant Impact CFONSI) ~ssued m association wath the PEA. The second section of
these comments addresses the issue of water-related recreation development fi.om a lake-
wide perspective The tlurd section of these comments addresses issues related to
specific manna proposals The fourth section concludes these comments
L CONTEXT OF ~ WATER-It.ELATED DEVELOPMENT SUPPLEMENTAL
ENVIRON1VIENTAL ASSESSMENT (SEA)
As set forth ~n the Finding of No Stgmficant Impact (FONSI) associated wath the
PEA that was signed by Col James SWeller on 30 September 1999, there were several
I 12
msues that were not resolved m decmlon-makmg arising ~'om the PE~ Consider the
fo~owmg excerpt from tins FONSI
A Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) was prepared wtuch discussed
the environmental impacts of more than 300 md~sndual development actions being
proposed by 18 pubhc and private enuues for Implementation w~thm the next 10
years on Federal lands around Le,mswlle Lake The PEA ldentuqed the future and
foreseeable mdw~dual development actions, assessed the potential cumulatwe
mapacts fi.om these actions on the human and natural environment and presented
mforrnatton to be used m the ensuing supplement to the Lewusvflle Lake Master
Plan, Design Memorandum No lC, June 1985 The PEA was prepared m
accordance w~th the National Environmental Pohcy Act (N-EPA) of 1969 and
pertinent anplementmg regulations
Nme types of actlwues were addressed m the PEA including (1) bndges and
roadways, (2) water-related recreation famhues, (3) parks - including enhanced
amemues m exastmg recreational areas, (4) ut~ues and uuhty comdors, (5) golf
courses, (6) habitable structures such as hotels, lodges and cabins, (7) trmls, (8)
land use classification changes, and (9) other rmscellaneous actlwtaes .The PEA
tdennfied potentml slgmficant ~mpacts which m~ght result from some of the
actw~ties as proposed These acnv~t~es, such as additional marinas brtdges~
golf course and a land use reclassfficanon will reqmre addmonal assessment
tinted from the PEA.
The PEA was circulated to interested mdwxduals, groups, orgamzaUons, cities,
state and federal agencies for revmw and comment A public notice describing
the avaflablhty of the document was published on August 19, 1999, and the entire
document was made avmlable vaa the mternet and at several local hbranes and
city halls The comment period closed on September 24, 1999 Comments were
received fi.om 86 agencies, groups and mdw~duals and petitions were s~gned by
more than 1,600 persons Comments from agencies and mumc~pahues pnnc~pally
supported the findings of the PEA w~th some concern expressed about the level of
boating actlwty and water quahty Cmzen remarks were generally m
Opposition to additional boating facflmes~ marina eonstrucnon~ hotels and
recreation actlvatms wtuch would reqmre large areas to be cleared of native
vegetation These types of pro~ects will require further analvs~s under N-EPA
and are not cons;dered a part of th~s finding (emphasis added, remainder of
FONSI ormtted)
Therefore, the situation regarding addmonal boating facilities and manna
development under the FONSI associated wath the I~EA is that no decisions have been
made regarding the acceptabflay of those actlwUes As stated above, the ~mpacts fi.om
these acnvmes were potennally mgmficant A FONSI can only be s~gned if the unpacts
are not sigraficant Therefore, it is clear fi.om the FONSI that the impacts from additional
boating fac~hues and manna development remain potentially slgmficant The purpose of
the Enwronmental Assessment on Water-Related Recreation Development, at least
13
according to the September, 1999 FONSI, is to determine whether m fact slgmficant
enwronmental mapacts would result from additional boating fac~htaes and mannas on
Lewasv~Ie Lake Such an analysis must include lake-w~de mapacts as well as site specdSc
mnpacts assomated wath mdivadual boating facthtles and manna proposals
The dear language of this FONSI is m conflict wath statements on the first page
of the SEA. Here, the Fort Worth District states
The findings of the PEA. concluded that the requests to increase the number
of vessels on the lake would exceed the carry capacity estabhshed by the Corps m
the Lewasv,.lle Lake Future Water-Related Development Pohcy (see Exlublt 13 m
the PEA) Ttus pohcy authorized the increase of 274 vessels on Lewasv~lle Lake
distributed by 0 vessel increase m Zone A, a 46 vessel mcrease m Zone B and a
228 vessel increase m Zone C (figure 2) In order to avoid exceeding the carrying
capacity of the lake requmng an EIS, an altematave, based on the pohcy's
recommendataons for carrying capacity lamts, was developed and assessed m the
PEA. Tlus alternatave reqmred that all entities requesting authorization of
development projects affecting the number of vessels on the lake get together,
amve at a consensus, rewse and resubmat their requests so that they not exceed
the estabhshed carrying capacity, either cumulatavely or by zone Indl,ndual
proposals for water-related recreation development that were onganally subrmtted
by the various entities were removed from further consideration m the PEA. The
FONSL which was executed on September 30 1999~ approved the carrying,
e0pae)tw established m the Lewasvflle Lake Future Water-Related
Development Pohe¥~ allowing for a 274 vessel eqmvalent increase without
sneelfvm~ the distribution of those vessel eqmvalents (SEA, p 1, last
paragraph) (emphasis added)
The conclusion relating to the FONSI that is emphasized m the quote above from the
SEA ~s simply incorrect The FONSI is clear - "These types of projects [additional
boating fac~ties, manna constructaon, hotels and recreation actlvmes reqmnng large
areas to be cleared] w~ll reqmre further analysis under N-EPA and are not considered part
of ttus flndmg" It Is ~mpossible for the FONSI to approve the carrying capacity for new
boating facilities and manna construction when the FONSI specifically disavows such
approval
Therefore, the correct interpretation of the role of the SEA is to disclose and
analyze the carrying capacity of the lake wath regard to manna and boating facility
development as well as to disclose and analyze the environmental impacts of specific
manna and boating fac~hty developments on the environment to deterrmne ff
"slgnrficant" mapacts result from such manna and boating facility development
Therefore, the SEA must address lake-wade issues as well as site specific issues
associated w~th water-related development No element related to manna and boating
facility construction was approved m the PEA because it was not included m the Finding
of No Slgn~icant Impact (FONSI) All issues associated wath water-related recreation
development, instead, must be disclosed m the SEA, and no decision may be made
3 14
wathout full ccns~deratmn of the ~ssues rinsed by pubhc comments as well as by the
unpacts associated wath manna and boating faclhty development In fact, we urge that
environmental full dts¢losure under NE?A reqmres an En'aronmental Impact Statement
prior to declslon-malang on this issue
LAI~-WI])E ENVIRO1N-5~NTAL ASSESSMENT DEFICIENCIES
In the following sections, vanous deflcmncms are set out regurdmg the SEA and ~ts
coverage of lake-wade environmental ~ssues First, the issue of lake level has not been
correctly integrated rotc the concept of lake-wade carrying capacay set out m the SEA_
and the PEA. Tins creates a false concept of carrying capacgy and ts directly related to
the potential occurrence of stgrnficant en, aronmentai ~pacts Second, no defensible
methodology was utilized to establish carrying capaclty and the allowance for more
boats, even assuming "best case" lake ¢ondmons Third, the SEA. and PEA. fall to
disclose how the final carrying capacmes were determined and how they affect the
resources being protected Finally, no serious analysis of the MTBE contammauon issue
was completed We behove that these deficmnc~es are serious 'aolat, ons of the National
Environmental Pohcy Act
A. ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH LAKE LEVELS
Neither the SEA nor the PEA present any analysis of the vanatmn m lake levels
as they relate to carry_ng capacity of Lewtsv~lle Lake Instead, a constant lake level of
522 feet mean sea level is assumed and used as the lake level m calculating carrlang
capacities Tins Is the level of the lake when It is full However, Lewasvflle Lake is not a
constant water level lake Because Lew~sv',lle Lake is a water supply lake, the lake
elevation changes sigmficantly over tune Depending upon rainfall and water usage, the
elevation of Lew~svflle Lake will change A graph of the hlstonc water levels at
Lewasvflle Lake is shown m figure 2 of the attached report by Dr Phllhp Bedient
(Attachment 1)
The determination of lake canymg capacity ts related to the amount of surface
area that erasts at a particular lake level Of that surface area, only a portion is "useable"
for boating Additionally, each type of boat needs a certam amount of space Geo-
Manne, Inc prepared an analysis of the carrying capacity of Lewasville Lake for the Fort
Worth Dtstnct of the Corps of Engineers utdmng these factors In this study, Geo-
Manne stated the following
The purpose of this mvestlgatmn/analysls was to determine the actual "physmal
carrying capacity" of the lake This was determined m-house using updated lake
acreages, updated acreages of water required per boat by type and by re-
evaluating the actual amount of"useable" surface acreage Updated lake acreage
was pro,aded by the USACE "Geo-Marme, Inc, December, 1998, p 3-11
The methodology used by Geo.Marme allocated a specific number of acres of the lake to
various types of boats and estabhshed a final number of boats that presumably could
4 15
safely use the lake when tt ~s at full conservatmn pool The Corps of Engineers m both
the PEA and SEA followed tins methodology w~th certain modfficauons to estabhsh a
carrying capacity for the lake ua terms of total boats to be allowed and new boat shps and
mannas that could be authorized
The point here ~s that the "best case" lake level was used for determination of the
carrying capamty of Lew~svtlle Lake The lake acreage that was used was calculated
assurnmg that the lake was full - at the top of the conservation pool at elevation 522 feet
However, as shown m figure 2 of Attachment 1, the lake has rarely been at 522 feet for
several years In fact, the lake ~s now around elevation 507 feet According to
documentatmn obtained fi.om the Corps of Engnneers web stte, the cmos of Dallas and
Denton have the water rights to 100% of the conservatmn pool between elevattons 481
and 522 (see Attachment 2 herein) It is clear fi.om tbs mformatlon that the right exasts
to draw down Lew~swlle Lake much lower than even the drawdown pattern tndmated m
the last tlve years
A lq-EPA full d~sclosure document is supposed to be an honest attempt to predtct
and understand the enwronmental tmpacts of a proposed actmn Accordtng to the 1994
Lew~swlle Lake, Texas, Manna Demand Study, finahzed m June, 1994, lake crowding ~s
sufficient to cause both psychological and physical concern over the carrying capacity of
the lake Common sense clearly uadmates that ffthe water level ~s lower than the 522 feet
used for the determmauon of carrying capacity, less useable area will erdst No analysts
has been completed m the SEA or PEA regarding the mapact of more boats on LewuSVllle
Lake at tunes when water levels are lower than assumed m the carrying capacity analysts
Stated otherwuse, no attempt was made to determine the carrying capacity of the
lake at lower elevations and compare that number to the number of boats (1,112) that
were determined to be allowable (based upon the carrying capacity for the lake at
elevation 522) What is the mapact of operating 1,112 boats at elevation 5159 Or 5079
These drawdowns are not merely conjectural They have occurred wattun the last five
years
Even the Corps' own Development Plan Gmdelmes state "Development must be
planned w~th lake elevation variances m rmnd," and show as stgmficant lake elevauons
515 and 503 According to the Corps' 1985 Lew~svdle Lake Master Plan, the total
surface area of the lake at elevataon 515 and 503 ~s 22,480 acres and 13,360 acres,
respectively At the top of the conservation pool (elevation 522), the total surface area ~s
reported as 29,592 acres, wath only 20,117 acres considered "useable" for boating
act~wUes According to Peter Brown's expert report (a copy ofwtuch is enclosed hereto
as Attachment 3), the "useable" surface area at elevatmn 515 is between 12,000 and
13,000 acres, or appromrnately 55% of the total surface area due to emerged tree stumps
at the lower elevations as well as the slope of the lake bottom If 55% of the total surface
area is considered "useable", then the useable surface area at elevations 515 and 503 ~s
12,364 acres and 7,348 acres, respectively These slgndicantly smaller "useable" surface
areas were never constdered m the SEA or the PEA m calculating lake carrying capacities
or un evaluating envaronmental tmpacts due to the addition of more boating fac~ues and
5 16
mannas Had they been considered, the Corps would have found that af the carrying
capacity of the lake is 1,112 boats at elevauon 522, then at elevauon 515, the carrying
capacity m reduced to 683 boats, and at elevation 503, the carrying capacity is further
reduced to 406 boats (at 55% useable surface)
It m both irresponsible and illegal for the Corps to mtennonally d~sregard
reformation directly germane to the analysis stmply because such mforrnatlon will lead to
an unfavorable analysis Such biased action is specifically prohtbtted byNEPA.
B METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH CARRYING
CAPACITY ANALYSIS
A second major problem crests with regard to the carrying capacity analysm that
was undertaken by the Corps m the PEA and SEA ut~I,z~ng the lake elevation of 522 feet
The problem is that the Corps altered data and analyses developed by their consultants
wathout identifying any basra or source for such modifications NEPA prohblts
conclusory statements that are vnthout a basis m fact or documentation
The concern rinsed m tlns subpart is d~rectly related to the detemunatlon of the
number of boats that could be "absorbed" by Lew~swlle Lake m the carrying capacity
analysis According to the PEA. and SEA, a target of 1,112 boats was selected for the
lake as a whole, a number that offers a "median" level of resource protection Tins
number m distributed by allocanons m three zones - zones A, B and C Zone A m
allocated 631 boats, Zone B is allocated 192 boats and Zone C m allocated 289 boats
However, the methodotog3, underlying tins allocation ~s not defensible
There are two major issues here F~rst, there m a question of the relatlonsinp
between existing usage patterns on Lewaswlle Lake and the carrying capamty
determmatlons Second, there m the quesuon of the manner tn which the number of boats
was determined
Based on data collected by C-co-Marine of actual boats on the water in each zone,
the determlnataon was made that the exastmg peak load for the various zones on the lake
to be 340 - 370 boats tn Zone A, 75-80 boats m Zone B and 320-340 boats tn Zone C
(based on 1- to 3-hour durauons) Geo-Manne then compared tins existing boat usage to
the mdt'adual carrying capacities for each zone, and concluded that Zone C m at or near
capacity Notwithstanding tins existing use data and the conclusions of ns own
consultant, the Corps made tts own subsequent carrying capacity analysts and used tins
subsequent analysis to dlstnbute addiUonal boat usage on the lake As a result of ttus
"new" carrying capacity analyms, the Corps deterrmned, for example, that Zone C, could
handle an additional 228 boats tn tins subsequent allocation process No explanation is
g~ven tn the SEA of the relauonsinp between emsttng use patterns showing Zone C as
already having over 300 boats and the detenmnauon that Zone C could absorb an
addmonal 228 more boats In fact, on its face, it appears that the addmon of another 228
boats would lead to exceedance of the Zone C median carrlang capacity of 289 boats (as
well as exceed Zone C's rmmmum resource protection level of 383 boats)
6 17
On the other hand, the erdstmg use pattern for Zone A is 340 to 370 boats
However, the Corps made a determmatmn that there was no more capacity m ttus zone,
even though the carrying capacity allocatmn indicated that 606 boats could use flus area
(under mmmmm resource protectaon) In tbas manner, an area such as Zone A, that
appeared fi.om actual use data to have addmonal capacity, was eliminated as a me for
future mannas, whereas Zone C, which had extensive exastmg usage, was determined to
have room for 228 more boats
There ~s something wrong wath flus methodology Why are exastmg use patterns
ignored? Why are new allocations made m areas that have extensive e-astmg usage?
Why are new allocations not allowed m areas w~th usage much lower than their capacity?
Why has the Corps established Zones when no boater w~ll remain ~n ~ts zone regardless
of ongm In other words, the arbitrary zones bear no resemblance to actual lake usage
On its face, tt appears that the Corps has been arbttrary and capricious m the assignment
of capacity around the lake NE?A abhors pre-determined answers A II-EPA analysis ~s
supposed to fully disclose the truth and let the declsmn-maker and the pubhc know that
truth Tlms analysis fmls as a d~sclosure document
More problems erast wath the methodology So far, the discussion m these
comments has been directed at boats on the water However, for purposes of the SEA and
PEA, the number of boats on the water must be related to proposed mannas and boat
ramps and parking spaces The key ~ssue here ~s - what is the ratio between the boats on
the water and the fac~tles that either ernst now or are proposed to be perrmtted?
Here, a dlspanty crests between the Gcc-Marine study, earher draf[s of the Geo-
Marine study and the number that is finally used by the Corps tn the PEA and SEA
Imtmlly, Geo-Manne used a ratio of 1 boat on the water for each 5 slips, or 1 5 (See Draf~
dated 11/98 as Attachment 4 hereto) In the Gcc-Marine final report, a ratio of 1 boat on
the water for each 8 shps occupied (1 8) was used In the Corps' PEA and SEA, a ratio
of 1 boat on the water for each 10 shps occupied was used In flus manner, the number of
boats on the water has stayed the same, but the number of shps to be perrmtted has
increased
The point here ~s that there xs no defensxble basts for selectmn of 1 10, other than
xt generates the pre-determined number of shps The consultant's report does not support
tbas number No source for flus ratm is g~ven Yet tbas ratio ~s mcred,bly u-nportant If
the ratio is wrong, the actual number of boats on the water could increase substantlalIy
Carrying capactty calculations would be greatly exceeded Substantial safety and human
health problems would result, the very type of issues supposedly addressed m an
enwronmental document such aa an environmental assessment Stgmficant anpacts
would be generated, d~ctatmg the need for an envxronmental ~mpact statement
Stnularly, the occupancy rate of manna shps was ldentffied by Geo~Manne to
currently be at 88% Tlus was a drop from the 90-95% rate found m the 1994 Marine
Demand Study Gcc-Marine projected that the occupancy rate would increase to 100%
7 18
by 2020 ~f no new mannas were constructed Yet the Corps adopted 84% as the full
occupancy rate for mannas m tis analyses, again vathout explanataon or discussion as
reqmred by NEPA. If an occupancy rate of 100% is assumed, even at a ratao of 1 8 for
boat shps and dry stack umts, then the currently authorized 3,256 shps and dry stack
umts, combined wath the 710 parking spaces at boat ramps, would y~eld 1,117 boats on
the water, exceeding the Corps' carrying capacity for the lake of 1,112 Thus, any new
authortzatmns for boating facthtles or mannas should automatically necessitate an
Enmronmental Impact Statement
C DISCLOSURE ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH CARRYING CAPACITY
DETERMINATIONS
Yet another point is relevant regarding these carrying capacity determinations In
the documentatmn associated vnth the determmatlon of carr~ng capacity, three levels of
carrying capacity are identified These are mammum resource protection and user
enjoyment, medmn resource protecUon and user enjoyment and n~mmum, resource
protection and user enjoyment However, there is hterally no discussion about the
meaning of these terms
Stated otherwase, the enwronmental assessment is supposed to disclose
reformation m an at, erupt to assist the dec:sion-maker m deterrmnmg whether or not
sigraficant anpacts ernst The presence of slgnrfcant impacts is clearly related to these
can3,mg capacity calculations, according to the Corps Consider the follouang excerpt
fi.om the PEA
The addnlonal authorization requests [for mannas] fi.om the various entrees
exceed the carrying capacities tn all three zones As a result, the conclusion of
il,as PEA would have been either the selection of the no action alternative or that
carmng capacities would have been exceeded causing sigmficant impacts thereby
requmn_~ an Enmronmental Impact Statement (EIS) (PEA, p 67) (Emphasis
added)
On its face, tlus statement indicates that exceeding carrying capacity would generate
mgmficant environmental impacts requmng an EIS However, there is no discussion of
the basis for flus conclusion For example, there is no discussion of the differences, m
terms of mapact, between maximum, median and mmamum resource protection and user
enjoyment We believe that any level of resource protection and user enjoyment less than
maximum generates substantial impacts At the least, we deserve to be reformed as to
what differences ernst between these different levels of carrying capacity
Environmental full disclosure means that reformation Is generated descnbtng
impacts No re_formation has been developed that ldenttfias the d~fferences m these
various levels of resource protectton l~rom the documentation, It is clear that fi.om a
lake-wide perspective, the median level of resource protection and user enjoyment was
chosen The maxamum resource protection level lake-w~de was deterrmned to be 735
boats, yet 1,112 boats were used for boating permit allocation purposes This is the
8 19
median level of protectlon No explanation is g~ven regarding the drfference between a
maxunum protection level and the median level, and the extent to which the resources to
be protected will be impacted
Perhaps more wnportantly, no explanation is g~ven regarding the allocations m the
various zones For example, Zone .4. appears to be overallocated at the lowest level of
resource protection The nummum level of resource protection m Zone A is 606 boats
(Gee-Marine, Dec 1998, pgs 4-8) The procedure used by the Corps m the SEA and the
PEA has projected an emstmg load based on current authorizations at 631 boats Tlus ~s
a clear exceedance of the mmn~um carrying capacity for Zone A According to the prior
statement, the Corps considers the exceedance of the carrying capacity to generate
s~gmficant anpacts Therefore, on its face, the exceedance m Zone A should require an
EIS Why ~s tbas exceedance ~gnored7 In fact, 606 ~s not shown as the carrying capacity
for Zone A. Instead, 631 ~s shown Ttus ts a clear error
Zone C is also very interesting Zone C is shown m the SEA and PEA carrying
capacity charts as hawng a current usage of 61 boats and a requested authonzatlon of an
additional 228 boats, leadmg to a total of 289, the current median carrying capacity Of
course, there is no explanatmn of what a "median" carrying capacity actually means
More maportantly, as discussed m sectxon II B above, the measured usage currently
wathm Zone C is one of the lughest on the lake, averaging between 320 and 340 boats,
rather than the 61 used m Table I on p 7 of the SEA If320 is used rather than 61, the
mammum carrying capacity of 383 ~ be substantially exceeded wnh the additmn of
228 more boats as recommended by the SEA and the PEA. Such an exceedance should
generate and EIS, based on the PEA, p 67
D ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH MTBE AND HYDROCARBON
CONTAMINATION
Another fatal defect of the PEA and SEA is the consideration of water quahty
issues Boating and mannas necessarily generate pollution Mannas sell gasoline to
boats m the water Boat owners may transfer fuel and work on their boats The reality IS
that spills and leaks of gasoline occur m marinas Perhaps more anportantly, there ts a
direct relatmnstup between the operation of outboard and inboard motors and pollutant
discharge Two-cycle engines are notorious sources of water pollution It Is well known
that these outboard motor engines d~rectly d~scharge gasohne and off residuals rote the
water where the boats are operated
The first flaw of the SEA is that there is no d~scuss~on of the generation of
pollutants from mannas and boat usage There is no quantification of the ermssmns from
two-cycle engines There is no discussion of manna spills There IS no attempt made to
understand m any real sense the magratude of the water quahty issues that may erdst at
Lew~swlle Lake rfttus water-related development ~s allowed
The most noticeable aspect of the PEA relative to water quahty ~s ~ts d~sclamer
9 20
"A det~ed study and analysis of water quahty data is beyond the scope of tins
The SEA does state that water quahty considerations were input into the carrying
capacity detenrananons that were estabhshed for Lewasvflle Lake Tins statement does
not have any suppor~ Our re,aew of the supporting documentation indicates that water
quahty ,considerations were oertamly not taken into account m any quanUtat~ve manner
There is no defensible basis for stating that water quahty was incorporated into the
carrying capacity analysis, and there is no explanation or discussion m the SEA or the
PEA as to how tins was done
A major pollutant of concern here is Methyl Teruary Butyl Ether (MTBE)
MTBE Is present m Lewsvflle Lake It has been measured at concentrations as ingh as
16 7 ppb under current use patterns on Lew~svtlle Lake Although a number of
statements have been made m the SEA to the effect that there is no problem associated
wnh the proposed increased levels of boating traffic and mannas, no quantification ex:sts
No documentation crests The only reference included m the SEA is a "personal
commumcatlon" v~th the U S Enwronmental Protection Agency
"The estabhshment of a canyng capacity on Lew~svflle Lake took into
consideration impacts to water quality as a result of increased numbers of vessels
Personal commumcatlon v~th the EPA, lt. eg~on 6, Water Quahry Section
determined that the increase of 274 vessels on the lake per the USACE policy
would not be expected to increase the Ievels ofMTBE m the water over the 20 to
40 ppb identified by the EPA to have the potential to cause adverse taste and
smell It has therefore been determined that there would not be sigruficant
adverse tmpacts to the water quahty of Lew~sville Lake fi.om maplementation of
the proposed actions, except on a temporary basis" SEA, p 13-14
There is no documentatton to support tins statement of commumcatlon vath the U S
Enwronmental Protection Agency Did the EPA use a proportional methodology? Did
the EPA take into account spills fi.om the mannas to be authorized here? What exactly
did the EPA undertake m ns analysis? None of tins reformation is set out and it should
be
The issue regarding MTBE relates to dnnkang water quality and contact
recreation Levasvflle Lake is a major water supply lake for the cities of Denton and
Dallas The exastence of an MTBE sample of 16 7 ppb is very serious The EPA is
stated to have considered an increase of 274 boats However, that is not the true increase
because certain capacity has already been authonzed but not yet used The actual
capacity increase over current use patterns, according to the SEA and PEA, is 376 boats
rather than 274 The current use of the lake is 736 boats Sauce the MTBE
concentrations are d~rectly related to boat traffic, then the increase to be analyzed in the
SEA is effectively a 51% increase A 51% increase m lVlTBE levels, in thas worst case
situation, would add 8 4 ppb of MTBE to the lake, making the level at tins location 25 1
ppb Tbas level would exceed the odor and taste threshold established by the EPA and
10 2 1
generate slgmficant mapacts, especially since tbas location ~s the City of Denton water
retake (see Attachment 1, ?tul Bed~ent's expert report)
The point here is that the MTBE issue is senous and generates slgnfl~cant
mapacts The conclusory nature of the SEA is s~nply unacceptable The reason to
prepare an EIS is to fully discuss and disclose issues such as tbas MTBE concern There
is a tremendous potential for harm here and the discussmn and disclosure is inadequate
For example, how was MTBE considered tn the carrying capacity calculation, tf at all9
What concentration of MTBE is predicted tn the zone tf the permats are issued as
proposed? Consider the following excerpts fromDr Bedaent's report
1 Current EPA standards call for MT'BE levels below a taste and odor
standard of 20 to 40 gg/L CaLtforma, however, has established an MCL for
MTBE of 13 gg/L, and a secondary taste and odor MCL of 5 gg/L(Cahforma
DHS, 2000) Research has shown that the taste and odor threshold for sensitive
mdxvxduals is around 2 gg/L (Keller et al, 1998) Texas acknowledges a taste
and odor threshold of ].5 p.g/L (TNR. CC web site)
2 The exastmg boating load on Lewas,alle Lake is 736, (from Table 1 of the
EA) Tl~s load has already resulted tn MTBE levels that occasxonally exceed
the primary Cal~orma dnnkmg water standards, and routinely exceed the
Cahforma taste and odor standards Expected increases m boating load,
including already penmtted but not built expansion (102 boats) and new
expansion under the proposed development plan (274 boats) would add a total
of 376 boats to the lake at peak usage, assuming that the estmaates are correct
Thas represents an increase of 51% tn the usage levels of the lake As seen tn
the discussion of the observed boating patterns, the distribution of boats on the
lake does not correspond wath the number of docking/boat ramp facflmes
Therefore, one can assume that a 50% increase tn the number of boats on the
lake would increase the usage throughout Zones A and C evenly Thas
increase would reasonably be expected to result m a proportional increase m
the MrBE levels m the lake, wtuch could result tn levels of 25 ~tg/L or tugher
During tunes of lower lake levels, the smaller volume of the lake would be
expected to result m tugher concentrations of MTBE, due to reduced dilution
3 MTBE levels tn Lewasvflle Lake are reaching levels of concern, and
increased boating on the lake will serve to increase those levels Due to usage
of the lake for water supply purposes, substantial impacts to those dnnkmg
water from the lake are expected to occur In my oplmon, the analysis of
MTBE certainly warrants full d,sclosure tn an EIS
111_ SITE SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DEFICIENCIES
In addmon to lake-wade issues, there are emaronmental issues and unpacts
generated by tndtwdual mannas that are proposed to be located on the Lewasvflle Lake
In the SEA, three dimnct manna locations are ldemffied, including one manna at
11 22
Cottonwood Park and another manna at Hidden Cove The persons on whose behalf
these comments are subnutted hve m or near Fiddler's Green, a residential subd~wsion
chrectly across from Cottonwood Park and near to Hidden Cove They are seriously
concerned about environmental anpacts occurring tn their commumty as a result of the
manna location, l decisions maphclt tn the SEA.
The problem wath the SEA. is that no - repeat no - site specific enwronmental
trnpact analysis was undertaken It is tmpoasible to determine whether anpacts are
slgn~cant or not ffno analys~s ts presented The residents of Flddler's Green subrmt that
it ~s wresponsihle and arbltrar3, and capricious for the Corps to determine there are no
slgmficant mapacts associated wath the SEA and the proposed Mannas when, m fact, no
factual or analytical basis exasts for those dec~slons
In the paragraphs that follow, three me-specific ,ssues are presented These are
nmse, water quahty and land use The residents of F~ddler's Green beheve each of these
areas to raise senous anpacts that were not considered m the SEA and that ff these were
correctly analyzed, s~gnfficant impacts would result
A NOISE IMPACTS
The SEA fanls to disclose the potentmlly slgmficant no~se impacts to the
commumty of Fiddlers Green associated vath the proposed development of nearby
mannas Indeed the analys~s presented m the SEA merely says that 'bt ~s especially
difficult to predict noise levels from boats "and "it is not anticipated that these proposed
projects would result m s~gnfficant noise ~npact"
To the contrary, the attached report from Collaboration m Science and
Technology Inc (CSTI) (Attachment 5) detmls the following no,se sources that may
impact residences and people at Fiddlers Green
Car traffic on shore at manna,
Social acttwues on shore at manna,
General commercial acuvmes at park (gas, groceries, restaurant, boat serwces,
Boat service and mmntenance act~wUes at park (hoisting, sanding, dust collectors.
otc ),
Construction noise (dredging, cutting stumps, construction of docks, otc ),
Boat traffic to fi'om and around manna (boat ramp, manna and commercial
visitors, otc )
Furthermore, CSTI explains that ~t ts not especially difficult to predict nmse levels from
boats For example, measuring sound levels near an exastmg manna at a comparable
locatmn could determine possible impacts It would also be possible to predict wnpacts
by measunn$ the noise fi'om dff~'erent types of boats at a fixed distance, deterrramng
future d~stances from boat traffic to mapact sites, deterrmnmg future nuxes of boats and
then calculating no,se levels at the impact sites Had no,se impacts been properly
12 2 3
assessed, mgn~cant nome ~mpacts on the remdences and people at Fiddlers Green are
probable Not only m the proposed manna at Cottonwood Park hkely to produce a
mgn~¢ant noise umpact at the Fiddlers Green commumty, the proposed manna is hkely
to dramatically increase boat traffic passing m front of Fiddlers Green and force other
boats closer to the Fiddlers Green area Tins addiuonal boat traffic wall generate more
noise anpacts to F~ddlers Green
Appendm D to the SEA (letter from The Colony) locates the proposed Hidden
Cove Manna on the same side of the lake channel as F~ddlers Green Ttus manna will
also add noise impacts and compound the noise wnpacts from Cottonwood Park manna
on the Fiddlers Green commumty A comprehensive noise study should have been
conducted prior to a proposed Finding of No S~graficant Impact by the Corps of
Engineers
B WATER QUALITY I1VIPACTS
The proposed Cottonwood Park Manna m d~rectly across the lake channel from
the commumty of Fiddlers Green and the proposed l-hdden Cove Manna is on the same
side of the lake channel d~rectly west of Fiddlers Green Cottonwood Park is one of the
largest mannas and as proposed, will accommodate 840 wet slips, dry storage and a boat
ramp wath accompanying parking for cars Hidden Cove wall accommodate 350 wet
slips, boat ramp and 25 parking spaces No real analysis has been undertaken on the
mapacts of these mannas on the water quality &rectly adjacent to the Fiddlers Green
cormmumty
Between February, 1999 and February, 2000, water samples were taken and
analyzed for MTBE on Low, smile Lake by Anne Lee at the Umvermty of North Texas
No samples were taken m Zone C where the proposed Cottonwood Park Manna and the
proposed Hidden Cove Manna would be located No base line reformation ~s therefore
available about MTBE levels m Zone C Furthermore, no analysis has been undertaken
to deternune the potentaal for soft erosion and runoff of pollutants such as fuel and ml,
and there m no analysis of the effect of the operauon of boats or engine exhaust on water
quality m the wc~mty of these mannas The sample locations that were taken near boats
ramps or mannas showed bagher concentratmns due to boat traffic at that partacnlar
location Addmonally, according to the attached expert report by Dr PM Bedient,
MTBE levels appear to have an annual cycle, increasing m the summer uath increased
boat usage m the lake Accordingly one would expect increased levels of MTBE from
boat tra~c to occur m the vmnuty of Cottonwood Park, I-Itdden Cove and F~ddlers
Green However, no analysis was performed and a Fmdmg of No SlgnnScant Impact is
totally inappropriate
C LAND USE IMPACTS
The mapact to the commumty of Fiddlers Green from a "land use" perspective
from the Cottonwood Park Manna and Hidden Cove Manna also has not been adequately
analyzed m the SEA. Specifically, the mapact from these mannas on Fiddlers Green m
13 24
related to safety issues, nome issues (as discussed above m section HIA), wsual blight,
and lowered property values
The background materials for the SEA (PEA and Geo-Marme Report 1998)
indicate that Zone C is already over capacity for boats and often exceeds its carrying
capacity at both maxamum and median levels of resource protection (pg 4-1 of Geo-
Marine Report, Dec, 1998) The addition of the proposed mannas w,2d further add to
that over capacity
It is also our understandLag that the lake area m front of Fiddlers Green is one of
the few areas of Le`msv,.lle Lake clear of stumps, and therefore a very popular spot for
water-skung The addition of 840 slips at the Cottonwood Manna and 350 shps at
l-hdden Cove Manna ,mi1 negnt~vely impact tlus popular area by adding s~gnfficant boat
traffic The impact on the residents and boaters of Flddlers Green as well as the impact to
the water skamg population has not even been discussed m the SEA.
The SEA rehes on the Master Plan for Le,msvtlle Lake to justify a conclusion that
there will be no land use anpact from the mannas That the Master Plan designates the
sites as "future Latenslve recreation" is totally rmsleadmg and inaccurate The master
plan proposes only a boat launch and day use camping for the Cottonwood Park area
There is a substantial d~fference between a large commercial manna and a park, as far as
land use is concerned Parks can be configured and designed to rmmrmze adverse
anpacts to surrounding areas through the use of additional roadways, wsual screens and
buffers and locating campgrounds La wooded areas and play fields away from residential
subdpnsions Such buffering of vessels or boats is not feasible tn manna design See
attached Expert Keport by Peter I-I Brown, AICP for further planning and land use
mformatlon
It is our understanding that the design of the proposed Cottonwood Park Manna
contemplates tire break-waters, wtuch will be clearly v~sible from the Fiddlers Green
commumty Indeed, Attachment 6 shows Phase IA and I13 of the proposed Cottonwood
Park manna superimposed on a survey performed by Gregory Schon, AIA (See
comments submtted by the McEnttre Fanuly for Mr Schon's report) Note that the
proposed manna for 251 slips leaves barely a channel between it and Fiddlers Green
The tare breakwater is proposed along the entare length of the manna from west to east on
the schematac (ma hne equivalent to the line above the designations "no, It. evasion
Descnpuon, Date" etc to "Cottonwood Creek Manna") No analysis of ttus wsual
anpact has been undertaken La the SEA.
Another important impact that has not been evaluated in the SEA is the effect of
large commercial mannas on residential property values in the nearby vacwaty The
homes La Fiddlers Green are valued between $100,000 and $750,000, due at least m some
part to the ldylhc location on lake front property The impact from addmg a large
commemal manna directly across from thas subdivision or adjacent to the commumty
should have been analyzed La the SEA but wasn't The economac impacts of large new
mannas are slgraficant and the SEA is m error by fmlmg to disclose these ~mpacts
14 25
IV. CONCLUSION
In conclumon~ ~t ~s the posmon of the Fiddler's Green commenters that the SEA ~s
totally inadequate under the National Environmental Pohcy Act In fact, the SEA makes
a mockery of the N-EPA process as well as both the letter and sprat of the Act The idea
behind NEPA is that enwronmental consequences are to be considered in enwronmental
decision-making An environmental assessment is used to help an agency determine
whether a proposed action will generate slgmficant impacts or not If slgrnficant unpacts
vail result fi.om a proposed action, then a more detaded en,aronmental n-npact statement
must be prepared Tins law is well-settled The practice is well-settled
The courts have been clear as to the intent ofNEPA. NEPA does not prevent bad
decisions but only poorly ufformed decisions If the environmental mupacts are fully
d~sclosed, then actions that harm the enwronment may proceed The courts are clear,
however, that NEPA does not allow pre-deternmned results to be ratified by partially
completed disclosures The agency has discretion, but only aftcer fully understanding and
disclosing the impacts of the proposed action
Such disclosure has not occurred un the case of the decisions on Lewuswlle Lake
water-related recreational development F~rst, the agency has faded to fully explore and
consider the types of umpacts that may be generated by this proposed action There is no
serious analysis of lake-wale wnpacts regarding carrying capacity and IvlTBE levels
There is no serious analysis of she specific umpacts of manna development regarding
noise, MTBE levels and land use Without a senous investigation of these issues, it is
wnposslble to make a deterrmnatlon as to whether or not slgnfficant impacts ~ result
from these proposed actions That is a ~uolatlon of one of the primary reqmrements of
NEPA.
However, there are more problems than disclosure problems It seems clear fi.om
the analysis of carrying capacity and water quality set out m these comments and the
attached expert reports that slgnfficant enmronmental n-npacts v~ll result fi.om ttus
proposed development In Zone A, the nummum carrying capacity has been exceeded,
thereby tnggenng slgmflcant impacts by the Corps own adnusslons MTBE levels far tn
excess of taste and odor thresholds set by the State of Texas will occur There is no
discussion of the Texas taste and odor levels tn the SEA, a clear 'aolattnn of NEPA.
However, there is clear ewdence that these thresholds are being exceeded currently, and
Gill be worsened by additional boat traffic Those unpacts are surely slgm£cant
The persons on whose behalf ttus pubhc comment is filed strongly assert that data
has been onutted Carrying capacity has been rmsstated Simple, straightforward
analyses have been neglected Important issues have been ignored
This is one of the worst types of NEPA wolattnns - an arbnrary disregard of
issues and concerns to the detriment of the public health and welfare We urge the Corps
to put tins flawed SEA beband and conduct an honest full disclosure analysis of the
15 26
n-npacts of putting more manna~ and boats on a lake that has been described as
overcrowded and dangerous and that supphes dnnkmg water for the C~t~es of Denton and
Dallas Suck a~ analyms m nothing less than the duty of the Corps under the laws of the
Umted States
Respectfully subnutted,
BLACKBURN CAKTEI~ P C
J'ames ]5. Blackbfi'~'n, Jr.
2900 Weslayan, State 400
Houston, Texas 77027
(713) 524-1012
(713) 524-5165 (fax)
16 2 7
AGENDA DATE
DEPARTMENT
CM/DCM/ACM
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
October 24, 2000
Legal Department
Herbert L Prouty, City Attorney
^Dondaltem t'/. /~/.~ --'
ate lO- g 4- O0
SUBJECT - Redistricting for 2001
BACKGROUND - Redistricting is the process of re-drawing election district boundaries The
U S Constitution requires that election districts for governmental officials who act in a
representative capacity (e g, legislative officials, such as city council members and county
commissioners) have approximately equal populations, so whenever there is a new federal
census indicating population changes, governmental entities - states and local governments -
must determine whether existing districts still satisfy this requirement If not, they must
redistrict 2000 Census data will be released by April 1, 2001, tnggenng the redistricting inquiry
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires "covered" jurisdictions to obttun
"preclearance" (usually from the Department of Justice) before implementing redistricting
changes
The city council needs to establish cntena for redistricting The criterion for redistricting 1S
adopted by resolution The law requires at least one public heanng The council determines the
extent of public input The council may appoint a citizen's committee If the lines are redrawn,
the city must submit the redistricting plan to the Department of Justice
Attached is a memo from the Blckerstaff firm explaining the redistricting process
PRIOR ACTION REVIEW - This IS the first discussion of redistricting
OPTIONS - The council may want to have the Bmkerstaff firm draft a proposal The
Blckerstaff law firm speclahzes in redistricting Another firm that specializes in redistricting is
the Allison, Bass firm in Austin, Texas The legal department is not familiar with this firm
FISCAL IMPACT - The legal fees for redistricting will mn approximately $25,000 The fees
will include computerized maps of the new dlsmcts This work will be billed at a paralegal's
rate
Respectfully submitted,
Herbert L Prouty
City Attorney
Bickerstaff, Heath, Smiley, Pollan, Kever & McDaniel, L.L.P.
Ya Gotta Draw the Line Somewhere:
Redistricting in the New Decade
Presented by Karen H Brophy
and Alan Bojorquez
Introduction
While the 2000 Census has many uses, one of particular interest to pubhc admlmstrators ~s
redistricting Redmtrictmgmtheprocessofre-drawmgelecttond~str~ctboundanes The hnes that
dlwde communmes also allocate money and power Whether drawn ~mtmlly by legislative bodies
or ultimately by the courts, these lines vail have a dramatm ~mpact on pubhc adnumstrat~on for years
to come
Although state and local governments go through th~s process every ten years, there will be
slgmficant differences thru time around The legal enwronment has become much more complex
Followmgthe 1990 Census, atleast41 statesexpenencedred~stnetmg htlgat~on Thehkehhood
of such lmgataon ~s greater now then ever Although no enUty can make Itself stat-proof, there are
certain tlungs they can do to be more successful at mai Thru paper provides an overview and
h~ghhghts slgmfieant changes
The Pohties of Sampling
To what extent redistricting is necessary vall be determined by the numbers reported by the Census
Bureau W~th more than 270 mflhon people to count, errors are lnewtable It is estimated that the
1990 census missed 4 7 mflhon people The undereount does not occur umformly across geographm
or demograptuc groups The undereount ~s greatest among children and renters The undereount for
African-Americans ~s sm t~mes that for Anglos and the undercount for H~spamcs ~s seven tames that
for Anglos
Seeking greater accuracy, the Census Bureau has developed a methodology for staustmal samphng
that is h~ghly controversial In 1999, the Supreme Court determined that samphng may not be used
for Congressional apportionment Thus, for Congressmnal appomonment, the Bureau is planning
to provide numbers that do not rely on samphng However, the Bureau ~s also planmng to prepare
a set of adjusted numbers that use samphng Therefore, state and local pohcy makers may be asked
to make the pohtacal demslon of whmh set of numbers to use for state and local redlstrmtlng It ~s
~mportant to note that the Bureau ~s under the direction of the Secretary of Commerce and policies
may change with a change ~n adm~mstratlon
One Person, One Vote
Post-census redistricting is often necessary because electaon districts for officials serving m a
representative capacity must achieve population equity within reasonable hmlts For local
governments, a variance of less than ten percent between the largest and smallest district is generally
considered de mlmmus The need to satisfy one person, one vote requires each elected body with
single member districts to assess the population changes in the districts and redraw the lines
(redlstrmO w~th the new census data
Retrogression Under Section 5
For "covered jurisdictions," wluch include most of the South, Southwest, parts of New York City,
Alaska, Cahforma, Florida, Michigan, New Hampshire and South Dakota, nearly every change in
a voting practice or procedure reqmres preclearance by the U S Department of Justice ("DOJ")
pursuant to section 5 of the Voting Rights Act The purpose is to establish that the change does not
have a retrogressive purpose or effect Essentially, a governmental body may not go backward in
the way it treats minority voters
Section 5 reqmres the government to obtmn approval of a change before it can be utahzed Changes
that are implement without having been precleared are subject to suit by the United States or any
interested citizen
Vote Dilution Under Section 2
Sectaon 2 of the Voting Rights Act is much broader than section 5 Section 2 makes it illegal for a
governmental entity to deny equal access to the electoral process on account of race, color or
language minority status It is the basis for challenging redistricting plans that allegedly dilute the
minority vote In 1982, Congress amended Section 2 to eliminate the requirement that plaintiffs
prove a discriminatory intent Now, &scnmmatory results are enough Section 2 cases involve the
quemon of whether the plan gives members of minority groups an "equal opportunity to partmlpate
in the political process and elect the representalaves of their choice" The amendment unleashed a
wave of successful suits challenging local at-large elections and resulted in the creation of many
single member districts and increases in the number of Black and Hispanic elected officials
New Limited Role for DOJ
The DOJ has previously been concerned not just with avoiding retrogressmn but also insuring that
plans maximized minority voting opportunity The DOJ has also persisted in applying section 2
analysis by looking for discriminatory results and intent dunng its section 5 review of preclearance
submissions In recent cases, the Supreme Court has rejected the DOJ's interpretation of the V°tlng
Rights Act and clarified that the DOJ's role under section 5 is limited to reviewing changes for
retrogressive purpose or effect Of course, even if the DOJ determines that a districting plan is not
retrogressive under section 5, either the DOJ or private cmzens may still challenge the plan as being
discriminatory under section 2
2
Racial Gerrymandering
In 1991, the primary legal issue facing the redistricting authority was whether the plan was in
compliance with sections 2 and 5 In 1993, the Supreme Court recogmzed a new cause of action
through which persons of any race can challenge plans as being based on unconstitutional uses of
race Shaw v Reno was brought by a group of white citizens challenging congressional districts The
plaintiffs in Shaw claimed that redistricting on the basis of race violated a constitutional right to
participate m a "color-bhnd" elect~on process The Court rejected that proposluon However, the
Court held that an effort to "separate voters into different districts on the basis of race" raises
constitutional concerns Under the 14~ Amendment, race is a suspect category, thus, those
districting plans based on race wdl be subject to strict scrutiny review -- a legal standard that is very
difficult to satisfy The district will survive only ~f it is proven to be "necessary" and "narrowly
tmlored" to satisfy a "compelling" government interest
When adopting a redistricting plan, governmental entities almost always make decisions with some
consideration of race Thus, th~s change in the law wdl make it extremely difficult to comply with
the Voting Rights Act Fortunately, the Supreme Court has provided some gmdance
It ~s permissible to be aware of race and to consider issues of race
Race, however, may not be the predominant factor
Distracts are not per se unconstitutional but may be evidence that race was the
predominant factor
If race was the predominant consideration, the districts are subject to strict scmuny
Compliance w~th section 2 is a eompelhng governmental interest
The Court is willing to assume that eomphance with section 5 is a compelling
interest
Compliance w~th section 5 does not mean doing whatever the DOJ required for
preclearance
WalkJng the Line
To mlmmize liability, governmental bodies should carefully estabhsh processes and criteria for
adopting redlstrictang plans Here are some pointers
· Know the law
· Adopt cmtena for evaluating proposed plans. Criteria might include.
a
using easily ~dentlfiable geographic boundaries,
avoiding sphtt~ng neighborhoods and communities of interest,
using whole voting precincts,
using existing districts (where possible),
drawing districts that are relatively equal and do not exceed a ten percent
population deviation,
f
drawing chstrlcts that are compact and contiguous,
keeping existing office-holders in their districts, and
narrowly tmlonng the plan to avoid retrogression for minorities
· Encourage and structure public part~cipat~on throughout the process
· Evaluate your compliance throughout the process
Conclusion
Red~smctlng in 2001 vail be substantially different than in 1991 Prewously, all the legal pressure
came from the Voting Pdghts Act Now Shaw v Reno provides pressure from precisely the opposite
dtrection Almost everytlung the govemmantal body does to comply vath one of its legal obhgatmns
makes it more hkely that it vall violate the other Thus, a governmental body must walk a legal
tight, ope Although there is little that can be done to avoid being sued altogether, there are steps that
can be taken to reduce the likelihood that any resulting lawsmts will be successful
Karen H Brophy
Karen H Brophy is a partner at Bxckerstaff, Heath, Smlley, Pollan, Kever and McDamel, L L P, ~n
Dallas, Texas The firm represents several local governments and serves as an advisor to the State
of Texas Karen received her J D from Umverslty of Texas School of Law She is a past President
of the Texas City Attorneys Association
Alan Bojorquez
Mr Bojorquez advises local governmental entittes m all areas ofpubhc law, including election law
Mr Bojorquez ~s the Former Assistant General Council at the Texas Municipal League He
graduated from Texas Tech Umverslty in 1996 (J D and M P A )
For more information contact Karen Brophy at 1-800-749-6646, 214-753-0225 or
kbroph¥~,b~ckers~aff eom For more on red~strmtmg, v~slt www vot~nglaw com
4
AGENDA DATE:
DEPARTMENT:
CM/DCM/ACM.
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
October 24, 2000
Planning & Development Department
Hill, 349-8314 i~ k~
David
Agenda
Agenda Item
Date
SUBJECT - SI-00-05, Denton Houstng Authortty, 713 Wdson Street & 1043 E Pratrte Street
Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding conveying real property to
Denton Housing Authority for affordable housing
A 715 Wilson Street The 0 544- acre property is located at the southwest comer of
Alexander and Wilson Street
B 1043 E Prmne Street The combined 0 764- acre parcels are located north of Prame
Street, west of the Phoenix Apartments and south of the Pec-4 drainage channel
BACKGROUND
Denton Housing Authority (DHA) has made a request (Attachment 4) to acquire the above
referenced vacant parcels from the City of Denton to develop affordable housing The parcel on
Wilson Street is proposed to be developed as townhouses wlule the parcels on Pralne Street are
proposed to serve as open space in conjtmctlon with the redevelopment of the Phoenix
apartments
Subsection 272 001(g) of the Local Government Code allows the city to convey real property
to an entity for low to moderate income housing without recelwng fair market value and
without going through the bid process It is the opinion of the Legal Department that City
may gift city property to the DHA for such purposes The Legal Department also
recommends that the conveyance contain a reversion clause that the property will revert to
the City if the property is no longer used for low-moderate income housing
Both properties are located ~n a One-family dwelling (SF-7) zoning dlstnct created in 1969
The development of the Wilson Street site will require rezomng the property to multi-fanuly
or a Phmned Development (PD)
Comprehensive Plan Analysis
The Comprehensive Plan identifies the Wilson Street site to be within the Existing
Residential / Infill Compatibility district "New development should respond to existing
development with compatible land uses, patterns, and design standards" The proposed use
(single-family resldentml) is compatible with surrounding existing uses Staff believes that
there may be concern over the design and compatibility of townhouses
The Prlnne Street site is within Developed areas of Floodplain Although there have been
recent drainage improvements m the area, a portion of the property contmns 100-year
floodplmn as shown on existing Federal Emergency Management Area (FEMA) map and
Letter Of Map Rewslons (LOMR) revisions It also appears that the property is outside the
floodway The current map shows that the 100-year base flood elevation is 662 5 With the
changes as submitted in the LOMR, the 100-year base flood elevation is 660 0 Typically,
during platting, the City will get all of the 100-year floodplain in a drainage easement and
reqmre a Conditional Letter Of Map Revision (CLOMR) and LOMR for any proposed fill in
the floodplain Any building constructed prior to LOMR issuance will be reqmred to elevate
2 5 feet above current 100-yr elevations After the LOMR, minimum finished floor
elevations will be set according to new 100-yr elevations As this property is already platted,
a requirement of any transfer of property should require drainage easements for all areas
within the 100-year floodphun
OPTIONs
City Council can honor DHA's request, reject the request, or consider the matter at a later date
Staff will provide additional information upon request, Council can also ask DHA for more
specific design information prior to release of the parcels
RECOMMENDATION
All city departments have been contacted to determine ff the parcels are needed for city-related
projects or purposes Provided the drainage and public access issues can be resolved, staff
recommends that the parcels be transferred to the Denton Housing Authority If so directed, staff
will prepare documents needed for formal Council approval of the transfers
ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE
~ The Wilson Street site is not platted and will need to bc platted prior to development To
develop townhouses the parcel will also need to be rezoned to allow townhouses
~ Prior to development of thc Prairie Street property a project plan will bc required
ATTACI{MENTS
1 Location Map
2 Zoning Map
3 Land Use Map
4 DHA Request
Director of Planning and Development
Prepared by
Assistant Planning Director
2
ATTACHMENT 1
NORTH
LOCATION MAP
Scale None
ATTACHMENT 2
NORTH
ZONING MAP
Scale None
ATTACHMENT 3
NORTH
LAND USE MAP
Scale None
Se
February 29, 2000
ATTACHMENT 4
Denton Housing Authority
EQUA~HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY
Mike Jez, City Manager
C~ty of Denton
215 E McK~nney Street
Denton, TX 76201
Dear M~ke
It was good to see you and to talk briefly on our plans for Southeast Denton on 2/18/00
Pursuant to our d~scuss~on, herein please accept tNs letter as a formal request by the
Denton Housing Authority for the acqmsmon of these properties delineated below
819 Wilson and Alexander, and tract 202 abstract 1184 sheet 4 ofH Slsco Survey
Abstracts are enclosed for specific ~dentlficatlon of smd properties
If the C~ty has a process by which it can donate real property to a not-for-profit
organization for the purpose of creating affordable housing, this would be our first thrace
a donation If the City does not have a procedure for conveying property to tax exempt
organmation, we would be interested m paying the apprmsed value of these propemes
and/or any discount the Cxty would consider
We apprecmte your interest in tNs matter and I look forward to hearing from you
End (2)
Phoentx Apartments
940/382 9638
Section 8 --
Emsung
817/383 1504
308 South Ruddell
Denton, Texas 76205
940/383 3039
Pecan Place
940/484 9535
Herttage Oaks
940/383 1506
~ ooo o< Roooo~ o <o
~z ~ ~z ~
~ mO zO
~
~o
Z
A-'i02 U.S. 377/1-35W
NORTH
Location Map
Scale Nor~
five calls!
Exhibit D
COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS
From the
OCTOBER 24, 2000
A-101 & A-102 PUBLIC HEARING
[Note? Ctty Planmng staff has prepared the followtng comments and questtons ustng
meeting notes and vtdeotape revtew If the comments, questtons, or speakers' names
have been represented tncorrectly~ or ~f om~smons have occurred, we apologtze and ask
that we be mformed of the overstght so that correcttons can be made ]
COMMENTS QUESTIONS FROM A-1011RYAN / COUNTRY CLUB AREA
1 Are the assessed amounts the market value or the assessed value? Shown on page
39
StaffResponse: The assessed amounts shown ~ndlcate assessed value taken form
the most recently approved tax roll, based on Denton County Appraisal District
data. The tax roll was approved by City Council m September 2000
2
In the recent past, Robson and Huffines agreements were made to pay for
overslzing of the US 377 line extension, and was a capital project funded through
the Utility Department as part of a negotiated settlement What other projects are
expected to take place ~n the next 5 years ~n which there is overslztng money for
the extenmons9
StaffResponse. The Robson and Huffines agreements were made on a "capacity
share" basis, meaning that the developers paid their proportionate share of the
master planned US 377 water 1me Oversmng of hnes occurs when an extension
is paid for by a developer, and the hne is oversized to allow intervening
properties to tie in to the line at a later date Such oversmng occurs on an as-
needed basis, and is situation specific. Oversmng is anticipated to occur in the
proposed annexation areas when extensions are required that pass by
undeveloped property
3 Distribution lines should come offthe major transmission hnes, and the city
should pay for the overslzmg
Staff Response Distribution lines d__~o extend from major transmission lines. If
the city pays for overs~zing, it is not allowed to be reimbursed for the cost of
oversmng A developer, however, is allowed to be reimbursed such costs
4
For ESA's, what are the restrictions and who has oversight responsibilities?
Within the ET J, D~vislon l, does development have to meet mlmmarn
requirements of FEMA, such as stay out of floodway, or fill 1 foot above flood
levels?
Staff Response Currently, area within Denton's Division 1ETJ must adhere to
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regulations, which
prohibit development in the floodway, but allow development in the floodway
fringe (floodplain minus the floodway) if the Finished Floor Elevation (FFE) is
above the 100-year Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Current c~ty subdivision
regulations are more specific, requiring that FFE's must be at least 18 inched
above the 100-year BFE.
The city's interim zoning regulations allow the transfer of ~ the density that
would otherwise be allowed from floodplain areas to non-flood plain areas.
The draft Development Code, expected to be completed by March 2000, requires
density transfer from the floodplain, with a relief measure provided to avoid a
claim of taking without compensation
5 A Sanders Road neighborhood written protest was submitted in opposition to the
annexation
Staff Response The petition was presented to City Council
6
Services typically expected with annexation ~nclude water, sewer, and garbage
service Currently, most residents in the area have water and great septic systems,
they do not want to pay taxes for no additional services
Staff Response Water, sewer, and garbage service are utlhty ratepayer services,
and are not supported by property taxes If property owners currently have well
and septic systems, and a private waste contract, they may continue w~th their
current services without having to pay a City of Denton utility bill Property
taxes support those services specifically listed as such in the service plan, and a
majority of property tax expenditures support police, fire, and emergency
medical services
Mr Burch has a lot of property In the flood plain, very little in the way of services
provided, and it's not worth the city's effort to tax the property He is still
actively farming the property The city has refused to extend water to his
property
2
StaffResponse' Water line extensions are the financml respons~bdlty of the
property owner. The city employs a "cost of service" pnnc~ple to utd~ty servnces,
and ali recipients of water servnce pay m some fashion for the cost of the hnes.
Mr Tommy Calvert, 5299 Settlers Creek Road, owns 140 acres that have been
used by 4 generations for agriculture production A portion is in the flood plain
that ~s undevelopable, and ~s only good for farming
Staff Response- Annexation does not prevent Mr Calvert to continue to pursue
the current use of the land. The dtmmnshed value of the floodplain areas
unsmtable for development ~s reflected ~n the apprmsal d~stnct assessment
values, and would not be taxed at the value of non-floodplain land. Mr Calvert
would still be guaranteed the same municipal services made avadable to other
property owners m the c~ty
9
With the depressed agricultural prices today it is impossible to pay the county
taxes If annexed into the mty it would be near impossible to pay for city and
county taxes by way of crops, hay or livestock
StaffResponse: Staffhas looked at the estimated tax impact on large,
undeveloped tracts that are used for agricultural purposes. Some examples.
Aeet Number Acreage Assessed Value Estimated Clty Tax
64685 180 79 $ 23,695 $ 125 15
76886 92 38 $ 60,710 $ 320 64
64736 88 49 $ 10,954 $ 57 85
64986 123 50 $ 22,485 $ 118 74
132660 80 11 $ 6,727 $ 35 53
64667 95 08 $ 24,667 $ 13028
154819 92 84 $ 21,353 $ 112 78
162869 92 36 $ 459 $ 2 42
These properties have agmeultural exemptions, and on the average, would pay
an estimated annual e~ty tax of between one and three dollars per acre.
10 Developments on the north (Thistle Hill) and east (Ryan Ranch) have created
problems of flooding, trash, development workers trespasmng on private property,
and the c~ty not being able to keep up with the development
StaffResponse. C~ty Councd has encountered resident complaints regarding the
interim impacts of construction activity The Budding Inspection staff has the
authority to reqmre comphance w~th c~ty codes, and has tssued a stop work
order when violations are not corrected in a timely manner Growth rates have
accelerated ~n recent years, and the c~ty ~s aggressively planmng to avoid
negative ~mpacts Transportation problems continue to cause concern with
respect to state and federal roadways, where compet~tion for funding ~s fierce
11 The enwronmental ~mpact of the development has created standing water on some
properties, and eromon control ~s not working on bridges and roadways Trees are
being removed from property being developed, which wall impact the
environment and the watershed
Staff Response. The city continues to work toward resolving these issues
through ~mprovements ~ncorporated ~nto the Draft Development Code.
12 C~ty taxes will create a burden on some famlhes because they are on a fixed
~ncome Crops raised are used to feed the hvestock The annexation will force
them to sell the property instead of passing ~t on to he,rs The city should
encourage annexations to occur voluntarily rather than mvolantanly
Staff Response The impact of c~ty taxes on some properties on noted In #9
above
13 Dot Thompson, 175 Ryan Road, was concerned w~th traffic ~n the Ryan Road
area The mty needs to take care of the traffic that ~s already ~n the c~ty hmlts Is
C~ty Councd was aware of traffic problems at Country Club Road and US 377?
A tax b~ll ~s all the property owners will receive No ex~stlng water or sewer
service lines are located along Ryan Road The annexatmn will amount to
d~scnm~nat~on ~f you are not treating the property owners ~n the annexation area
hke other residents of Denton What you are offering the c~t~zens of the area9
The c~ty ~s prejudiced because ~t wants to annex the property w~thout promd~ng
may services The c~ty ~s not offenng her anything she does not already have
What is the c~ty offenng in exchange for taxes9
Staff Response The Cl~'y IS aware that several intersect~ons need improvements
to handle increased traffic, and has approached the Texas Department of
Transportahon (TXDOT) to add signals, turn lanes, or other additions The
process takes time for state review, which is reqmred for all state and federal
roads Staff ~s aware of traffic congestion and speeding issues on Country Club
Road and US 377 The city and the county have $1,000,000 each m their current
Capital Improvement Programs (CIP's) to place toward the wldemng of US 377
from Country Club Road to 1-35. TXDOT has not given the city a timeframe for
widening Hwy 377, but c~ty and county participation in the prolect should speed
up the process. The c~ty also has $300,000 m the current CIP to place toward the
widening of FM 1830 Again, the State has no timeframe The city has been
worgdng with the State concerning lowering the speed hmlt on FM 1830 without
success to date
The city fully intends to meet the service plan requirements as per state law.
14 What is the time element for providing services9 What is meant by difficulties in
prowdmg services9 The Mayor elaborated on what city taxes pay for Water and
sewer service are not provided by taxes
Staff Response- The service plan indicates that several serwces will be provided
immediately upon annexation. Other improvements, such as the US 377 water
line, and the Graveyard Branch wastewater line, will be completed within 2½
years Work to design and secure easements for these lines is already underway,
and completion will occur well before the 4½ year timeframe
15 Is there a mechanism for paying taxes later9
Staff Response: Staff knows of no such mechanism.
16 Fred Smith, owner of the Denton Roundup Club on Ryan Road, ~ndlcated that
taxes would take money away from the kids
Staff Response' None.
17 Dawd Wltherspoon, 410 Hamilton Road, smd that annexation will just rinse the
taxes with no servmes Ryan Road ~s dangerous because of the hills The c~ty
needs to fix its own streets before taking on any other streets
Staff Response' None
COMMENTS / QUESTIONS FROM A-102~ US 377 / 1-35W AREA
If the City Council accepts the protest petitions, what does it mean9
Stafflndlcated that the petition was accepted to hear citizen input The petition as
submitted was not legally sufficient to reqmre a public hearing in the annexed
area as per state law
Staff Response: The petitions were accepted by Council Neighborhood
meetings have been scheduled to answer questions aside from the public
hearings.
2~ Legal Staff recommended changes to the service plan Recommended revisions
~ncluded, "Renewal of the service plan shall be at the discretion of City Council
, If the City Council determines the service plan needs to be amended, it may be
changed through the public hearing process If it is determined at a pubhc heanng
that conditions have changed or subsequent occurs make the service plan
unworkable or obsolete to may amend the service plan to conform to the changed
conditions"
Staff Response The recommended amendments have been made to the draft
service plan being considered on November 7th
Council asked if it was appropriate at the current time to amend the service plan9
The service plan was amended as per Legal Department recommendation,
approved, 7-0
Staff Response Service plan amendments will be considered by Council on
November 7th
4
City Attorney Herb Prouty noted that the amendments to the service plan could
not be made, because there was not proper notification The vote taken was
considered ineffective Stafff was dlrected to place proper language on the
November 7th agenda to allow the amendments
Staff Response Staff has acted as directed.
5
Staff thought that the protesters wanted the merits of the petitions to communicate
their desire not to be annexed They did not seem to be strongly interested in the
location of the next public hearing
Staff Response Neighborhood meetings were scheduled to respond to the
comments raised
6
Staff indicated that the separation of the annexation areas was due to differing
growth pressures A-101 growth pressure is from Teasley Road and Ryan
Elementary School The A-102 area growth pressure stems from the major
roadway connector from 1-35W to US 377, new water and sewer line extensmns,
and the potential for plat submittal for residential development Staff indicated
that property owners are weighing their options given the avmlabfllty of services
and are also aware of vested rights issues
Staff Response None
7
When is the US 377 / 1-35W roadway connector planned? There is currently $1 9
million in the current CIP Staff replied that it was understood that is Mr Jowell
is negotiating w~th the Burch Family to buy property to complete the connection
Staff Response The City has 1 9 mllhon dollars in the current CIP to part~cipate
in the construction of Vintage Parkway between Bonnie Brae and Hwy 377. The
remainder of the road including the port~on connecting to 1-35 W is proposed to
be developer funded The timing of the project is dependant on the developer
being able to obtain offsite right of way, and fund his portion of the road
Phdhp Henderson, at Bonme Brae and Hickory Creek, asked several questions
Council asked him to g~ve h~s phone number to staff so they could contact him to
answer his questions He had questions about the effect zomng will have on
6
exlstang sales of sand and gravel, and the potential for future oil and gas
exploration and wells
StaffResponse: Stafftr~ed to contact Mr. Henderson several times He is
currently on vacation. Staffwfll continue to try to contact him when he returns.
9 The status of the closing of Bonme Brae was questioned
Staff Response: The City's current mobility plan indicates that the bridge over
Hickory Creek on Bonme Brae will be removed Thns Is only one aspect of the
mobd~ty plan for this area. The mobility plan also Indicated the establishment of
Vintage Parkway which will provide access to 1-35 and Hwy 377, the widening of
Hwy 377, the establishment of a connection from Johnson Lane to Brush Creek
Road and an associated wldemng, and establishment of an extension of John
Payne Road from Crawford Road to Vintage Parkway Staff does not think that
the closure of Bonme Brae at Hickory Creek should be considered until a
significant portion of the aforementioned road system is in place Bonme Brae
south of the Vintage Parkway ns intended to remain open, as a local or collector
street.
10 Are uses established prior to annexatnon grandfathered?
StaffResponse: Land uses legally established prior to annexation are
grandfathered, and may continue to operate
11 What does the new code provide for oil and gas wells?
Staff Response The draft code does not address oil and gas wells Exnstlng
regulations will continue to operate, requiring a Specific Use Permit The draft
code will need to include language regarding oil and gas wells
12 Becky Koonce, 4365 Bonme Brae, is served by water, and has a septic system
, The county does not mmntmn Bonnie Brae very well, and the small section
malntmned by the city has not been maintmned all year long She sees no benefits
from the annexation Are fire hydrants installed9
Staff Response: For major transmission lines, fire hydrants are not ~nstalled.
13 Mary McWhorter smd that the residents of Happy Acres are 100% agmnst the
annexatnon I s the city going to request some kind of agreement with the Argyle
Fnre Department? They are voting members of the Argyle Water Supply
Corporatnon Is the Denton Country Club in the city limits? How much of the
property in Happy Acres ns undeveloped? Will the Argyle Fnre Department still
service the area? Will the addresses changer
7
Staff Response The city's fire department has entered into a "mutual" aid
agreement with the Argyle Fire Department, but has not entered into an
"automatic" aid agreement Should the area be annexed, Denton would still
expect to malntmn its mutual aid relationship. Denton Country Club is not
within the proposed annexation area. A majority of Happy Acres lots are
developed Staff is unsure exactly how many undeveloped lots stffi remmn.
Addresses will not change
14 Vmky Watson, 2452 Hamilton Road, asked What are the CIP projects related
with this annexatlon'~ Will the lines be extended to them9 Is involuntary
annexation the only option9 Explain the differences between voluntary and
involuntary annexation Is there a remedy for Happy Acres area9 Will Bonme
Brae be closed9 Will Bonnie Brae be repaved9 When will US 377 be w~dened9
Liberty Christian School did not get the proper zoning and the traffic and access
were not taken into account when it was developed Council explmned the
c~rcumstances of the project, including the opening of the school w~thout the
city's knowledge
Staff Response The queshons about Bonnie Brae Closure and Hwy 377
wldemng are answered above ~n #9 Bonme Brae south of the proposed Vintage
Parkway will remain in place as a local street or a collector street In reference
to paving Bonnie Brae, the current lnterlocal maintenance agreement between
Denton County and the C~ty of Denton specffies that Denton County is
responsible for maintenance of the entire road If annexed, the city and county
will reevaluate the existing agreement Also, paving South Bonnie Brae will be
considered ~n future budgets and CIP processes Staff expects that there will be
some ~mprovement to the road required by the developer when the Vintage
develops
15 BFI solid waste collection is provided to current residents How is this affected9
Staff Response: Staff indicated that private service may continue for 2 years
Denton Municipal Solid Waste will then provide services Such services may be
provided sooner if desired by the property owner.
16 David Saxe, 8023 South Bonnie Brae, was present last year at the mty-lmtiated
annexation Tract 1 is purely agricultural The City will provide a tax bill with no
services The fire protection proposed to be provided w~ll be inadequate, because
of the distance Bonnie Brae will be closed He spoke about the major connector
between 1-35W and US 377 - if it were to cross the rmlroad tracks, two other
crossings would be reqmred to close Which crossings are proposed to be closed9
He suggested that voluntary annexation be the way to go
Staff Response' Staff does not know which railroad crossings if any will be
closed to prowde for the new crossing at Vintage Parkway The railroad's
current policy is to close two existing crossings for each new crossing installed
and we expect that trend will continue. The closing of any radroad crossings wall
involve a pubhe input process.
17 Patnma Brown, 4300 Johnson Lane, felt that closing Bonnie Brae, a major north-
south thoroughfare, should not occur She felt that she should not have to be back
before City Council agmn within one year after talking about the annexation so
recently
Staff Response: The City of Denton is not restricted in terms of reviewing the
need for annexation within certain periods of time.
18 Betty Farmer, 9475 Hilltop Road, lnchcated that traffic on US 377 is bad Access
to Denton is through US 377 and Teasley Widening will not be effective due to
new subdivisions construction MaJority of the area is m the flood plain, why is
the city considering annexation when there is such a large area of flooding?
Council members responded that the city is interested in watershed management,
storm drainage, and water quality for protection of the entire city, and that
development is creating the environmental problems
Staff Response: Questions about traffic on US 377 have been answered above
Concerning Teasley Lane, the City has $250,000 in the current CIP toward the
design of Teasley Lane improvements, with the county contributing $700,000
toward the project Design work on the Teasley expansion has begun Denton
County has also indicated that $1.6 million has been reserved toward
construction. Teasley Lane should be widened by TXDOT in a 6 to 8 year time
frame
19 Lonny McGee, 1200 Brush Creek Road, asked if there are there other areas
proposed for annexation this year, and mqmred if the maximum annexation area
allowed in one year would be exceeded She also felt that Denton cannot provide
satisfactory police and fire service Pnwleges they have now include open fires,
discharge of firearms, fireworks, and they can build any kind of building without
any permits or inspections that cause delays and thsruptlons How much money is
the city getting out of this annexation9 He wanted acknowledgement of receipt
when he sends e-mall to City Council He felt that road improvements for curb
and gutter will be assessed and each adjacent property owner will receive a bill
for the improvements
Staff Response. The maximum area that can be annexed has not been exceeded
bT the proposed annexations. A city may accumulate up to three years of
unused annexation capacity to be used m a single year The amount of money
raised by property taxes will not cover the cost of services given existing levels of
development The City of Denton has not done assessment paving in nearly 30
years. The current practice is to fund such improvements with bond sales
through the CIP
20 Pdchard Smutzer, 7053 South Bonnie Brae, said the annexation is taxation
without representation No services will be ginned vath this annexation No one
on City Council represents him now The service plan can be speeded up or
slowed down When would services be provided, and are any guarantees that
services will be providede What happens if the service plan conditions are not
mete Legal staff indicated the state law allows property owners to challenge the
lack of services with m the first two years using a writ of mandamus The City
could agree to dlsannex or agree to a revised schedule for provision of servmes
Who pays for the attorney feese Stafflndlcated that if they are dlsannexed then
there is a procedure refund taxes prod, it is incumbent upon the property owners to
come in within 2 years with a writ of mandamus There is a provision that
provides that attorneys' fees be paid The court can require the city to provide
reasonable services within a certain timeframe or be assessed civil fines
StaffResponse Response was prowded as per above
21 Mont Wilkes, 141 Springfield Lane, said that the service plan has no specific
details, just ambiguous statements What ts the time frame9 Are the services
available in 2~A years, or does construction have to start for the services tn 2½
years Why does the city not have an annexation plane Should there be some
negotiation with the land ownerse What are the exceptlonse When does it apply
or not apply? He cannot watt 4½ years to get water service on Bonnie Brae
Denton does not have the best representation Bonnie Brae will be closed It
should not be closed The city's Subdivision Ordinance controls ETJ
development, so why ts annexation necessarye Restrict the area somewhat
Services should be provided before it is annexed Legal staff responded that
annexation plans were required to be filed by December 31, 1999 There is a
grace period for such annexation plans The exception states areas with fewer
than 100 separate tracts of land on which one or more residential dwellings are
located on each tract are the type of actions that require an annexation plan once
the grace periods ends However, the cities have until December 31, 2003 for that
provision to kick in This particular type of annexation is exempt from the
annexation plan requirements because the number of residences ts less than 100
even though there are over 100 tracts
Staff Response Legal staff response Is noted above
22 Kevln Wade, 6979 South Bonnie Brae, was concemed about fire protection and
prevention A mutual aid agreement ts proposed with the Argyle Fire
Department He believes the fire department cannot provide services to him as
well as his current service from the Argyle Volunteer Fire Department Bonnie
Brae will definitely be closed at US 377 Closing of the northern section of
Bonnie Brae ts proposed If closed prior to completion of other thoroughfares, a
safety hazard will be created because of the traffic problems on US 377 He
requested that Bonme Brae not be closed until other access If fully provided Five
years ago, at a City Council meeting regarding development of his property, with
10
developer Everett Frasler, City Planner Owen Yost led City Council to block the
provlswn of water
StaffResponse: Mr Wade's comments have been addressed in previous
responses
23 Shella Luster, 4377 South Bonnie Brae, smd that annexation should be for the
mutual benefit for both partaes Will agricultural exemptions stay in effect9
Evaluate the pros and cons. Why pay taxes with no additional servmes9 Water
tap fees and pavement of Bonnie Brae was not accomplished because the
developer and city planner could not get along and the improvements were not
made There is no intention of putting in fire hydrants before 2004
StaffResponse' Agricultural exemptions will remain in place at the discretion of
the property owner.
24 David Yoder, 940 Brash Creek Road, asked what is the tax rate? The response
was 52¢ per $100 valuation What is tax money going to be used for9 How is
annexation going to improve my quality ofhfe9 Is the road going to get better9
Am I going to get sewer9 What will I get from paying city taxes? What will the
posted speed limit on Brush Creek bev When will Brush Creek Road and its
bridge be improved? Will the police give speeding tickets to speeders?
Staff Response' A portion of Brush Creek Road is included an an lnterlocal
maintenance agreement between Denton County and the City of Denton If
annexed, that agreement should be reevaluated The City of Denton will
immediately assume maintenance of the portion not involved in the agreement
Standard maintenance includes pothole and base failure repmr Also, upgrading
of the road and drainage will be considered in future budgets and CIP processes
Areas under the jurisdiction of the Denton Police Department will ~ssue speeding
t~ckets for violations
25 Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek Road, was unconvinced that annexation will provide
any benefits The city does not need the money from small residential areas
Staff Response' None.
26 Mike Barber, 313 Allred Road, was present last year at the proposed annexation
and is st~ll opposed What is the density of Country Lakes North? There is no
plan on how the services will really be provided in the area
Staff Response: The density of Country Lakes North is 4 units per gross acre
27 M C Burch, 7034 Country Club Road, said the proposed water line is 4200 feet
long What is the distance required between fire hydrants9 He feels he is a victim
of progress, not a winner
11
Staff Response Fire hydrants are not provided on major transmission hnes
Hydrants may be installed at strategic locations if considered necessary to flush
lines to maintain water quality
28 Charles Hackett, Country Club Road, observed that a common thread is that no
property owner is in favor of annexation One of the reasons for annexation is for
control of the land dunng development Bent Creek Estates was not built to the
desired standards of City Council Bent Creek was in the city limits under City
Council control The control was not taken by City Cotmcll, and its authority was
not used to control the development
Staff Response None.
29 Gene Price, as a citizen of Denton, requested City Council to not annex these
properties
Staff Response None
30 Gary Davis, 970 Brush Creek, felt that City Council is asking for money for
things he already has How will it affect his utthty ball9 Will the annexation
affect the water rates?
Staff Response The annexation will not affect water rates
31 Tom Holamon, 3246 South Bonnie Brae, asked how can the c~ty of Denton
control the floodplain that he already controls? What can the city do with the tax
money to protect the floodplain? It can't be developed City Council assured the
property owners 10 years ago and the Vintage development that there was no
~ntent to annex his area to serve other developments You are doing what you
smd you were not going to do
Staff Response The city intends to maintain dralnageways In their natural state
to the extent possible Under current regulations, floodplain areas can be filled -
the draft Development Code proposes to address this issue
32 Terry Houston, 4524 South Bonme Brae, asked if there is any poss~bflity to sway
C~ty Councd to vote no9 What are the conditions to voting no to all the
properties? What is needed for a no vote? You should receive something for
what you get Staff responded that a super majority is needed to approve an
annexation Two votes against the annexation would deny the annexation
Staff Response Councd must vote by super-majority (either 6-1, 6-0, or 7-0) for
the annexation to take effect
12
SUGGESTIONS &COMMENTS
Annexation A-102 US 377 1-35W
Date November 7, 2000 ( Election Day)
Once agmn my name is Tommy R Holarnon and my vale is Sharlet Yount Holamon We reside
at 3246 S ,Bonme Brae St, Denton, Texas 76207 (a small, qmet little neighborhood at Bonnie
Brae and Roselawn Tbe nelghborhood consists of 7 RETIREE family homes, all built 20+
years ago The property(s) are located vathm 150 yds of the intersection of Roselawn Road and
S Bonnie Brae Our property(s) are listed in US 377 Area Tract 2, A-102 oftbe proposed
annexation
The City Council first needs to evaluate their long range plans for our area a little closer They
want to annex the Flood Plmn to control development and to preserve the habitat Their own
plans call for a park and greenbelt system for the S Bonnie Brae/Hickory Creek area Yet, for
over a year, 93 acres of Flood Plain acreage at the Bonnie Brae/Hickory creek bridge are has
been for sale at approx $2,000/acre and the City has not reed to acquire ~t If they wait till the
Vintage Development and others are bmR, we al/know that the land may already be sold and
expensive to acquire Don't simply annex us and overlook the long term goals Buy the land
now, if you really want to develop a flood plain habitat that locals can enjoy
The area is considered fully developed, except for flood plain acreage The same is probably
true for Happy Acres, Brush Creek, and others Since the City Council indicated that control of
FLOOD PLAIN development was the motivating factor for this Annexation, the Council should
consider an alternative to full annexation Namely, omit the developed acreage(s) and annex
only the undeveloped and controllable FLOOD PLAIN Since the properly owners farm the
flood plmni annexation would not be a significant burden
In addition, I believe the Council should be sympathetic to the impact or plight annexation vail
cause Granted City taxes vail dent our immediate pocket book, but what about when the City
comes back next year or so to modify or upgrade our existing road/drainage system, which may
not currently me~t code The City may/probably vall assess fees to existing residents for
upgrachng or mmntaimng These adchtional cost are simply unjust and unfair I sincerely
propose that the City make a firm comnutment to these annexed citizens NOT to assess any fees
or other costs for drainage or road repmr/maintenance (Example, cost to either close or upgrade
Bonnie Bra~ should not cost the local residents hwng on Bonnie Brae ) It is only falrl
The City could and should consider granting special concessmns to the lon~tlme residents of the
property in return for the burden of annexation At the very least, the City should grant longtime
farmer/rancbers of the FLOOD PLAIN rights to bum downed or damaged trees, brush that might
impede flood waters (Remember, we have been managing ttus FLOOD PLAIN for years and we
can managellt faster and better than the City)
Tommy R Holamon, 3246 S Bonnie Brae
AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEVELOPER & ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS
Elght Foot Brick Fence with concrete base, to be installed before
other construction begins, except for leveling for fence
Of the houses to be constructed
Maximum of 30 houses to be 1500 to 1800 square feet
M~nlmum of 14 houses to be 25o0 square feet or over (ad3oin~ng
or facing Holland and Smelser Property )
Remaining houses to be mlnlmum of 1800 square feet
Developers will provide access to Utilities to property on his
south side
LOt la¥~Jt · latt~t~ 10~J1/2000 1~1 gl U!
0 fl)
0
Thls Llst extracted from City Document "GR General Retail Dlstrlct
Permit%ed Uses "
RETAIL AND SERVICE TYPE USES
Antique Shop
Bakery or Confectlonary Shop (Retail)
Cafeteria
CleanlnG and Pressln9 Small Shop and Pickup
custom Personal Service Shop
Drapery, Needlework or Weaving Shop
Florist or Garden Shop
Laundry o~ Cleaning self-service
Mimeograph stationery or Letter Shop
Offices Professional and Adminllstratlve
Off Premise Sale of Beer and/or Wine
Licensed Private Club
Restaurant
Retail Stores and Shops - 4.000 square feet or less
Retail Stores and Shops - Over 4 000 feet
Studio for Photographer, Musicians Artist or Health
Art Gallery or Museum
School, Business or Trade
Off street Parking Incidental to Main use
Telephone Business Off~ce
Theater, other tha~ Drive-in Type