Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-19-1984 w CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SKEET MEETING DATE: June 19, 1984 S'03JECT: Receive the Planning and boning Commission recommendation for the five year Capital Improvement Plan SU~',MARY: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a pub'.-.c hearing to gather input from the public concer;•,- ing capital improvements on April 4, 1984, Tht capital improvement needs addressed at the public hearing and those through correspondence along with the master list of suggested capital improvements was used in arriving at the Planning and Zoniing Commission recommendation. All projects lis`ed beginning with the l~fib.lcc- year will require a Capital Improvement Plan Fond Election, ?.CTION' REQUIRED: Receive the Planning and Zoning Commission, re.:t^- mendation for the five year Capital Improvement Plan. ?,LTERN,kTi1'ES: Receive the recommended Capital Improvement Plan RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommends the attached Capital Improvement Plan, The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimousIN- recommends approval of the Utility Capital Ire^rove- ment Plan. EXHIBITS! 1. Capital Improvement Plan Funding Schedule Suggested projects and correspondence 3. Minutes of the 'Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Lill ari 5 l1 atT:InS Scr.PIanP,er I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING SCHEDULE • 1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING SCHEDULE 1984-1985 Prairie Street Drainage $ 1660000 Yellowstone - Sheraton Drainage 8 724,000 Update Signal Equipment $ 10,000 Total $ 900,000 1985-1986 U.S. 380 R.O.W, Acquisition W 200,000 Xatchinc Funds for U.S. 380 $ 700,000 Fire Substation 5 450,000 Total 81,356,000 The projects listed b:-low will require CIP Bond Election; 1.986-1987 Loma Del Ray Drainage S 825,000 Bridge on Woodrow Lane $ 250,000 Reconstruct Oriole Street 117,000 Traffic Signals 25,000 Sidewalk cn Vercules 15,000 51,232,000 Total Capital. Improvement Funding Schedule Page Two 1987-88 Improve Woodrow Lane $ 525,000 Stuart Road - Selene Drainage $ 320,000 Willowsprings Drainage $ 337,000 Traffic Signals 25,000 Total $10207,000 1988-•89 Oversize Paving $ 150,000 Stuart/Sunnydale Drainage $ 350,000 Taylor Park Drainage 5 300,000 i General Traffic Signal Inprovements $ 50,000 Windsor/Sherman Drive signal S 50,000 Pave Davis Street $ 15,000 Burning Tree Bridge $ 150,000 Burning Tree Drainage $ 64,000 Avenue E (Eagle to service road) $ 40,000 Total 51,169,000 • 046Sa v ,v SUGGESTED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS • SUGGESTED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 1. Repair or rebuilding of older deteriorating streets, $30,000,000 (includes all streets in the 1979 Street Study) Bond Issue 2. Drainage on Kingfisher Street. $ 73400 3. Stuart/Sunny Dale Drainage, $ 375,000 4. Willowwood/Dudley/Parvin/Lindsay Drainage $ 300,000 5. Old North Road - Nottingham Drainage. $ 352,000 6. Archer Trail - Emerson Drainage. $ 21,700 7. Burning Tree Bridge. $ 150,000 8. Burning Tree Drainage. $ 63,700 9. Crescent/Fulton Bridge - Add inlets to $ 1,000 existing grates 10. Duncan Street/Shady Oaks Drainage $ 30,000 11. Improvement of Bonnie Brae Street from Scripture to $ 50!:1000 Highway 380, 12. Drainage improvements near Coit Street, $ 16200 13. Improvements to the Cooper Creek Channel (Bond $2.8'S,4.4 Issue) million 14. Pave, curb and gutter Davis Street between Bradshaw $ 1:,000 and Crawford Streets. 15. Street and drainage work at entrance to Acme Brick $ 1000 Company. 16, Reconstruction and drainage Locust and Elm in $2.2 million city limits, 17. Audra Lane Drainage $ '-01 000 18, McKinney Street (Culvert 800' west of Bellaire) $ :5,000 19, McKinney Street (Channel work 1200' downstream) $ ?0,000 20, Drainage improvements in the Southridge area. $ 7-01000 Capital Improvement Projects 0 page 2 21, Improvement of Teasley Lane I.35 Interchange. $ 40000,000 22, Improvement of paving of Johnson and Smith Streets. $ 2S0,000 23. Preservation of the City's environment including development of greenbelts and cleaning of drain- $ 1,0009000 ageways, (Per Mile) 24. Drainage improvements behind 3001, 3101 and $ 15000,000 3011 Santa Monica (creek behind houses floods accessory buildings during heavy rains - MONTECITO CHANNEL.) 25. Traffic signal (Sherman/Windsor) $ 500000 26, Improve Ave. E (Eagle to Service ku.ti $ 40,000 27, Finance professional study to determine alignment of $ 151000 Bell Avenue. 28. Drainage improvements on Avenue C between Eagle and $ 1009000 I-35E access road. 29. Development of internal roadway system for Airport. $ 5009000 30. Development of a comprehensive system of bicycle $ 102501006 lanes and jogging trails. 31. Widen Teasley Lane at site of new school, $ 45,000 32, Development of a central social services center. $ 230,000 33. Development of branch libraries. $ 3"51000 34, Purchase of a bookmobile. $ 200,000 35, Development of stort:-front libraries, $ 50,000 36. Development of lighted stage for theater productions at the Civic Center. Capital Improvement Projects Page 3 37, Land acquisition for neighborhood park in northeast Denton. 38. Park development in southeast Denton, 39, Improvements to existing City parks, $ 200,000 (Per Year) 40, Continued development of North Lakes Park, ) 41, Neighborhood recreation center in northeast Denton,) 42, Deepen channel - Savannah Trail & Fairfax, i I • 0 39`3a I r K/UlTvws Woman's Ut iversity P.O. Box 23427, Denton, Texas 76201 (817) 383.1466 OFFICE OF THE PRWIDWT March 7, 1984 fr, , Hobert LaForte Chairman Planning and Zoning Ccamission City of Denton ftnicipal 'Building .Denton, Texas 711 Dear Nir, LaForte; Thank you for your letter of February 22 extending an invitation to participate in the recomuendations leading to the five year capital ir!>provemen r plan, In behalf of the Texas Woman's University, I subalit the project for relocation of Bell Avenue to the east of its present location as specified Da the campus development plan which is on file with your committee, I believe that existing data on this proposal are in your file and so I will not duplicate here, However, if you do need other information or if those files do not contain data You need, please feel free to contact me, Best wishes, Sincerely yours, Mary Evelyn Blagg Fh;ey President '~EBH:jf CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS REQUEST DENTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT • 1964 (in 1984 dollars) Acquire land for softball expansion and proposed Community Center in Mack Park area $ 600,000 $ 600,000 1985 Hire architect to design community center, Senior Center addition, and school/center for NE Denton $ 325,006 Apply for TPW grant funds for development of two softball fields at Mack Park, begin development 250,000 Develop two school/park sites 100,000 $ 675,000 1986 Start construction projectsi Community Center $2,500,000 Senior Center Expansion 750,000 Apply for TPW grant to develop soccer complex at North Lakes, begin development 500,000 Re-develop and light fields at Evers 300,000 Re-lamp and renovate fields at Denia 100,000 Hire architect to design School/Centers 100,000 Develop two school/park sites 1001000 Acquire and develop park sites in four priority areas, get TPW grant 825,000 $5,175,000 1987 ' Construct School/Center in NE Denton 500,000 Develop two school/park sites 100,000 Carroll Blvd, median improvement 100,000 Re-develop five existing park sites 330,000 Acquire and develop park sites in four priority areas, get TPW grant 825,000 Construct band shell in Civic Center Park 250,000 University Drive median improvement from Sell to Loop 288 200,000 University Drive median improvement from Carroll to I-35 200,000 $2,505,)00 RECEIVED APR 0 1934 I Page - 2 1988 Construct School/Center in Ear SE Denton $ 500,0:. Expand tennis center 350,01.,, Re-develop five existing park sites 330,00:. Construct additional baseball/football practice fields at Evers 150,00':' Construct two softball fields at Mack Park 350,00,:, Build restroom/concession stands at Denia and Evers 120, 0C': Re-surface parking areas in Denia and Evers 300,OC1: Acquire and develop park sites in four priority areas, get TPW grant 825,4QI $2,925,0( 1989 Re-develop five existing park sites $ 330,4:1:) Acquire and develop park sites in four priority areas, get TPW grant 825,4 Acquire new community park in NE and SE Denton 800,0C.'D $ 1,955,0,:,{) . TOTAL $13,835,441 NORTH TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY OKNTON, T9XA1 74203.3737 OFFIQt DF TNS vict PRSSID[NT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS December 15, 1983 Mr. G. Chris Hartung City Manager City of Denton 215 E. McKinney Denton, TX 76201 Dear Chris: Thank you for your letter dated December 12, 1983, regarding Avenue E. As discussed at our meeting yesterday, it will require all our available funds to pay the back charges for sewer service. Accordingly, it will not be possible in the foreseeable future for NTSU to participate in the financing of the Avenue E project, We would, therefore, appreciate it if you would put the project on your list for future CIP funding. Sincerely, (=~;N Frederick Pole Vice President for Administrative Affa',rs mp 0 S . /gGa~-~ ear , y Q,, ( 74v N,T, BOX 13737 8 17!366.2103 MLT RO: 267.0652 Denton Independent 6chool District GLCI OF TNI A4416TANT 80I114NTINOONT NOX 307 $Q011491111 AOFAINI r a N OX DENTON.TSXAS 70202 March S, 1;84 Mr, Robert LaForte, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission %o Planning and Community Development Dept. 215 E. McKinney 8t. Denton, Tx. 76201 Dear Mr. LaFc•rtei 7i'tank you +or the opportunit`f +or al lo.,ring the Dentc,r, IndB~" Zd?r' . School District to respond to the Capital Improv?ment P1 an for ---2- C .it~• o+ Denton. The 3chcol dl strict will be opening, Iis school the Evers' Park site in August, 1i$8. It Is our recommendation tha-: the r~Dn•ai der adding sidewalks on the street where th? ,chool 3 Io.ated, on hl inds.or to Hinkle, and on Highway 21.64 to the mobil? some park . In addI t 1 on , the : i ti should study the ne?.i for tr.af+ i trol sl~r,als at the -:orner of Wind-or and Highwa.>• 77 and at the corn?- o+ Windsor and Highway 2154. This must be thor.oughly =-tudied and reviewed prior to the open!nq of school in August, 19$x. It -r 3?so our opinion that these needs should be re prioritized and pIA_e~ - the 19:4-8-5 ctpi te,l improvements budget so that these improvement? ' 1 b? ready when they are needed. Thank you for ;your consideration in this. matter. Pleas? c nta•:i me i+ I C.an be of Furth?r servic?, EincereIy. .d.~,~reA' ~C3 ~.--.-5' iii 1bert Be rna.t?in C1 Dr R,:zb9rt H c Q o r 1' ECc! v LU f 1Ax; J, r W J Street 14alntenanco Program First Priority lo Doundaiies Length Estimated Riding u.stress t Name --r-roll, TO Miles Class Constrr~ction ualit p;;,ints Si;e Cagle UnlVol, sity 1.70 Al 4C R--766,700 2 ,76 University Sherman 0.30 C30C g, 150 3 13 University Cagle 1,70 A40C 72,250 2 61 Bolivar Jagoe 1.00 A36C 400000 1 65 ory Avenue C Welch 1.10 R-440,000 75 ory-j(el** Cedar Austin 0.20 A18C 9,060 2 67 ory Carroll Cedar 0,10 A36C R-36,800 2 75 st University Orr 0,65 A34C 223880 2 64 ue A I" Highland Mc Corrnick 0.55 A34C I1-104,100 2 75 It-ass Oakland Ponder 0.95 C34C 339440 2 69 ~oll Northridge Ross 0.50 A36C 20,000 2 60 10 141thers Morkingbird 0,20;.' R30S 120950 2 58 / Austin Bolivar 0.20 A50C 100090 2 55 ory Austin Rit 0,30 A55C 179960 2 52 \j 1 RR Austin 0.20 A40C 80500 2 50 ie Brae ~It U.S. 77 University 0.35 C25S R-71,400 3 75 dr'a 1'ICKinney Cnd or Divide 0130 C55C 17,960 1 62 Lt In9ham University Windsor 0,30 M OC 34,000... 2 62 lch ✓ Cagle CIlastnut 0040 C40C 17,000 2 59 lclr ✓ Chestnut Oak 0.30 10,560. 67 rnar•d~ Ifickory Cagle 0.60 A30C 10,300 2 55 st Oak Donnie Brno Jagoe 0.70 A36C 24,640 2 50 L st Oak / 111-35 Y 0.30 A64C R-130,000 4 70 nsaC Anna University 0,35 R34C 12,320 1 53 liver Congress University 0,30 C30C R-267 300 4 95 liver 11arkway Congress 0,10 C30C R-33,500 4 100 iala !Mockingbird loop 233 0,35 R34C R-117,200 3 102 enwood I-lindsor University 0.70 R34C R-234,300 2 79 em-rood laurel Wood Sherman 0,90 R34C 31,630 2 51 ame I?I(X S. 1MckInney 0,30 134C 10,560 2 55 } Y ✓ Scripture Ifickory 0.20 R34C 1,040 2 52, rnard./ 14iI)orvrvood 111-35 0110 R36C 41000 3 65 away Bolivar Fulton 0045 R34C 150340 2 69 ;tywood Not t in911DIN G l enwood 0.45 R44C 210130 ` 2 64 cc Congress University 0175 R34C 26,400 2 63 'd -McKinney 'texas 0.50 R34C 17,600 2 67 Street Maintenance Program Second Priority Street Boundaries Len th Estimated Riding Disr.ress amo "7r•o~r~'~ 3o Milos Class Construction Cost unlit Po` n t s Stuart Selina Sherman 1000 C30C 300500 42'%, Audra End of Divide New Paisley 0110 20,400 102L-. ; Crescent Malone Carroll 0,35 12,320 QV f~ Shady Oaks 1-111 low Springs Woodrow 0.60 R34C 21,120 1 Ii 1 i knr Springs Dallas Drive Shady Oaks 0.20 C50C 9,OGO - 1 uddell Paisley Willis 0,20 C22S 90500 4 511 lercuies Redstone Stuart MS, C60C 16,440 1 57 lercules Picadilly Sheraton 0,30 C34C 100560 1 55 ulkey Oaktree .'tudra 0.45 R25S 210375 1 4; lock ingbird McKinney Oriole 0.50 834C 17,600 1 11 rairIe'rj" Avenue F Bonnie Brae 0,45 1500640 73 ~._1 olivar Northridge University 0,70 R34C 2340330 x,76 Ialnut Austin Cedar 0110 R34C 3$20 2 6U Justin McKinney Mulberry 0115 R34C 51200 2 5+1 ;odor Mulberry McKinney 0.20 R34C 70040 2 6d 'ec;n Cedar Austin 0.10 R40C 41250 2 IN Crawford • Texas McKinney 0430 ' OR34C 100660 2 ~ 64 Ileadloo Hinkle Bolivar 0460 R34C 21,120 2 67 Dan i son Iload 1 ea Un i vors i ty 0,50 R34C .01, 6 ' (2-1961..- 1974 <2- Willow Springs Shady Oaks Kerley 0,20 C34C 7,040 52 Hobson Lane Teasley FM-1830 1115 C25S 54,620 61 hmas Massey Ft, Worth or, 0.70 R25S 1420000 ii Rinse Paisley Texas 0.15 R25S 300000 f 89 Texas Rudde11 Crawford 0105 R25S 10,200 1 82 Pearl Denton Carroll 0.75 251,060 79 Emery Fulton &2001 Carroll 0,35 R34C 12,320 2 ~ ON0 1 Coit Wes Way Congress 0.70 R34C 24,540 2 10 Danton r Crescent liickery 0,75 R34C 26,400 1 $6 Anna Panhandle University 0,60 R34C 210120 2 ~ Woodhaven Misty%vood Emerson 0130 R34C 1000430 77'\ Cherrywaod Greenwood Wood land 0.20 R34C 660950 ~ 77Wood land Cherrywood Sherman 0.50 R34C 17,600 2 G n Kayewood Crestwood Greenwood 0155 R34C 1.90360 2 Crestwood Live Oak University 0.55 R34C 19136Q195G~/; 36o 2 f+D Avenue Of Maple Underwood 0.30 R30C 90150 2 5i8 Thomases Oak Emery 0,05 R34C 29,920', 1 5ie Linwood Sherman Crestwood 0,25 R34C x,000 2 y, Amarillo 40 Gregg Panhandle MOO' 0.40 R34C 14,000 1 g,5 order./ oak Linden X100' 0,50 R34C 179600 1 56 ontorroy Sierra Sherman 0,35' R34C 12,320 2 56 illIamsburg Nottingham Jamestown 0,20 R34C 7,040 2 55 bests Northwood poll 0.35 R34C 12,320 2 55 ckrrood Emorson l.aurelwood 0.30 1t34C 10,560 1 54 iuiasa Bolivar Hinkle 0155 , R34C 19,360 2 54 urelwood Kayewood University 0145 R34C 15,840 2 53 1 Akins Drive Dallas Drive Cast End 0.30 R34C 10,560 1 53 nhatLan Sherman Stuart 0.30 It34C 10,560 2 52 anloy Emery Panhandle 0.50 R34C 17;600 1 52 1)inwood Emerson University 0,60 R34C 21,120 1 51 no Oakland Locust 0,10 1125C 2,460 2 62 rma100 Oak Scripture 0,15 R34C .502'00 2 59 cond- UoliVal. Locust 0,20 R34C 71040 1 56 yd Tyler Lattimore 0,20 R34C 7,040 1 53 i" Hotta Oak Scripture 0,20 R34C 70040 1 51 tidy Ilwy. 300 Hampton 0,55 R25S 1120200 , g5- rshall Ilwy, 300 Hampton 0160 R25S 122,400 ,apton Marshall Marsh llranclt' 0,75 R25S C2,1a0,00U~ /S3~ oe d riat,- Ilamp Lon Marshall 0175 R25S 35,620 11 67 3F..,. Eagle High Iand, 0.15 R25S 300600 110=x= 1 Street Maintenance ProSrani Third Priority Boundaries Length Estimated Ridinq Distres! reed Miles Class Construction Cost Quality points We Drae University Scripture 0,75 C38S 280,500 3 90 dra Paisley Loop 288 0155 C55C 299,470 2 102 yno North Leg III»35 1620 R20S 214,800 3 77 l~lef Avenue D Bernard 0170 R34C 234,330 2 encer Woodrow Loop 288 1140 R25S 205,600 2 92 Locust South End III 35 0.20 R255 40,000 2 86 me Bernard S. Locust 0125 R25S 51,000 2 94 selawn Ft. Worth Or, County line 1.35 R25S 275,400 2 85 enuo E./ 111 35 Eagle 0.05 C34C 16,740 2 102 ' L~ . able, III UENTON STREET INVENTORY SUffhUlitY SHEET FLEXIBLE PAVEMOT Category 3 - Overlay Needed Priority 3 Boundaries Stre Length Estimated Ridiing• Oistr et Ilarno, rom~ To ftilos Class Cons truction uali t Q Poll) Camden Ct, Londonderry Cui do sac 0,05 R34C 10760 Z' G9 Kingswood Londonderry Cul de sac 0105 R34C 1,7ti0 4 r X67 Northwood Ter Cdgewood Cul du sac 0110 R34C 3,520 L 65 Prior Tuck Lockslay Cul de sac 0110 R34C 3,520 62 Scripture III-35 Bonnie Brao 0.50 C22S 23,750 62 France Wood Iand University 0.10 R34C 39520 61 So. Locust 111 35 Eagle 0.10 R25S 49750 3• 60 Preston Place Greenwood End , 0.10 R34C 39520 Z 50 C(1n1I)b011 McKinney Paisley 0,•35 1134C 12,320 1 41 llouston Place Fild Marietta 0.60 R34C 219120 1' t 41 Fannin Bernard Avenue 0 0.40 R34C 149000 1 42 naIinrvood Glenwood Kayewood 0.05 R34C I t760 1 42 inyder (Jayne , Tyler 0115 1134S 110010 1 42 • ,r s, • • Iiradshow ~ PA IS loy McKinney 0.30 11340 10,660 I '46 tlan Malone Ilolivar 0100 R34C 20,160 I 46 I'irsL Do liVal, Locust 0.15 R34C 6,200 1 46 Sawyer Oakland Locust 0115 R25C 3,160 1 46 Shawnee Mingo University 0,30 R34C 10,560 I 461' Third Bolivar Oakland 0.30 R25C 71390 ! 46 Chasewood Pembrooke i'loodbrook 0110 R34C 30520 ! 4'7 Collier 111-35 Eagle 0,25 R34C 80800 1 _,\47 Gold Ct, Wisteria End 0.10 R34C 3,520 ! 47 Lovell ScripLure Egan 0.10 R34C 3,520 47 Myrtle Daugherty Collins 0,25 R34C 80800 2 47 Old Lee Ct, burning Trea Cul de sac- 0.05 R34C 1,760 I 47 Amherst Georgetown Hinkle 0,40 R34C 14,000 I 10 Gary Locust Bolivar 0.10 R34C 3,520 1 40 lie0ther SLrfl tFord Oxford 0,50 R34C 17,600 Z 40 Avenue 0 Highland 111-35 0,25 R34C 00800 49 Broken /brow Old Orchard Burning Tree 0130 R34C 10,560 L X49 foxceoft hmerson emerson 0.70 R34C 24,640 ! 49 Royal Lane 1-1Istywoud Rockwood 0.10 R44C 40695 i 49 Santa 140111ca El Paseo Hobson 0.55 R34C 19,360 1 49 rivers IIoirk ins Drive P1011g Rock 0.0 R34C 1,760 1 42 Ictor Ia NuttIngham Churchill 01 ?5 1134C 0,000 1 42 isLei, Ia Pllllowwood CIO lf 0.10 R34C 3,520 1 4? 00dr0rd CL. Woodford 00ad end 0105 R34C 1,760 2 42 vc(rue C Mulberry Oak 0.20 R40C 90060 2 43 1 fiasco CarrnoI 'Santa Monica 0135 C44C 16,430 1 43 i X111,111(1 1:1115 Welch 0.60 R30C 100300 2 43 rshing SLuarL Atlas 0.20 R34C 71040 1 1Lhers Oakland Mingo 0.30 R34C 100560 1 43 rsLin Oakland Parkway 0.70 R25C 17,240 1 44 Il'Lwood Trail SLwar t Bell 0.25 R44C 110740 1 44 '(111(0 lift Tracks Grove 0.25 R34C 00000 44 lldo)ph 14111owwood lli-35 0.50 R34C 17,600 1 44 bin Circle No LtIn gham Cul de sac 0.10 1134C 3,520 1 44 truly Creek Ailge 1 I na Bond Angel Ina fiend 0.15 1134 C 51200 1 411 'enue 11 Oak II ickory 0.05 11400 2,125 1 I(jewood Nor Lhwood Crestwood 0.10 R34C 3,520 1 45 dustrial hickory Bell 0.20 R40C 00300 1 45 Y11011 a Il Ink le Bolivar 0.55 R34C 19,360 2 45 rtl(wond Greenwood It oberLs 0.20 R34C 71040 1 45 sLwood 1) arvin 14111owwood 0.35 R34C 12,320 1 4, PROJECT LOCATION , AND DESCRIPTION DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PIIOJCCT Illy[ AIIU NUMUCII Prairie Street Drainage 11WONSICIC ul.rAnt►r[NT ANU0IVISICN Etip, ineering; and Davelopment PROJECT NORATIVE LOCATION MAP r II .a..iti This project: is to concrete the channel of Pecan jn~LjJ<<<~k Creek next to Fred Moore Park. JL J L 1D~ Q Y1Y.►.1 M = 171 [1 EL Ob E-10 ❑ Dn = DD ISLIE1=1 M±l ~0 ~ a x=1 1.1 F r--, D Alt 1 w i •.1 11J r J ~l _ 111~QY I \ D aaa~~~~ D~... DD ~d Y 111 A Kh•lr IN Ia AM l• r`~ d«~~ ! y ~ • • Yd 1 • • ~ ,r17 e 1 /,p:'111,5~MI n htiOJ. a•.I.aart/.'w/.s+1o/wn rr+w Yu+Yr M1WYrr.v.YY.I.~ I~wMbiM/1►/IYr.wbMYIwwYIrw~M.Y.r'MYrYw WOIWwr.~i lww►wfAMMwYRMMtMY~Iw I WhMMMIiI{q~pYYpt1LUL• 4{1161 i11 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS i'ItUJECr IIiIE AND NUAIUEII Yellowstone-"-Sheraton Dratnage ilI0 0101DLE OEPAntME111 AND OIVIli011 Engineering and Development hBOJCCT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP Tilts project is n major improvement to the drain , age system in this area and will alleviate flooding of homes in the Yellowstone-Sheraton Street area. Ito ~y . I,fwl, Y~/~ • M Yv y I 1~ r ~ '1 4' 1 r L _ Z 4 / ~ l.w.lll . - ] f{!I if h'I I111Y + Ljr_ trY+a. 1 .1Y 1 l/. coo .IM1.Irr ~1 mrlT'1 °ici d 4 ld!f "s aw y - ~e+ MI,Y/ Y ,1111 u1111 IYI{ 1.M V O C~00.. 10'rt r • "1 ~ n yti :4tww+.u ,...w.. r o.....1►..n,..»wi..... w.«w«vw.r.+..~w.r.ww..w Zstti r1.4 aMyy 11 TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS ' hIIIIJECi 14E A!!U NUTAOClI 'Pra CCic Signal 1'mprovoments IIES IMULE UEMApFAIENT ANU OMS1UN P80iF'CT MA ATIVC LOCATION MAP This, is a project to update traffic signal equipmont and to improve the Bell Avenue and i Eagle Drive intersection. 'I ILI --•r- ~1 Iii ~I i 11~ 1, r ww..,r dsoio~ STREET IMPROVEMENTS PriOJr;Ci 11fLt I!N NUAIUEN U.S. 380 R.O,W, Acquisition IIE3POIISIOLI, WA AIWEli I AIIOOIY131014 Engineering; and Development P00JECT NAgnATIVE LOCATION MAP 'I Tho '1'cxus State Highway Department plans to I i reconstruct U,S, 3fi (University Drive) from 1 l' Locust Street eastward to the City limits. The ! resulting thoroughfare will have excellent access I\) between central and east Denton. The City's ( -I required contribution includes Participation with1 the Stai:e for right-of-way purclases, _ r tit , ~ 1)~...'.~,w -1 IF' JI I I ,i ;r' it" -I N "00/ T • • ,•~~f'C:IdIKIrsfMY~n111 FI+wl.NY~VMW~MM:NYMrM.+aflww.M ' Yrn1+r1/~t NYAw~..11~ ' ~f.{/Kd1 ML~ STREET IMf'RCVL•:14ENTS P110JE01 11f1E A11U 11UAlDCfI MrjLcli:tnV; funds for Ilighway 380 ACIP011910I.C DEPARTMENT ANDOM910N Engineering and Development PROJCCT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP The Texas Highway Department plans to reconstruct I~ l U.S, 380 (University Drive) from Locust Street' ,to the City limits, The resulting thoroughfare will havo excellent access betwoen central and east Denton, The City's required contribution includes participation with the State in utility relocations rind construction of drainage systems. ~ ~+'s'' • c1 Ilk( Y.IVI,U 1 !1 M' , ~ .1, llr1 .il~~y Ij11I;j,ll;/! rl` 1f I PUBLIC BUILDINGS rltuJCCI ;ITC ANJ NUTAD(A Hire Substation Nt9p01491OLC OCIM11TMUIT A11001YOWN Ingineering and Development: PROJECT NAj1nA1'IVE LOCATION MAP A standard two-bay fire substation will be con- structed on a site to be selected to ensure (t orderly provision of fire protection and to meet State standards, I'I A fire substation is necessary to improve the ~~II City's ability to adeq .lately respond to fire and ambulance service needs. ^ i.. ~ ~ Ct cL::~ 1 Ilk y y ~ 1 ~ , '.S6+6+M"A boar Mawraewrw~wr~wew ~,,.1YUN7~MMIMMI 7M DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS rl+u~tot t u~t quo +tu~+ncn Loma Del Ray Drainage atsrons+n~r utr~ntut+tr ~uao+v+s+ott Engineering and Development PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project will help 'alleviate drainage prob- lenis around the Loma Del. Ray and Singing Oaks Apartments, Oriole Street, Kingfisher Street and Cardinal Street. Water fequently tops the curb in this area and occassionally homes on Kingfisher Street. __JFF 7F ' 3 $ (x/1!-4-Ll1-PS ~ 1 Y b~ Yl l _ J * `Y1 11 F Y /.Ot Y Irluww w+.wrrnr~. ' 1•I~Ibe~7~ ~TkEET IMPROVEMENTS eiWAgI iIJLE ANU NUMDEII Bridge on Woodrow Lane 111MUSIDLE WMUNT AND DIVISION l-ngineering and Development _PnOJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION M«P The exisUing bridge over Pecan Creek'on Woodrow Lane is a low water crossing and is frequently- LEO underwater during heavy rains. This project is for reconstruction of, the bridge to solve this '1 problem, f 0 W. 414 El F014-1 W"I . Q~ I~` Y .r r"rw L'~. 0[wn10 h, 144 4~P{ v IM ~a C 0 • .+Ifwsw..ra«Y cww,+lf ' r1loJc01111LE A11u rluti+uKU STR[El IMPROVEMENTS Reconstruct Oriole Street NONNIVOL( uEPA It tM04T A h 0 Di Y1IW14 .Engineering and povelopment PROJ E'C NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP Oriole Street is one of the worst streets in the City, This project is for reconstruction of the ~ •w•~ ~ 1' street, 7[ ' •Y h s ~ ~--ir ~ , VIII w f ~ f ~F fx0~ r , r.V1tY'a~wV■~ 1MMMAM~1 1MYfl~1 r rnwAaa ii7L c uu i~uiencu TRAFFIC IMPROVCMCNTS 't'raffic Signal Improvements rlCSPOASIDLC DEVAI AE111 ArroUIY141011 t;nglneering and Development, PnQJCCT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project is for acquisition and updating; of traffic signal equipment- city-wide. ' J~T: ~~i"~III~ 1, f IIi 1 IV ~r• C ice.{ ~lf'[~~'~ , ' • • ~J • VVIV •I.. '~11::, I ~ Imo. 1 r i T ~ 1 ~ III ;.A Yfla1AMAAAYNA►MMVII.AAAM~MIt~r«JrAAtrAIArAM •IA~MNI«rlrtrll IYIMAMMM7R1IN1 W1 STREET IMPROVEMENTS P1 dJ( Q1 II1LC AIII) HUM OEII Sidewalk on Hercules HWIDfISIILE WAntIVIENT AIID DIVISION Engineering and Developme.pt -pRQJCCT NARRATIVE The sidewalk will be on Hercules where no side- walk exists to provide a safe school route for' children going to Woodrow Wilson 8lementary School, ' 1 M r±r~ \lip ,al«1 1 1 w ypl'~ ~ wJ r 3 trail C ^a11IEEE , ~~.JJ 1 fir. A IA«A Fr « IOM r +f. ~ 4 4 ' Yr1A _ ~F Q 4y1 r y{ ` tfw""M -__LY INUrt It Oil t"- E-3 F- ©li r ~y~~ A~~ j Itatylt/ AI IN A fMV ~r A... Cie. ( Tt'•.>,>r . fLttM~ Verne, New MtNUtWnII, gIMAAt~tprll LM/~Rl/+AJ~1K.~W lrA tig iYY1HM)i7~I7ttL1 W~. ~/~.~MA~yLV10~ ~yfr~~l~.wY+ra~a~.rrer~.q ' wrl~ywwwl~sY.r.Yh./ rYlwwwnal NOV STREET IMPROVEMENTS I411JdCC1 IIILE Arlu NUAIUtII Improvement of Woodrow Dane fIt9PON911i1C DtPARtQNTAN001V111011 I)Cvolopmollt: and X11gi.110er.ili<J PROJECT MARfiATIVE LOCATION MAP This project: is for reconctruct:ion of Woodrow Y r~_J I ~ Lane which will soon be connected to Colorado ~ L L,., r ~'II~ ~MJ Boulevard to provide an additional access to t:he [Eloonmr] Mail. D Q 7. Y. 111 Il Y~ar 1{ ~ . PIK M1,1, ~r 1 1 If /•1 ~ ~ll~ J Ll F Yr~no+.le ~ la . IN ~ ~ a ' w 0' C 4 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Project- o ect •tle an um er STUART ROAD - SELENE DRAINAGE ResponsMe Department and Division ENGINEERING PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project will relieve flooding at Stuart / Road and Selene Street which prevents vehicular traffic during heavy rains and cuts off access to Twin Lakes Mobile Home Park, . i _ C I ~ I l F\ 1, o. r y\~ r n~~r • c .1 1 . tl. 1!l1P6I a _ .111 ~1 j►]--'S' l~ .4~~~~ dti~ r ,a _ . ~f;, \ ` !l "It 'I__J J.= 1 0271s ,lpsssla~rfp.\11lI♦Iw./.1~a1 11k+i~~ DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS 61110JCC1 1111,E A1111 MAUCH Willow- S s Dr i1la le 1113P011010LC ULPAHrAICUT A11001Y1l1011 , I.ngi.necri ng and Deve looment „Pf Q-J-EC1' NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project will help drainage in the Willow [LJ L Springs-Duncan Street area, Water has gotten r,,~, ~lr into at. least one business in this area, The Q. F1 .R.sy____ additional construction on Dallas Drive will ' a ~,'gravnte di L A is I ainal;e problems in this area it11ti1 + \p,'' projectis completed, I oa , IM N h M•11 .\Iffl IIU1Mlf+ 114 MW• .;;..,,F- ,...XIL I i I 1 ~ r' f- riv~aaae+.s+.li+°~.~.y.lra.~r~wwwww.°w.w~wwrol~w. Y+~wwnt+ww.wwewwYwlw Iwat~ TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS PIIDJCVI MTLI ANu Ilu u Il 't'raffic Signal Improvements (10POuSIOLC DfPAATUCUT ANDDIVISIDN •1?n ,ineerinf, and Development: 00jr~T NARRATIVE _ LOCATION MAP This project is for acquisition and updating of traffic signal equipment city-wide, i VI - 1I Imo„r I1I1T(f f 7 II{yl, i '1 IZiI. ~~r•-.1 ':I, d.11I1 I~.~ `w [ Irk r.L I-. r 0 STREET IMPROVEMENTS ro ect ~t3e anal Number ` OVERSIZE PAVING Responsible Department a6d Division ENGINEERING PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project is for funding of oversize street I paving for collector or larger streets in newlv developing areas. 14 i :i +i .I .__..f - . is r . . 0 0 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS fro ect Tit le and Number STUART/SUNNYDALE DRAINAGE es1F~ ponsib a epartment an v s on ENGINEERING PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project will work in conjunction with previous CIP drainage projects in this area to x" alleviate flooding. ' if vl.. ,r- ~`-.T' ~ 'r,,~~ r i M-1~~~ 1 1 - = L L.J LJ c` F .-_Lc LS c.w•c , - 3 L"1_I c ii pct u., ~•C. 1111 ~~,o -i ~'t Lc l.oi. w !u,,r C~ \S 1.!-ili--1! 'r.o 0271s ]JI DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Pr6J ct-Title and Number _ TAYLOR PARK DRAINAGE espons bT`e Department an Division ENGINEXR1NG PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project is a major improvement to the drainage system in the Taylor Park area, f4WT , - IEI , r 0271s r •~1 ri I~11'Iq 1N N M 1.111 ~'.I YI II Ibum Y..•nU... M..M ~IN.ai11... L.wa1~M I.IM+iMY..'...~I... vwlw wY/ YM1111y.~~J.11.V w...n r.11 ...Y T'r.~111.a7r.W\ NN r.y! W M.IA YMMMV MWIJY+v1 Y.M.MIYIHW1\~YLUpa u. w14111J IN HII M~\N ~.ra una l Yal ll'nl•L jl\ 11 TRAFFIC !'lIUJ k U l I I I L l IUIII Illl1.4i111 ~Il.'il f: 1. C: iLf~lIilf III I11'0VC1111011CH Itl'91'UIISIIII f. ULI'A11I IiCIi I AII1) 11Yl51U11 '~;I1~+,1IIl'l?I'IIl)' Illlll I)(!V(.'.f.Cllml(!I111 PHOJE.CT NARHATIVF LOCATION MAO 1'111;; pro.1 oct hi Fol- llc(lui:;i1:ioil ¢old lkpt.I11l:(111" o!' 4 l: 1'n c: il'11i11, o(IIl.ipulellL cil:y-Wc. . II .y ~I::~~ ~I • .1-111 11 i({;, ~ - YaYl.b 111 I Ij- - it/ 1 f'+ - ?l11 TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS ro Title and Number WINDSOR/SHERMAN DRIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL i e o n s bTe a r~ m a n t afid Division ENGINEERING 4 TRAFFIC PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project is for a traffic signal at ` " Sherman Drive and Windsor which is needed bocause this intersection is on a school route. ! ~ ) ,r!Itvs tij, i` 'j ri. D V° ~~r -r r- "la's\ F ~J,_ YRI lLC. e ~ _._.._-----Y' ~ r.._ • 1F~ 1 ~ ~ ~ _ lei.` r+' I1 it: `..Y=, .•N ~~ik~- A ,fit 26o s / `.i j 4. f. r g > f! Ii T"InWrii ID41 r001 ~ r- ut1.21 _ 4..°` III _ it 't a~ ' nM lr.t[i ' " 0271s - i STREET IMPROVEMENTS Project Title an Number DAVIS STREET PAVING Respons-M-e-D-6partment and Division ENGINEERING PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP 1 / 1 This project is for paving of Davis Street, ~y•x F , / 1' l i• 1. J... \ c'• ~ ' 11 ~ ~ i 2 II ~ I ~ r~ 1 I - _ I r 111- / I f'r .t l1l1 1 N - - _ ..•Mr-. 7 -1 / , I I k l\ r~ I L 1 1 i n. i~ _ I. -PL -il STRI3ET AND DRAINAG13 IMPROVEMENTS T r e c t t e an utiu-6 BURNING TREE BRIDGE ,espons a ePartment an Division ENGINEERING PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project is to make improvements to the bridge on Burning Tree Lane to make it ass- able during heavy rains and to help alleviate restriction of the water flow caused by the bridge. J ~ l`{ i 1 ~ I y+t . o UqW. t --ru•f'r' ~ t art , r L._._ ``Yf..~- IIE 1°ptl.Fro. t 1 ~ ~ rtYr.. rh c li i`.'Ir I •i ,~..I. ~1Lr1.''t y1 11. ~ii - l u~~ j rra•~ L_f,i.euLiacla_J Jj 1:Y M,1L~ {~SIL.J 1 ar' •-~~~I i L__ ~1 ~ l.J l~_. hI rl YYf_ ~ \ 4 + r,l `j Yi L.I. 4t• ,r% J ' ~O J 0271s DRAINAGE iMPROVIHMENTS Projeci7itio and Number ~ BURNING TREE DRAINAGE Responsible opar ment an Division - ENGINEERING PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project is in conjunction with Burning I ~rrt 'i Tree bridge improvements to improve the drainage system in this area, - - L ,J 1 ~ tT it 77 r I T l~sf e { ' ~ lllll ~~T T.L i u.. IN1!'r . ♦ r 6A t! , 194 t. - L11 Vh: In 14M!' Il r qtr t / d Y i'a+ --1.~✓ t~; 1.-~ t r 6 r \ 1r £ rr, ut '7r f j tr ri `J! I + yCy' t0~ 11 ~ ~ ~ 31~_ F! ~ fl . ~\\f/r~ \ _ r✓:'• , Jl •'~1 ~ fP+'li I, `t`,t( g~'; Clr.o `turf/1~~ r ;r-~ .L712 r..- I Y. l-/S 110. 1dd' 1 L ~.._t!! J2W tt._ .l I s _ (JL_JI TRH, ~ p ~ 1 s, r ~ ~ L r r~ I rte, ~ I~ h 1 W rA C~TTI I~ r -J •11vn~l, I-., 1~ 0Z71s ` STREET IMPROVEMENTS project TFile an um er AVENUE E Responsible apartment and Division ENGINEERING PROJECT NARRATIVE LOCATION MAP This project is for street improvements to "Avenue E between Eagle Drive and the service road, _ •,1 h 1 I fl _ { 1 / ' _ tt t I. j I / I r Jy Y I, 0271s ; I y,:: r 17, J, . -•..~1.1 Y:1 %•Y-.S~fi±:i 1-rr ~,tiVi+.i-4L..y♦+-~li`~il ~.-+yf-•~++•.•,-.~-mss:.... ~+^~^J._... ll{.iy..,..p... Page May 30, 1984 ;w. I~. rAp naval o! the City of Denton Capital Improvement -P;.an and the Utility Capital Improvement Flan. Mr. Watki. S explained the CIP plan and stated tht! acc"_sit:o:: for Hic;,way 3'oo was dropped as the thi_ z yecr 'an was not rui.deCd .or _,C6-87, there were ::C' c-acces for lpv'i-FO, .aS~Ca~I t.-.e samH. statee he :eels that ~.:9 :ESentEC tC ,,ie cc,--,,Ss1On is a Cood :roa-am, a.-.c szated he had -C c:..^.er co:%me-ts tc ma,.e. s_CC_ made a mcz_C.", tC ac, rC'.'E L.":e C_ C= Ca=_Ya -.-r :semen. _ ,.an. ~eccnde:. and an_. - V'V } Yarr -ed A -1660 ^h~s '_s the ~et_ _C Cr le :s_C - Deve c~`,e _ne, red est. c a chance r-.. zc:.i:',c _rcm ned✓ce\~e:cpment and sinl- E ~d`,i._.r (C^-l~) a re'._sed _anne6 ceveic--ment c_ass__rcar.ion on _cr, aCr?S JeC C at L.^,'e L :e=seCcn C'r _easleV La.-.e a'6 r.._dCewav C ccn:;r: Sed C: et acres (_G.6 acres o Cc.^.eYa~ retai ~ :6„- acres of cluster hc.us_nl 1 _rs we= acre, a acres C_ G8~ 26 S pe_- acre) The ance c: ..ale _6_. , acre tract (__C ac_ecN t- eC ":Se \ "cCnEC LC GCCC.T.mGGa'@ SC_E' ~a",r ac:% c- -._:._:n.^, 10,000 scuare _cct _C-S, approved, z..e rc-~csed 161 acre panned devec-me-nt w _ s es.~ad___.. ;he followinc Y'eCCnCvrazicn of: exti s` nc rD-1 9 tC' the eas S'_de of i doewa" rrive to respect the new al_`_.- ient. (Pei t e d la:G %:ses and net acres are -',e Same as those in exis:._;.C ?"D-1.9 ) _c _e :a.;._i,, on a 14 44 acre parce- - c '.vest c. .._GCewaV Crl : B . ~_nc ac ~ace : an ,Dec _Gn__. _G/ - C.. G _v. !C acre 7'ace _ _oCaCEC EaS:. C. E'Jaj _L e .._C,C znE .Cr_ G_ C_ ....E S_..e. c- C- ii Y AGENDA C'~l . CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCT.L June 19, 1984 Work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, June 19, 1984, at 5:30 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room of the t~;unicipal Building at which the following items will be considered: 5:30 p.m. 1. Discussion of employment of Medical Consultants, Inc. to assist the City Council in developing long range plans for Flow Hospital. 2. Consider an agreement with Flow Hospital for assistance in funding of ttie Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement, 3. Study session on the proposed sign ordinance. 4. Executive Session: A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. • B. Real Estate Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. C. Personnel Under Sec. 2(g), Art 6252-17 V.A.T.S. D. Board Appointments Under Sec, 2(g), Art 6252-17 V.A,T.S, Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, June. 19, 1984, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building at which the following items will be considered: 7:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda: Each of these items is recommended by the Staff and approval thereof will be strictly on the basis of the Staff recommendations. Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the City Manager or his designee to implement each item in accordance with the Staff recommendations. A. Bids and Purchase Orders: i 1. Bid !i 9266 - East Prairie paving improvements 2. Bid !1 9292 - Controller terminals, replace- ment keypads and terminal printers City of Denton City Council Agenda June 19, 1984 Page Two 3. Bid # 9293 - Transmission poles 4. Bid # 9296 - Fire Department windbreakers R' Haley 5. ompany Prchase in Order the amo#unt 2 of g $3,1to G, 9327 C B. Plats and Replats; 1. Consider approval of the preliminary re plat (The dition, Of the Haywood-Jester Ad andZoning Commission rcommends approval.) 2. Consider approval of the preliminary plat of the Patio Gardens Homes Addition. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval.) 3. Consider approval of the preliminary plat of the Mack Center Addition. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval.) . 4. Approval of the preliminary plat of the Morse Street Audition. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval,) 2. Receive the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. 3. Appearance by Ms. Carolyn Cushman requesting permission to install storage sheds on 1 acre of an 8 acre tract, 4. Consider authorizing the Confederate Air Force to use Denton Municipal Airport for an airshow on July 14 and 15, 1984. (The Airport Advisory Board recommends approval.) 5. PLolic Hearings: A. Hold a public hearing on the proposed annexation of approximately 9.013 acres of land beginning (A-4). approximately 70 feet ands Zoning Commission recommends approval.) B. Hold a public hearing on the proposed annexation • of approximately 31.335 acres of land located between FM2164 (North Locust Street) and Twin Lakes Mobile Home Park (A-5). City of Denton city council Agenda June 19, 1984 • Page Three C, Z-1659. This is the petition of Morelle M, Miller reqquesting a change in zoning from single family (SF-7) to tlhe approximately industrial classification on PP acre tract located at the southwest corner of Morse l.) and Woodrow Streets (1814 Planning and Zoning Commission orecommends)deniat D, Z-1660. This is tYncpetition a hange iin eve opment Company, requesting from planned development (PD-19 )ansingle family (SF-10) to a revised planned development classification on 161,7 acres beginning at the intersection of Teasley Lane and Ridgeway Drive. Existing PD-19 is comprised of 42.2 net acres (10,5 acres of general retail, 16.7 acres of cluster housing at 12 units per acre, and 15 acres of multi-family at 26 tinits per acre), The balance presently the b , o accmmodate (119.5 acres) is p Y zoned to single family detached land use on 10,000r square foot lots. If app oved t newly established planned development (PD) will permit the following land u 1. A reconfiguration of DexisetingoPDr 9 to the east side of Ridgeway eneral retail alignment. The 10.5 net acres of g 16.7 the ac ress existing D390 units Multi-family ame number of maximum units as existing PD-19.) Cluster housing has been reduced from 12 units per ace in ro d existing revised DPD9 and8 relocated units per tore the the p p Poe south boundary of the tract. 2. Singlefamily and west of (SF-10) Ridgeway Drive, beginning 3. Single family (Sr-10) on 30.49 acre parcel located east of Ridgeway Drive along the northern boundary of the site. 4. Single family (SF-7) on 35 acres Ueginning approximately 1,400 feet east of Ridgeway Drive. 5, Cluster housing on 28.89 acres at l units 2 per feet east of Ridgeway Drive. beginning approximately acre ,300 (318 maximum units) • b. norr ofeTeasleyBLane Band Ridgeway Drivenorthwest I ~ City of Denton City Council Agenda June 19, 1984 Page Four 7. City service use (potential fire station site) on a .55 acre parcel located at the southwest corner of Ridgeway Drive and Teasley Lane, 8, Proposed public park land use on 4.68 acres. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval.) E. Z-1661. This is the petition of James R. Neblett requesting a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light industrial (LI) classification on a 43.06 acre tract located adjacent and north of Highway 380E, adjacent and south of t lT 700 and MKT Railroad, beginning acneropl eanning and feet east of Mayhill Road. Zoning Commission recommends approval,) F. Z-1662. This s is the petition of James Neblett l requesting a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light industrial (LI) classification on a 16.909 acre tract beginning at the northwest recommend(The Commission Road, corner Planning of }andY,wa zoning and • approval,) G. Z-1664 This is the petition of William B. Rogers requesting a change in zoning from a ricultural (A) to the single 4f1mil Solar -Way classification on lots 3, 13, 0 Solar Way Addition, Section I, and lot 30, Addition, Section II, (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval.) 1. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the single family (SF-16) classification on lots 3, 13, 14, 15, Solar Way Addition, Section I, and lot 30, Solar Way Addition, Section II. 6. Ordinances: A. Consider adoption of an ordinance setting a date, time and place for pJblic Buttonrifor annexation tof petition of Mr. approximately 11 acres of land located at the intersection of I-35E and Mayhill Road (A-6). . B. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a change in zoning from single family (SF-7) to the planned development (PD) classification on an approximately 8.74 acre tract beginning at the southwest corner of Highway 377 and Collins Street (Z-1649). City of Denton City Council Agenda June 19, 1984 Page Five • C, Consider adoption of an ordinance prohibiting parking on the east side of Mesa Drive. 7, Consider removing zoning request S-174 from the table, 8, S-174 This is the petition of Champion Home Communities, Inc. requesting approval of a specific use permit for a mobile home park on a 104,28 acre tract located adjacent and north of FM 426 (East McKinney) and adjacent and south of Mills Road, and beginning approximately 3,000 feet east of Mayhill Road, 9, Consider removing zoning request S-176 from the table. 10. 5-176 This is the petition of W. J. Roddy requesting approval of a specific use permit for a mobile home park (197 lots with a typical size of 50 x 100') on a 36.96 acre tract located approximately 3,500 feet east of the 1-35E service road and adjacent and north of Page Road. 11. Consider removing disposition request D-35 from the table. 12. D-35 Consider approval of disposition of excess ja rrrr oll Boulevard right-of-way at the southeast corner of West Prairie and Carroll Boulevard. 13. Consider the North Texas State University 1984-85 parking and traffic proposals. 14. Consider authorizing the Airport Manager to apply for an FAA grant for a master plan study for the airport. (The Airport Advi:,m,-y Board recommends approval.) 15. Official.Action on Executive Session Items: A. Legal Matters B. Real Estate C. Personnel D. Board Appointments 16. New Business: This item provides a section for Council Members to suggest new items of business for future agendas. C E R T I F I C A T E I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at thfa Cit Hall of the City of Denton, Texas, on the rI -day of , 1984 at e. < o' c look (a.m.) ~.m. UTY SECRETARY 13850 I r I AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL June 1.9, 1984 Work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, June 19, 1984, at 5130 p.m, in the Civil Defense Room of the Municipal Building at which the following items will be considered: 5:30 p.m. 1. Discussion of employment of Medical Consultants, Inc. to assist the City Council in developing long range plans for Flow Hospital, 2, Consider an agreement with Flow Hospital for assistance in funding of the Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement, 3. Study session on the proposed sign ordinance. 4. Executive Session: A. Leggal Matters Under Sec, 2(e), Art, 6252-17 V.A.ToS, B, Real Estate Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17 V.A.'1', S. C. Personnel Under Sec, 2(g), Art 6252-17 V.A.T.S. D. Board Appointments - Under Sec. 2(g), Art 6252-17 V.A.T.S. Regular Meeting of the City of. Denton City Council on Tuesday, June 19, 1984, at 7:00 p.n,. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building at which the following items will be considered: 7:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda: Each of these items is recommended by the Staff and approval thereof will be strictly on the basis of the Staff recommendations. Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the City Manager or his designee Co implement each item in accordance with the Staff recommendations, A. Bids and Purchase Orders: 1. Bid # 9266 - East Prairie paving improvements 2. Bid # 9292 - Controller terminals, replace- ment keypads and terminal printers City of Denton City Council Agenda June 19, 1984 Page Two 3, Bid # 9293 - Transmission poles 4, aid # 9296 - Fire Department wi.ndbreakers 5. Purchase Order 0 62329 to G. R. Haley Company in the amount of $3,193,27 B. Plats and Replats; 1. Consider approval of the preliminary replat of the Haywood-Jester Addition, (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval.) 2, Consider approval of the preliminary plat of the Patio Gardens Homes Addition, (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval.) 3. Consider approval of the preliminary plat of the Mack Center Addition, (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval.) 4. Approval of the preliminary plat of the Morse Street Addition. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval,) 2. Receive the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. 3. Appearance by Ms. Carolyn Cushman requesting permission to install storage sheds on 1 acre of an 8 acre tract. 4. Consider authorizing the Confederate Air Force to use Denton Municipal Airport for an airshow on July 14 and 15, 1984. (The Airport Advisory Board recommends approval.) 5. Public Hearings; A. Hold a public hearing on the proposed annexation of approximately 9.013 acres of land beginning approximately 700 feet east of Sherman Drive (A-4). (The Planning and Coning Commission recommends approval,) B. Hold a public hearing on the proposed annexation of approximately 31,335 acres of land located between FM2164 (North Locust Street) and 'T'win Lakes Mobile Home Park (A-5). City of Denton City Council Agenda June 19, 1984 Page Three C, z-1659. This is the petition of Morelle M. er requesting a change in zoning from single family (SF-7) to the light industri.al (LI) classification on an approximately 2.32 acre tract located at the southwest corner of Morse and Woodrow Streets (1814 Morse Street), (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial.) D. 'L-1660. This is the petition of Dimension eve opment Company, Inc, requesting a change in zoning from planned development (PD-19) and single family (SF-10) to a revised planned development classification on 161.7 acres beginning at the intersection of TeaHa ey Lane and Ridgeway Drive. Existing PD-19 in comprised of 42.2 net acres (10.5 acres of general retail, 16.7 acres of cluster housing at 12 units per acre, and 15 acres of multi-family at 26 units per acre). The balance of the 161.7 acre tract (119.5 acres) is presently zoned to accommodate single family detached land use on minimum 10,000 square foot lots. If approved, the revised or newly established planned development (PD) will permit the following land uses: 1. A reconfiguration of existing PD-19 to the east side of Ridgeway Drive to respect a now alignment. The 10.5 net acres of general retail is the same as existing PD-19, Multi-family on 16.7 net acres (maximum of 390 units is the same number of maximum units as existing PD-19.) Cluster housing has been reduced from 12 units per acre in existing PD-19 to 8 units per acre in the proposed revised PD and relocated to the south boundary of the tract. 2. Single family (SF-10) on 14.44 acres beginning adjacent and west of Ridgeway Drive. 3. Single family (SF-10) on 30.49 acre parcr.l located east of Ridgeway Drive along the northern boundary of the site, 4. Single family (SF-7) on 35 acres beginning approximately 1,400 feet east of Ridgeway Drive, 5. Cluster housing on 28.89 acres at 11 units per acre (31j' maximum units) beginning approximately 2,300 feet east of Ridgeway Drive. 6. Office use on 4.68 acres located at the northwest corner of Teasley Lane and Ridgeway Drive. City of Denton City Council Agenda June 19, 1984 Page Four 7, City service use (potential fire station site) on a 1.55 acre parcel located at the southwest corner of Ridgeway Drive and Teasley Lane. 8. Proposed public park land use on 4.68 acres, (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval,) E. Z-1661. This is the petition of lames R. Neblett requesting a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light industrial (LI) classification on a 43.06 acre tract located adjacent and north of Highway 380E, adjacent and south or the T & P and MKT Railroad, beginning approximately 700 feet east of Mayhill Road, (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval,) F. Z-1662, This is the petition of James R, Neblett requesting a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light industrial (LI) classification on a 16.909 acre tract beginning at the northwest corner of Highway 380E and Geesling Road, (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval,) G, Z-1664. This is the petition of William B, ogers requesting a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the single family (SF-16) classification on lots 3, 13 14, 15, Solar Way Addition, Section I, and lot 30, Solar Way Addition, Section II, (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval,) 1. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the single family (SF-16) classification on lots 3, 13, 140 15, Solar Way Addition, section I, and lot 30, Solar Way Addition, Section II. 6. Ordinances: A. Consider adoption of an ordinance setting a date, time and place for public hearings regarding the petition of Mr, R. J. Button for annexation of approximately 11 acres of land located at the intersection of I-35E and Mayhill Road (A-6). B. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a change in zoning from single family (SF-7) to the planned develop went (PD) classification on an approximately 8.74 acre tract beginning at the southwest corner of Highway 377 and Collins Street (Z-1649). , City of Denton City Council Agenda June 19, 1984 page Five Consider adoption of an ordinance prohibiting C. Parking on the east side of Mesa Drive, Consider removing zoning request S-174 from the table, 7' Champion Home , g___.7[± This is the petition of ecific 8 Communities, Inc. requesting approval of 104, x28 acre use permit for a mobile home park o a tract located ad3aceIt and north of £ FM 426 (East McKinney) and adjacent a3d000utfeetf east SOfoMAyhill beginning approximately Road. Consider removing zoning request S-176 from the table. 9. requesting S-176 This is the petition of tit Jforoady mobile home 10. appr-oval o f a specific use perr typical size of 50` x 100 0 on a park (197 lots with a tyP l size of 30500 feet east 36.96 acre tract located approxely of the 1-35E service road and adjacent and north of page Road. from the Consider removing disposition request D-35 11. table, royal of disposition of excess 12. D-35 Consider app at the southeast corner arroll Boulevard right-o£-way a of West Prairie and Carroll Boulevard. 1984-85 proTexas posalFState University 13, Cons inertlNorth park g and traffic Consider authorizing the Airport Manager to apply for rant for a master plan study for the airport, 14, ~roval.) (The an FAA g Airport Advisory Board recommends app 15. official Action on Executive Session Items: A. Legal Matters B. Real Estate C. Personnel ointments D. Board ApQ 16. New Business: This item provides a section for Councageneams. to suggest new items of business for future C E R T I F I C A T E I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Denton, Texas, (a the Tp__day of , 1984 at o'clock SECRET` 18850 IV CITY OF DENTON MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM; G. Chris Hartung, City Manager DATE: June 14, 1984 SUBJECT; Work Session Agenda Items 41 and 2 Medical Consultants, Inc. is forwarding professional background information for the Council to review. C. J. will prepare the proposed agreement with Flow Hospital on assistance in funding the Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement when he returns to the office on Monday, June 18. Copies of the agreement and background information will be available at the work session. yr s artung ca 1385C/10 SUNKARX OF PROPOSED SIGN ORDINANCE Tie following is a very brief summary of the general design and significant components of the proposed sign ordinance, 1, Purpose; To regulate the size, height, setback, number and construction .of signs, Certain signs are not regulated (See p, b) and certain signs are prohibited altogether (See p. 4), 2. Design of Regulations; The majority of signs are regulated by the following general scheme; a, Signs Classified by Type. First, all 'signs are class- i fed by type, according to the`.r design, construction and use, as either ground, stake, portable, wall, roof or projecting signs, (See definitions p, 5), b, Zoningg~ Districts Categorized. Second, for purposes of regurating the ` L7 es o.tr~ signs according to their location, the city s zoning districts are categorized as either residential or nonresidential, except for the Central Business District which is regulated separately. c, Regulation Applied to Districts, Finally, regulations. governing the type, size, heig- t, setback, and number of signs are applied to the two categories of districts (See pp. 10-12). The regulations in residential districts, are more restrictive than those in non- residential districts, 3. Portable Signs-Additional Regulations: In addition to the above, certain regulations apply only to portable signs. The most significant of these regulations are based on ,,Nether the portable sign is on-premise or off-premise., a, On-Premise - Number & Size. Each premise located in a nonresidential zoning cistricC is allowed ~ on-premise portable signs 25 sgt:are feet or lass and 1 on-premiss portable sign no larger than 72 square feet (See Pp, Now I b. Off-Premise - Number, Size, Spacing. Each business may, at any one time, mate use of l off-premise portable sign of 72 square feet or less in size in a nonresidential district, Such signs must be placed no closer together than 450 feet on the same side of the street (See p. 10). c. Five Year Termination of Off-Premise. In five years the use of~~ nal all ot~-premise Aorta e signs will be prohibited (See p. 10). 4. Abatement of. Non-Conforming Signs, All non-conforming signs shall be removed or modified within ten years so as to comply with'the sign regulations, PORTABLE ADVERTISING SIGNS PORTABLE ADVERTISING SIGNS The City of Denton sign regulations as adopted in 1969 as part of the zoning ordinance make no mention of "portable advertis- ing signs" moreover, article 17 paragraph "I' specifies: "No signs shall be located or erected within required front yard except a pole &ign not exceeding 80 square feet in area may be erected on sites utilized by gasoline ser- vice stations, drive-in groceries, or simi- lar quick service retail establishments. No such pole signs shall be located so that any portion of the sign encroaches into public ,right-of-way for the dibtance of more than two feet from the property line." This information along with the definition in the zoning ordi- nanc, for the front and rear yard signs indicate that portable adver ising signs were intended to be prohibited. Several years ago the City physically removed bench advertising struc- tures because they were unlawful, Bench advertising is not mentioned in the sign regulation and must have been subjected to the same paragraph quoted above. In 1981 an amendment to the sign regulations were adopted per- mitting portable advertising signs In all business districts, except the office district, with no limitations other than set back in maximum size of the signs. A survey of portable advertising sign restrictions conducted in 1981 is attached, 0297s CITY PORTABLE ADVERT CS rNC SIGNS Permit Fee Limit Setback 1, Addison Not Permitted 2, Arlington - Not Permitted 3. Bedford Yes $25 60 days/yr 10 feet 4, Carrollton Not Permitted 5. Dallas Yes, if over $35-$65, 30 days/yr 20 feet 20 sq. ft., depending over 8 ft.high, on sire & illumi-lated 6, Euless Mot Permitted 7, Farmers Branch - Not Permitted 8, Fort Worth Yes, no $10 60 days, 20 fee, illumination remove 30 days 9. Garland Yes $10 + bond None 6 feet 1.0, Grand Prairie Ycs 25-50 sq.ft, 90 days/yr $7.50 51-100 sq.ft, $10 11, 1rvi.ng Yes, but must: $20 90 days/yr Varies remove wheels & anchor sign 12. Lewisville Yes, no $19.50 90 days/yr 15 feet illumination 13, llesquite Yes, no $5 30 days, i.llc.tmination twice a yr 14, Plano Not Permitted 15. Richardson Not Permitted Of 15 cities contacted, 7 (lid not permit portable advertising signs nnd of the 8 cities which did permit them a permit fee aas required by all, Only Garland did not specify it Lime limit for portable advertising signs, In addition, of l:he 8 cities which permitted portable signs most required that the sign be Located on Lie premises where the goods or ;cervices were of- fered for sale. (Survey conducted on September. 14, 1981.) ` EXISTING SIGN REGULATIONS r N , c;q?;itull an nil ~ (1) WE PLATE 2 SQUARE FEET ALL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS NONE lb RESTRICTION ALL DISTRICTS EXCEPT NbNE RESIDENTIAL (2) INSTITUTIONAL 36 SQUARE FEET ALL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS NONE SIGN NO RESTRICTION ALL DISTRICTS EXCEPT NONE RESIDENTIAL (3) APARTMENT SIGN 50 SQUARE FEET ALL DISTRICTS PERMIT- CNE STREET FRONTAGE ING APARITIENTS (4) BUSINESS SIGN NO RESTRICTION EXCEPT P ~RM ?'f ED IN O. I i"IONE SPECIFIED AS HEREINAFTER PRONTO- f; Lt. {B, LI, H1 AND ED FOR CERTAIN DISTRICTS P DISTRICTS AND TYPES (5) ADVERTISING NO RESTRICTION EXCEPT "-WITTED IN C, CB. NbNE SPECIFIED SIGN AS HEREINAFTER PROVID- . HI DISTRICTS ED FOR CERTAIN DISTRICTS (6) AGRICULTURAL 100 SQUARE FEET PCERMITTH/ INIA., GRj 200 FEET BETWEEN SIGNS SIl O, AND PD DISTRICTS H I IMM_TYPE SIGNS TYPE SIGN WIMUM ARFA ZONE PERMIT U SPACING STAORDS (7) REAL ESTATE SIGN 18 SQUARE FEET ALL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ONE FOR EACH PLATTED RESIDENTIAL LOT OR TRACT AND FOR A REAGE, ONE FOR EACH 2 FEFT OF STREET OR HIGHWAY FRONTAGE REAL ESTATE SIGN NO RESTRICTION IN ALL DISTRICTS EXCEPT NONE SPECIFIED iSAME--BUT RESIDENTIAL NONRESIDENTIAL) (S) CONSTRUCTION 60 SQUARE FEET IN ALL DISTRICTS NONE SIGN (9) DEVELOPMENT 2CO SQUARE FEET IN ALL DISTRICTS IN ONE PER PQ~ECT, OR ONE SIGN SINGLE-FAMILY TWO- FOR EACH ((~X}} ACRES IN FAMILY, AND MULTIPLE- PROJECT FAMILY DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF BUILDING INSPECTOR AS~SS PROVIDED IN ARTICLE Al PROVIDED (10) GARAGE SALE 4 SQUARE FEET IN ALL DISTRICTS NE FOR EACH PLATTED SIGN LOT OR TRACT (11) ADVERTISING 72 SQUARE FEET NS, CR, C, CB, LI, HI NO PORTABLE SIGN SHALL , (PORTABLE) DISTRICTS BE LOCATED WITHIN TEN l.;,J) FEET OF THE EDGE OF THE QT~RAVELED PORTION OF THE ROADWAY Ly- 9VOF THT OO E LADE OFC1, TY OF DENTON M rn~ • i D~~dTL1PI CODE U, IN A PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, THE SIGN STANDARDS oHALL BE SPECIFIED IN THE AMENDING ORDINANCE, E, NO SIGN SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIC-117 PERMITTED IN THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT WHERE THE SIC44 IS LOCATED, EXCEPT IN 89PING CENTERS OR SIMILAR COP'MERCIAL OR OFFICE CENTERS CONTAINING SIX (b) ACRES OR PDRE, PYLON OR MAJOR IDENTIFICATION SIGNS NOT TO EXCEED SEVENTY-FIVE (75) FEET IN HEIGHT MAY BE ERECTED WHEN SET BACK FROM THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINE A DISTANCE EQUAL TO THE HEIC+rT OF THE SIM I,, F, No SIGN SHALL BE LOCATED OR CONSTRUCTED SO AS TO INTERFERE WITH OR CONFUSE r-E CONTROL OF TRAFFIC ON THE PUBLIC STREETS AND NO SIGN SHALL USE A ROTATING BEACON, BEAM OR FLASHING ILLUMINATION RESEMBLING AN EMERGENCY SIGNAL, G, ANY NONCONFORMING SIGN WHICH IS DAMAGED OR IS DETERIORATED TO A POINT WHERE -17S RESTORATION COST EXCEEDS FIFTY PER CENT OF ITS REPLACEMENT VALUE SHALL BE REMOVED, 11. No SIGN SHALL BE ERECTED SO AS TO PROJECT INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF AiV- STREET OR ALLEY, EXCEPT IN 1HE Wj CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, ANY PROJECT(`r SIGN SHALL NOT F WAY FOR ADISTANCE O OF MORE THAN TEN 1~~1 FING EETFORETONWITH N ~L~~)RFEET ':F O THE STREET CURB, WHICHEVER IS MORE RESTRICTIVE, 140 SIGN SHALL BE LOCATED OR ERE TED WITHIN THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD, EXCEPT 4 POLE SIGN NOT EXCEEDING EIGHTY SQUARE FEET IN AREA MAY BE ERECTED ON S:TES UTILIZED BY GASOLINE SERVICE STATIONS, DRIVE-IN GROCERY OR SIMILAR QUICK SEA-+'ICE RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS, NO SUCH POLE SIGNS SHALL BE LOCATED SO THAT ANY PCP-:Om OF SIGN ENCROACHES INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A DISTANCE OF MORE -1AN TWO l~) FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, J, NO ADVERTISING SIGN STRUCTURE SHALL CONTAIN MORE THAN TWO SIGN PANELS FACIA IN THE SAME DIRECTION, K, No PROVzISIONS 0E THIS ORDINANCE SHALL SUPERSEDE OR REPLACE ANY OTHER ORDI WoA-E OF THE {ITY OF 6TON HAVING TO DO WITH THE SIC~N STANDARDS, MATERIALS OR CCN- STRUCTION; EXCEPT, THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THE USE CF THE VARIOUS TYPES OF SIGNS IN THE VARIOUS DISTRICTS AND THEIR SIZE AND LOCA-ION SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER ALL OTHER ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS, L. IN TF 11011 OFFICE DISTRICT, NO SIGN MOUNTED AT GROUND LEVEL SHALL X ED TI-.;RTY- SIX l 6) SQUARE FEET IN AREA, AND NO POLE SIC-1I SHALL EXCEED SIXTY SQUARE FEET IN AREA, K TEMPORARY POLITICAL SIGNS, ON Q IDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTY NO POLITICAL SIC-ilk 144Y BE ERECTED PRIOR TO FORTY-FIDE l~~) DAYS OF THE ELECTION DATE AND SAID SION MUST BE REMOVED WITHIN TEN (D) DAYS AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE ELECTION :AID SIGN ADVERTISES, NCLUDING ANY RUN-OFF ELECTION, SAID SIGN MAY NOT BE LAF'~:r, THAN THIRTY-TWO cM SOLIARE FEET AND NOT MORE THAN ONE SIGN FOR 'EACH CANDI SITE OR BALLOT MEASURE MAY BE ERECTED ON ONO REMAIN UPON ANY PORTION OF E ET LOT OR TRACT OF LAND, NO IP~OLIITICAL SIEN MAY STREV RIrL.S-/F- o KAY RD IV07 E CL~~7UE5 ,1/ 1: ORDZ IIONGSI}IgRICT~TISM 3i. 7I-54,. PROPOSED SIGN ORDINANCE DRAFT N0. 7 - APRIL 30, 1984 NO. AN ORD114ANCE REPEALING THE EXISTING ARTICLE 17 AND OTHER PRO- VISIONS RELATING TO SIGNS AND REENACTING A NEW ARTIf,LE 17 OF APPENDIX B-ZONING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS TO PROVIDE FOR THE REGULATING OF SIGNS AND THE PERMITTING THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00) FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton finds that the regulation of the size, location, height, use, maintenance, construction and placement of signs and other outdoor advertisin; devices and structures is necessary to prevent impediments an.: dangers to drivers and pedestrians upon and along City streets. sidewalks and easements; and VHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton finds tc3: the use of signs and other outdoor advertising devices arc structures, i£ unregulated, can, because of their number, placement, and characteristics, adversely effect property values: aesthetically dama¢e the overall environment; create a:. unfavorable business climate which hampers attempts to actract and retain desirable commercial and business enterprises; anz foster conditions that lessen the enjoyment and desirability the City of Denton as a place in which to visit, live and wor::; and S;HBREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton finds t;st portable or mobile signs present special traffic hazards towed on public streets or displayed on or along public rigat- of-gays; act as impediments to the effectiveness of the pe:_:e and fire departments in performing their duties; present dangers to the haaitn, saety and general •.:el£are of the citizens of _.-.e o ,Denton because of their cneir pronensicy :a bio','n aooUt if not propetl'i ancaoreo, ant, if llynted, spec-'al na:ards '-t electrical "se not _°'ound In other S u ns; anG iii?:J1S, Tax as Revised Civil itatute Articla it-15 specitically enumerates as one of the powers possessed .:,e P',G5' 1 City of Denton is the authority to regulate, license and control or prohibit the erection of signs and billboards; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS SECTION I, That Article 17 of Appendix B-zoning of the Code of Ordi- nances of the City of Denton is hereby in all things repealed. SECTION II, That a new Article 17 of Appendix B•Zoning of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton is hereby adopted to hereafter read as follows ARTICLE 17. SIGN REGULATIONS A. General Provisions 1. Purpose & Intent 2. Definitions 3. Signs Not Regulated 4. Prohibited Signs 5. Advtnistration & Enforcement B. Permits C. Portable Signs D. Regulation of Signs by Zoning Districts E. Regulation of Attached Signs VAbandoned Signs G. Special Provisions 1. Manner of Measurement 2. Setback Clearancu Zone 3. Signs on Certain Highways 4. Clearance from Electrical Line:, 5. Temporary & Political Signs 5. Sign Maintenance 7. Iden .ification of Signs H. Nonconforming Signs 1. Special Exceptions Allowed J. Historical Landmark Signs K. "onflicting Provisions A. GENERAL. PRO's ISIONS 1. Purpose and Intent. It LS the purpose Of this ArtiCLe to re,ulate the construction, erection, placement. Maintenance, ise and removal of private signs witnin tie City of Centon, Texas. PAGE 2 It is the intent of this Article to regulate signs generally by classifying each sign according to its design and construction and oy regulating, based on such classification, the type, number, size, height and setback of signs according to location in the various zoning districts, It is also the intent and determination of the City Counct: that these regulations be and are the minimum necessary and least ` burdensome to accomplish the purposes heretofore stated. 2, Definitions, The following words, as used in this Artici= or Article 7, shall have the meanings respectively ascribed t: them, as follows: (a) "Advertising" shall mean to seek the attraction of cr to direct the attention of the public to any loeatior, goods, services, or merchandise whatsoever, (b) "Business Purposes" shall mean the erection or use any property, building, or structure, permanent temporary, for the primary purpose of conducting - said building or structure or on said property a legitimate commercial enterprise in compliance all ordinances and regulations of the City of Dent:-. governing such activity. Business purpose shall n. include any property, building, or structurd erect:: or used for the primary purpose of securing a perm:; to erect a sign. (c) "Curb line" shall mean an imaginary line drawn alcr.; the outermost part or bark of the curb and gutter either side of a public street, or if no curb a, gutter exist, along the outermost portion of t:e pavement, or, if no pavement exist, along the edge the traveled portion of the roadway, (d) "Effective area" means the area enclosed by .:.a minimum imaginary rectangle or vertical and horicont_: lines which fully contains all extremities of a si.n (or signs), exclusive of its supporting structur_. This rectangle is to be calculated from an orthograr:-..: projection of the sign viewed horizontally, A vle - point f:~r this projection is to be taken which gi:as the largest rectangle of tnat kind, as the vie,pe_.t is rotated horizontally around the sign, If elemen:6 of the sign are movable or flexible, as a flag _r string of lights, the measurement shall be taken the elements are fully extended and parallel to ::.e plane of view, (e) ":ton-Residential Zoning District" means any zon_- (:istrict designated as a P, 0, :JS, GR, C, LI Y district as shown on the official zoning di:trict t of the City of Denton. (f) "Owner" means a person who has lesal title, cont:c: Possession of ;)roperty, (g) "Premises" shall mean a lit, parcel or tract of -.a: property as shown on a plat appeoved in accorda-_e witri law and filed with the County Clerk's Office PAGE 3 ~ f I an unplatted tract of land as conveyed by dead or operation of law and recorded in the official records of the County Clerk's Office, i (h) "Residantial Zoning 'District" means anyy zoning district desiggnated as an A SF-7, SF-10, SF-13, SF-16, 2-F, `1F-R, MF-1 or MF-~ district as shown on the official zoning district map of the City of Denton, (i) "Side Yard Setback Lines" mean the imaginary lines drawn parallel to the side yard lot line or property lines on a premise which delineate the minimum required side yard areas for that premise, (j) "Sign" shall mean an), device, flag, lignt fixture, picture, letter, word, message, symbol, plaque, wind device, or poster visible from the premises on which it is located or from any public street and designed to inform or attract the attention of persons not on that premise, excluding those searchlights and landscape fixtures which display no words or symbols and those works of art which display no words or additional symbols. For purposes of this Article, or Article 7, particular types of signs are further defined herein as follows: (1) "Abandoned Sign" shall mean an on-peemise sign advertising an activity, business, service or merchandise which was at one time, but is no longer, located on the premise. (2) "Attached Sign" shall mean any sign attached cc, applied on or supported by, any part of a building (such as a wall, roof, window, canopy, awning, or marquee) which encloses or covers usable space. Wall signs, roof signs and projecting signs shaltl be considered attached signs. (3) "Dilapidated or Deteriorated Sign" shall mean a sign; (aa) Where elements of the surface or background can be seen as viewed from the normal viewing, distance (intended viewing distance), to have portions of the finished material or paint flaked, broken of4 or missing, or otherwise not in harmony wi the rest of the surface, or (bb) Where the structural support or frame members are visibly bent, broken, cented, or torn; or (cc) Where the panel is visibly cracked or in to case of wood and similar products, splintered in such a way as to constitute an unsightly or harmful condition; or (dd) Where the sign or elements of it are twisted or leaning or ac, angles other that those At which it was originally erected (such &s ca;: result from being blown or the failure of a structural support); or (ee) Where the message or wording can no longer 'oe clearly read by a person with normal eyesi -,t under normal viewing conditions. y PAGE 4 (4) "Ground Sign" shall mean a sign whose principal support is provided by burying, anchorin or other- wise connecting the sign, or support n structure thereof, to the ground in such a manner as not to be easily or quickly removed or relocated, and which is not a stake sign, portable sign or attached sign. (S) "Off-Premise Sign" shall mean any sign advertising a business, activity, goods, products or services not usually located on the premises where the sign is located or which directs persons to any premise other than where such sign is located. (6) "On-Premise Sign" shall mean any sign advertising the business, person, activity, goods, products or services primarily located, scald or offered for sale on the premises where the sign is located. A sign which promotes or displays a political, religious or ideolo~ical thought, belief, opinion or other purely noncommercial message shall be considered an on-premise sign. (7) 'One Sign" or "A Sign" shall mean any number of signs located on or supported by a single supporting structure. (9) "Portable Sign" shall mean a sign whose principal supporting structure is intended, by design or construction, to be used by resting upon the ground for support and which may be easily and quickly moved or relocated for reuse. Portable signs shall include, but not be limited to, signs mounted upon or designed to be mounted upon a trailer, bench, wheeled carrier or other non-motorized mobile structure with or with- out wheels; and A-frame signs and other similar signs, or supporting structures thereof, resting car leanin5 on the ground or other structures but not permanently attacned thereto. (9) "Projecting Sign" shall mean any sign which is wholly affixed to, or supported by any building wall, and which extends beyond the building wall more than twelve (12") inches. (10) "Roof Sign" shall mean any sign wholly erected on, affixed to, constructed on, maintained upon, supported by, or located upon any roof of any building. (11) "Stake Sign" shall mean a sign whose principal sup- portkng structure is so designed )r shaped, usually by making one end pointed, so e, to be erected and used by pushing, pounding, hamm.:ring or forcing into the ground and allowing quick and easy removal and relocation from one place to another. (12) "Wall Sign" shall mean any sign wholly affixed tt, supported bv, or painted upon the wall of any building, and %.nich is not a projecting sign. pole, post, cable, or "Supporting Structure" means any other structural fixtures, or parts, so arranged cr Jsed so as to hole'., secure or support a sign, or part cnereof, and which is not imprinted or labeled with any picture, symbol, letters, numbers, or woids .n excess of one inch in height nor is intaenall;,, or decoratively illumirnatei. (1) "Iliad Device" means any flag, banc.er, pennant, streamer or similar device that moves freely in the air. PAGF 5 3, signs trot Regulated. The following types of signs seal: be exempt from. the provisions of this Article; (a) Gov®rnmental Signs. Any sign erected or maintained pursuant tand in disoharge of any governmental function or which is required by law, ordinance cr. governmental regulation. (b) Railwa Si ns, Any sign within or on railway proper- an pace or maintained in reference to the operation of such railway. (c) Utility Signs. Signs marking utility or undergrounrs commun cat ons or transmission lines. (d) Vehicle Signs. Signs displayed or used upon vehicles trailers or aircraft unless such vehicle, trailer aircraft on which such sign is displayed is permanent:, stationed or regularly used at a fixed location serve the same or similar purpose of a permanent portable sign not affixed to a vehicle, trailer aircraft. (a) Si ns Not Visible From Street. Any sign where nc, pa-.-: o sec sign s v s a trom any public street. (f) Holldav fteli sous Si ns. Temporary holiday re g ous s gns w t out commercial advertising. (g) "Ins on Persons. Hand held signs, signs, symbols sp ays on persons or animals. pcrt:r.t (h) Unused Signs. SLgns being manufactured, trans or store and not being used, in any manner or fo:-_ for purposes of advertising, (i) P1a ues. Commemorative plaques of recogn:.z,v. a stor cal societies and organizations. (j} Private Traffic Control. On-premise signs wn_.:.n irect the movement o traffic on private proper-.-v (such as entrance and exit signs) or warn :f obstacles, overhead clearances, or control parki::l, provided that such signs, are less than 10 feet :_n effective area, are less than 6 feet in height, aa+c are aot placed so as to interfere with the aa.:e movement of vehicles or pedestrians. (k) blail Boxes Newspaper Racks. Signs located on ma._ ores, newspaper veLLULI'g - machines, and curbs:_';ie residential newspaper holders which identify the oav;,es and address of the premise or the name of :.:it newspaper sold or subscribed to; provided, that devices are not placed so as to irterfere wic: :.:,e safe movement of pedestrians or vehicular traffic. (1) Si ns on Outdoor 'fa chines, Device and Equipment, vcate on, aC- 'LechqG-CO or ~p rotes upon mach:;,e: devicr:s and equipment located or used outdoors wnL:,: :.c, not generally advertise the business where 3L, machines, devices and equipment are used or locates :.a do, in regard to such machines, devices or eyuipr.e.:;, identify its trademark, tradenare or manufacturer; _ve the name or cost of the product or service pr,:v". c r+d therefrom; or give the operating instructions tihera PACE 6 Such machines, devices and equipment shall include, bu; not be limited to coin-operated vending machines, fuel dispensingg pumps, telephone booths or facilities, auto- matio tellat machines, automotive vacuum cleaners, and other similar self-service outdoor machines, devices or equipment, 4. Prohibited Signs, It shall be unlawful for any person to erect, :onstruct, maintain, reconstruct, place, convert, locate or make use of or cause to be erected, constructed, maintained, _ reconstructed, placed, located or used, any of the following signs for advertising purposes; (a) Signs on Private Property Without Consent, of Owner. Signs locates private property u3.thout Ana consent. o-` the owner of said premises, (b) Aarking and CSanevvering Areas. Signs which are Toca e n o inEerFer sWILn he use of a required off-street parking space or maneuvering area, (c) Unsafe Signs. Signs which are, or becomes deteriorated, dilapidated or in danger of falling :r otherwise unsafe. (d) Signs on Public Propert},. Signs which are located .n OF wl t nin a -public steet, sidewalk, alley, right-o:- way, curb, or any public bridge or par: of same, or :n any public building or structure of env kind belongine to the City, when such use or location unreasona'-' interferes with, or cryates danger in the use of ;r.e public property, In any case, ground or portable, signs shall not be located within the public ri5;:;• of-wav and no sign shall be located with- in a street median or intersection visibility triangle, (e) Code Comppli_a~n_c~e. Signs which do not comply with any applicable provision of a building code, electrica: code, or other applicable code or ordinance of ;:,e City, (f) Trees and °hrubs, Signs located on trees and shrubs. (g) Motion Picture Signs. Signs which employ a srereopt an or motion picture machine, (h) Signs Obscuring or Tnterferins With View, Si;::s ocl aced-or t 11 um nar,e_ n sucn a canner as to obscc:e or otherwise interfere with the effectiveness of ar. official traffic sign, signal or device, or so as ;o obstruct or interfere with the view of n driver .f approaching, emerging or intersecting traffic, or so as to prevent any traveler on any ,street obtaining a clear view of approaching vehicles Eo: a distance of 250 feet along the street. (i) ?rover Snieldinv, of Lighted Signs. Signio contai,:r, effective:, or :.along use of lignts which are not snieided as to prevent beams or rays of lights being directed at any portion of t+,e trave.ed way of a public street or which are of such intensity r brii1'ance, regardless of use, directions >r shielding, so as to likely i pair or interfere the vision of any driver of any rotor vehicle upc-, a public street. PAGE 7 (j) Flashing, Blinking or Traveling Lixhts. Any sign wit flashing h11 n< ng or traveling lights except temporary Christmas lights or signs which have a moving message or which have automatically changing messages, 5, Administration and Enforcement, The Building Official shall enforce and administer the provisions of this Article, The Building Official or City Manager may delegate the cuties and powers granted to and imposed upon the Building Official by this Article, B. PERMITS. 1, Permit Required for Signs. It shall be unlawful for any person to place, locate, erect, construct, reconstruct, alter, maintain, or make use of any sign, not exempt from regulation, without having first secured a wri.tcen permit for such sign fr:m the Building Official, except as otherwise provided in ts Article.. Exceptions to Permit Requirement. 'he following types regulated signs shall be exempt from the permit requirements this Article, but must comply with all other applicable regulation of this Article; (a) Legally nonconforming signs as defined in this Article. (b) Wall signs, legal notice;; and building address numbers, (c) State or National Flags, (d) Signs painted on glass surf,~ces of windows or doors. (e) Portable Signs, (f) Stake Signs. d. Application Procedure, Tne appli.ation for a sign per shall be submitted on such forms as the Building Official =av prescribe and shall be accompanied by such information, drawt:-gs and descriptive data as required by the Building Official tc su:•e proper regulation of such sign and to insure compliance .,_:n this Article. PermiT Fee If the }la;.a and saecifications for such sign, set Forth i; application l:er,.it conform to all of :Ae requi:ements f _nia Arcicie nd any tner ordinance or .sw applicable c:,exe the Building Official ;Hall, upon payment , the folloti.'ing fee, issue tike appropriate ;,ermit: CACH 8 Effective Area of Sign (Sq. Ft.) Fee 0 to 50 $15.00 over 50 to 100 20.00 over 100 to 200 25.00 over 200 to 300 30.00 over 300 50,00 5. Duration of permit, Unless otherwise revoked, all permits issued for signs shall be valid for an indefinite period of time, except as otherwise provided for in this Article. b, Revocation of Permit; Appeals. (a) Revocation, Notice' Order, The Building Offalicilal In re y g this permits for violation of any provi Article`; pruvided that, the Building Official shall conduct a hearing, if requested by the permit holder, prior to the revocation of the permit. The person whose permit is under consideration shall be given at least ten (10) days written notice of the date and time of the hearing and shall be permitted to present relevant facts regarding the pending revocation. Following such hearing thed' Buit such permit ilding Official is toall issue a written decision, a revoked, provide the permit holder with a copy of such decision and order revoking such permit, Co) q eals from Revocation. Any permitholder wishing to appea t e ec s on an order of the Building Official s. ccordance twithsa the tolawthe Board of a Adsign ,justmentmi in may ap el ordinances, regulations and procedures governing other matters -appealed to said Board, C. PORTABLE SIGNS. 1, Regulations Applicable to all Portable SUns, In addition. to all other applicable provisions the following regulations shall apply to all portable signs in all zoning districts; (a) Flash'.n> Li hts Prohibited. No portable sign ha be use so as to make use of an flashing intermittent lights on or in conjunction with suc'.•, sign. (b) Si ns Anchored. All portable signs used fcr a vert purposes, when not in transit, shall 3_ securely anchored, so as to prevent overturning :r unsFfe movement, the sufiiciencv of such anchorage be jetermined by the Building 0~£icial. (c) ad'veriis whicho iso ittaberecessy of si7a1 squceie usfeet effective area, pa cumber of On-Premisertable Signs Limited. 140 rs:!1 shall place, erect, maintain or ma}te use of, at any one time, :n any one precise more than two (2) on-premise portable signs fcr purposes of advertising of an effective area of 25 square feet • PAGE 9 or less or more than one (1) on-premise portable sigr for purposes of advertising of an effective area of more than 25 square feet. 3. Ra ul'ation of Off-Premise Portable Si ns. The following regulations shall apply to all off-premise portable signs used for advertising. (a) Number Limited. No person shall erect, maintain or me a use o more than one off-premise portable sign at any one time to advertise, identify or otherwise give information relating to the business, Activity, event, product or service, whether one or more, located on or at any one business, store or commercial establishment. (b) 5pacng_. No person shall place, erect, make use of or ma ntain an off-premise portable sign within 456 feet of another off-premise portable sign. In computing the spacing requirement, the measurement shall be made parallel to the nearest curb line and on the same side of the street. (c) Identification. The owner of an off-premise portable signer cause each sign to be conspicuously labeled or marked with the owner's name, address and telephone number, (d) Register To Be Kept, Every owner placing, using or maintain ng an ott-premise portable sign shall keep a current register or book showing the date or dates when, and location of the premises where, such sign is placed or used. No person shall record o: register a sign as being used on a date or dates or at a promise when sucli sign was not so used. Eve r•: person required to keep a current register or book shall make such register or book available to the Building Inspector for inspection, upon demand, a. any reasonable time. 4. Abatement of Off-Premise Portable Signs in Five Years. Beginning five years from the effective date of this ordinance, no person shall erect, use, make use of, or maintain any off- premise portable sign for advertising or business purposes. U. REGULATION OF SIGNS BY ZONING DISTRICTS. The foliow4.ng regulations apply to specified signs in t:n,e specified zoning districts. 1, Residential Districts. The following regulations 8na"._ apply to signs in all residential zoning districts. (a) Tv- Roof, projecting, portable or off - premis_ sign- are proi'Libited. (b) Heij~.t. No sign snail have a greater hei3nt titian fP.et. PAGE 10 W Size. No sign shall have an effective area greater Man 50 square feet. (d) Setback. All ground signs shall maintain a minimum s ante or setback from the curb line which is equal to or greater than one-half of the required front yard for the premise where the sign is located. (e) Number, Only one ground sign shall be located on one premise; except as provided for as follows: (1) Any premises fronting more than one public street, which is not an alley, shall be allowed to make use of one ground sign on each separate street frontage. (2) Any premise which has more thtin 450 feet of public street frontage on any one public street (exclud- ing, alleys) may make use of one additional ground sign for each 490 feet of frontage, or fraction ther.jof; the ground signs to be placed no closer than one-half of the total distance of total street frontage on which they are used. 2, Non-Residential Districts. The following regulations shall apply to signs in non-residential zoning districts: (a) Type.. All types of signs are permitted. feet. roof sign, shat: (b) Height. a height sign, greater than is not (c) Size. No sign shall have an effective area greater than 400 square feet, (d) Setback. All ground, portable, and projecting signs shall maintain a minimum distance )r setback from t:-e curb line, as determined by height and effective area, in accordance with the following: 40 Minimum Setback Ft), 3^v 30 30 30 Height (ft.) 2 20 20 30 10 20 30 0 50 150 400 Effective Area (Sq.Ft.) (In determining the required setbae:,., the measureme-.t of the height or effective area of the sign whiz, would require the greatest setback. shall be use:; provided, however, that if the determining height effective area measurement is a dimension t'r.at separates two different setback requirements :r.e least restrictive setback shall be used,) (e) Numbetr. Only one ground sign, or supporting str-.:- ture hereof, shall be located in any one premise, except as follows: (1) Any premises fronting more than one public street, which is not an alley, snall 'oe allowed to w ::e use of one around sign for each separate straat frontage. • PACE 11 (2) Any premise which has more than 450 feet of public street frontage on any one street (excluding alleys) may make use of one additional 450 feet of frontage, or fraction thereof. The signs to be placed no closer than one-half of the total distance of the total street frontage on which they are used. (3) Where any premise contains more than one lawfull> permitted business or use in divided buildings, each business or use thereon shall be allowed one or more on-premise signs on the permitted supporting structures thereon, 3, Planned Development District. All signs located in a Planned Development District shall comply with all provisions of this Article including any provision that would have been applicable to the property on which the sign is located had the property been otherwise zoned into districts in accordance with the uses shown on the approved site plan for such Planned Development; provided, however, that the Planning and Zoning; Commission may recommend, and the City Council may vary in the planned development ordinance for said premises, any of the sign S requirements of thi, Article as such requirements would apply to signs in Planned Development Districts, 4, Central Business Districts. The following regulations shall apply to signs in Central Business Zoning Districts. (a) Right-of-Way Limitation on Pro)ectinj Signs. No pro- jecting sign Nall project or exten into the public right-of-way for a distance of more than 10 feet or within 2 feet of the nearest curb line, whichever is more restrictive, No projecting sign, supporting structure, or part thereof which extends into the public right-of-tray shall occupy any of the space between the ground level and 8 feet above said ground level in said right-of-way. (b) Size. No sign shall have an effective area greater U~An 400 square feet. (c) Nei_,ht Limitations. No ground sign or supporting structure thereof shall have a height greater then -0 feet, E. REGULATION OF ATTACHED SIGNS. ?.n addit_on to any other applicable regulations, the follow- ing regulations shall apply to the type of sign specified in all, zoning districts. 1. Roof Signs, (a) Projection. Roof signs, or the supporting structure thereof, shall not extend laterally beyond the exterior calls, PAGE' 12 A or upward beyond the highest point of the roof of the building on which it is located, to a height, as measured from ground level to the highest part of the roof, which is greater than specified below as follows; (1) one (1) story bldg 55% of bldg height 2) two (2) story bldg 36% of bldg height 3 three (3) to five (5) story bldg 30% of bldg height 4) six (6) to nine (9) story bldg 25% of bldg height S) ten 10) to fifteen (15) story bldg 23% of bldg height (6) sixteen (16) story bldg or higher Max, height of 40 feet (b) secured to the building oupon iwhich sthey are installed, 2, Protecting signs, (a) Construction, All projecting signs shall be securely attached to the building or structure, (b) Protection Bevond Roof, A projecti❑ sign shall not e erecta on `t, waaL of any building so as to project above the roof or parapet wall or above the roof level where there is no parapet wall; except tnat a sign erected at a right angle perpendicular building, such horizontal width of which sign, p p wall, does not exceed eighteen inches may be erected to a height not exceeding 2 feet above the roof or parapet wall or above the roof level where there is no parapet wall. A sign attached to a corner of a building and parallel to the vertical line of such corner, shall be deemed to be erected at a right angle to the building wall. (c) Size. The total square footage of all projecting signs shall not exceed twenty (20%) percent of the wall area on which such signs are located, 3. Wall Signs, (a) Construction. Wall signs attached to exterior walls of solid masonry, concrete or i1tone, shall be safe!) and securely attached, Woad blucks shall not be user for anchorage, except in the case of wall signs attached to buildings with walls of wood. A wall sign shall not be supported by anchorages secured to an unbraced parapet wall, (b) Size. The total square footage o fll the wall wall slres snarl not exceed twenty (20) percent of on which such signs are located. 4. Signs o^ Common Buildings. Wnen one or more attached signs are located or to be located on a building dhich is divined and contalus more tnan one business or use, the regulation of such attached signs specified herein, as to size and projection, shale apply separately to the part of the exterior walls rhich contain that business or use. r PAGE 13 F. ABANDONED SIGNS 1, Removal of Abandoned Signs, All abandoned signs and their supporting structures, if not a building, shall be removed within thirty (30) days from the date of abandonment by the owner of the promises on which such sign is located. Any sign or supporting structure which is an abandoned sign on the effective date of this ordinance shall be removed within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this ordinance. 2. Extension of Time To Use. The owner or lessee of the premises on which an abandoned sign is located, who desires to use such sign, or supporting structure, may within sixty (60) days of the abandonment or effective date of this ordinance, make application to the Building Official for an extension of time to make use of such sign, If the sign or supporting structure conforms to all requirements of the law and the applicant submits I reasonable evidence that he is endeavort~ig to make use of such sign in a lawful manner the Building Official may grant an extension of time up to a maximum of twelve (12) months for t:.ie owner or lessee to make use of the sign. The Building Official may, as a condition of granting such extension require that -Is owner or lessee paint out, obscure, cover, or remove some or all of the elements or message or face portion of the sign in such manner as to leave the sign and supporting structure neat end unobtrusive in appearance or in harmony with the adjacent buildings to which it is located or attached, 3. Procedure for Removal of Abandoned Signs. Any abandoned sign for which an extension of time to use has not been granted, or any unlawful sign or supporting structure thereof, is hereby declared a public nuisance and may be removed in accordance -with the procedures set forth hereiu, (a) Notice and Order. The Building Official shall deliver or send a written notice to the person responsible c placement, arection, or maintenance of an abandoned, or unlawful sign, if known, or if not known, to _ihe owner or person in control of the sign or premises where such sign is located, ordering the removal o: such sign and its supporting structure within ter. (10) days of delivery or mailing of tl%e notice and PAGE 14 order. For purpposes of this provision the name of the person listed by the City Tax Assessor/Collector or other local taxing jurisdiction for tax purposes as the owner of the premises where such abandoned or unlawful sign is located shall be presumed to be the owner of such property or the agent for such owner and notice mailed or delivered to said person at the address listed shall be presumed to be sufficient. (b) Removal' Appeals . If the parson ordered to remove said s gn to s to do so within the time specified, the Building Official may, after twenty (20) days of the date of delivery or mailing of the notice and order, removo or cause said sign to be removed' provided, however, that any person aggrieved by said order may file an appeal with the Board of Adjustment in accordance with the provisions applicable for other appeals from decisions of the Building Ufficial. In case such appeal is timely filed, the procedures applicab,16 to other appeals shall be followed and the order of the Building Official may be stayed in accordance thereof pending the final determination of the Board of Adjustment. (c) Im oundment of Si ns Radem tion' Dis osal. Any sign w e s remove y t e u ng t e a pursuant to these provisions shall be impounded and transported to and stored by the Building Official at a location, designated for such purpose. Records of where sucn, signs were located and when removed shall be kept. The Building Official shall sand a letter to the owner of such sign, if known, or if not known, to the owner or person in control of the premises where such sign is located giving notice of such impoundment. The Building Official shall hold the sign in storage for at least thirty (30) days after notice of impound. ment has been mailed. Any portable sign may be redeemed by the owner thereof upon the payment of a fee to the City of Denton through the Building official, of a total of $25.00 for hauling the same to storage plus $1.00 per, day storage fee. Any nonportable sign may '>e redeemed by the owner thereof upon payment of the cost of removal of and hauling the same to storage, as determined by the Building Official, plus $1,00 per dad storage fee. Any sign not reclaimed by the owner thereof wit'ni; thirty (30) days of the mailing of the notice cf impoundment may be disposed of in accordance win:, applicable law. (d) Recoverrv of Costs. If, upon disposal of an unredeemez nonpotao e s gn, the Building UfficiaL has .r, received an amount sufficient to cover the cost removal and hauling of such removed sign, the Buildi ; Official shall send notice to the owner of the premise: where such sign was located requesting payment of removal and hauling costs less any amount received disposal of such sign. Any such costs remaining una._ after thirty (30) days from the date of mailing notice shall become delinquent and shall bear interest at ten (104) percent per annum. The Building Oificia', may cause such unpaid and delinquent amount to :a assessed against the premises where such removed sign Wits located by filing and perfecting a lien against said premises. The cost levied against said pram.ses shall include a $50.00 administration fee. PAGE 15 W A_pDeal of Cost ImQosed• L evlol, Any person may con- es Foe-' ane~s o cost for the removal of a sign Imposed hereunder by filing an appeal with the Board of Adjustment within twenty, (20) days of the mailing of the notice of such costs. The Board of Adjustment may either uphold the cost imposed by the Building Official or impose and cause to be levied whatever cost it considers to be reasonable. Storage costs imposed hereunder shall not be appealable, G. SPECIAL PROVISIONS, 1, Manner of Measurement, (a) Setback. To apply the setback provision of this Art c e for signs at any one Joint, the following measuring procedure shall be usedt (1) Draw an imaginary vertical line extending upward from the curb line of the promises; (2) Beginning at any point on the vertical line drew an imaginary horizontal line perpendicular to the vertical line and curb line and extending toward the premises; (3) Beginning at the point where the vertical line intersects the horizontal line, measure along tae horizontal line for the required setback, (Sea Appendix Illustration 14a) (b) Height, To apply the applicable height limitations o Fis Articla at any one point for signs, :r supporting structures thereof, which are not roof signs, the following measuring procedure shall be used; (1) Draw an imaginary vertical line extending upward from the nearest curb line of the public street fronting the premises; (2) Beginning at the surface level of the curb line measure along the vertical line to a point which is the maximum allowed height for a particular sign or supporting structure; (3) From that point draw an imaginarv horizontal line perpendicular to the vertical line towards the premises; (4) This extended horizontal line gives the maximum height allowed at that location for a particular sign or supporting structure. (See Appendix Illustration 14b). (c) Effective Area. In determining the effective area of a Fign where, more than one sign is located or affixed to a single supporting structure, all signs located thereon or affixed thereto shall ba included and measured together as though they were one sign. 2. Setback Clearance Zone. In all zoning districts, except Central Business Districts, all ground signs shall be so lorated so that no part of the effective area of such sign shall occupy PAGE 16 the space, (as determined in the same manner for measuring height and setback for signs), between 2 and 10 feet in height within 15 feet of the curb line of any public street; (See Appendix Illustration 14c). The supporting structure of such sign may occupy such space to an extent no greater than 2 square feet in area, such area to be determined in the same manner as for effective area of signs. 3. Signs on Certain HighwaYa. The provisions of this Article shall apply to all signs along the Interstate or Primary System of Highways within the City to the extent that such provisions supplement or compliment, but are not in conflict with, any law, rule or regulation enacted by or made pursuant to the Federal Highway Beautification Act, (23 U.S.C.A., Sec. 131, et seq) including all amendments thereto, or the Texas Highway Beautification Act, (Article 6674 V-1, V,A.C.S.) including all amendments thereto. All sign permits issued by the Building Official pursuant to this Article shall contain a notice advising the permi.ttee that signs located along the interstate or primary system of highways may be regulated by federal or state law or regulation and a permit may be required from another governmental agency. 4. Clearance from Electrical Lines. Signs shall be located a minimum distance of 6 feet measured horizontally and 12 fee: measured vertically from overhead electrical conductors whir,-. are energized in excess of 750 volts. The term "overheai conductors" as used herein means any electrical conductor. either base or insulated, 'Installed above the ground. 5. Temporary and Polir,ical Signs-. (a) Temporary real estate sales and development, temporar;: political, occasional sales and other special pia signs wnich are used for, or relate to, a particular purpose or event shall be removed by the owner of _:.e promise on which they are located aftar ten (lU) da;:; Of the date of the accomplishment of the purpose wnich they are used or tae occurrence of the event which :hey refer or relate. (b) In the case of temporary political signs, :`.e candidate to which a sign refers, I-,' not placed on premise by the owner of the promise tnereof, snail ':e i PAGE 17 responsible for the removal for such signs within the time specified above. (o) Stake or portable signs which relate to a candidate or issue to o voted upon by a political party or at a public election and are 25 square feet or less in effective area may be erected without limit as to number; provided, that such signs comply with all other applicable requirements of this Article, b. Sign Maintenance, All signs and supporting structures shall be kept in good repair, condition and appearance. All faces, bolts, supporting frames and fastenings shall be free from deterioration, insect or rodent infestation, rot or loosening, Painted signs which are faded or obscured because of weather or time shall bn repainted or redone or painted over so as to be neat in appearance. 7. Identification of Signs. Every off-premise sign shall be plainly marked at all times, in a location so as to be conspicuous and easily identifiable, with the currant name, address and reie- phone number of the owner or lessee of the sign. H. NONCONFORMING SIGNS. 1. Applicabilit The provisions oL this Article, defining and regulating nonconforming signs, shall control over any other conflicting provision of the zoning ordinance, 2. Defined. A sign, including its supporting structure, shall be considered nonconforming when it does not conform to all or part of the provisions of this Article applicable thereto, is not a portable sign or stake sign, and: (a) was in existence and lawfully located and used on the effective date of this Article, or; (b) was in existence and lawfully located and used in accordance with the provisions of the prior ordinance applicable thereto, or which was considered legally nonconforming thereunder, and has since been in continuous or regular use; or (c) was in existence, lrn:ated, and used on the property at the time the property was annexed to the City of Denton and has since been in regular and Continuous use. 3. Destruction; Repair. (a) Any ;~,nconforminf sign, including its su porting structure, which is destroyed, damaged, dilapidated or deteriorated shall not be replaced, repaired, or PAGE 18 renovated, in whole or in part, if such replacement, repair or renovation would require an expenditure of monies in excess of fifty percent, (50%) of th? repro- duction cost of a new sign, including its supportini structure, which is substantially the same or similar to the nonconforming sign destroyed, damaged, dilapidated or deteriorated. (b) The building official may, whenever he deemc nscessa rr to reasonably determine the applicability of t;.e foregoing provision, require the owner of said non- conforming sign to submit two or more independea: estimates from established sign companies of the cos- of replacing, repairing or renovating, in whole or part, the existing nonconformingg sign and two or m, independent estimates from astablished sign eompamiea of the reproduction cost of a new sign, including Lts supporting structure, which is substantially the saga or similar to the nonconforming sign destroyed damaged dilapidated or deteriorated, (c) No sign or suppporting structure which is lawful.= reproduced, repaired, or renovated as a nonconformLZLI sign shall be increased in effective area or height. 4, Termination; Time Period. All legally nonconforming signs, including supporting structures, shall be removed ur modified s: as ,no comply with the provisions of this article on or bef::f January 1, 1994 or within ten (0) years of the date the size. became nonconforming, whichever is later. Appeals from Termination Period, The owner of any none:.- forming sign may appeal the termination time specified for sign to the Board of Adjustment, Appeal procederes, unlass otherwise specified herein, shall be those as used in ot:.tr matters appealed to the Board of Adjustment. (a) Time for Filing Appeals, The owner of any nonconfor't- ing :sign who wishes to appeal the totmination ii:e applicable to such owner's sign shall file his aoc=_a: with the Board of Adjustment within one (1) year ' the effective date of the ordinance or within one year the premises on which is located a nonconform_r.; sign is annexed to the City. Failure to file appeal within the time specified constitutes a era:•-=_r of the right Cc appeal or contest the termination _i:- applicable to such nonconforming sign. (b) Rearing Appeals, The Board of Adjustment may, in :.s ciscr- et on r all properly filed appeals after E. one (1) year period for filing has passed and set a.: appeals to be heard at one or more times as convenient for such Board, (c) Determination. The Board of Adjustment, iu case appear- o the applicable termination date, determine whether the termination date applicable appellant's sign has allowed sufficient time for :-e appellant to recover his capital investment ir. nonconforming sign. In making such determination .e PACE l9 Board may consider the amount of the Initial capital the investment, life ex ac withy thesetregulati nsenand any removal cost to comply other factor the Board believes to be pertinent to the determination, The ambrtization period a peeled from shall be calculated or measured from the beginning of the amortization period; i.e. the data the sign becomes nonconforming. (d) Extension of Amortization Period, If the Board 11 etezm nes t at t e term time to na si n doeaas napplied to sufficient appellant's nonconforming appellant his Investment insuch sigallow n, the pBoardnmaytgrantI bpy its that r,such sign etension of time to may be maintained a asata nonconforming sign until such specified date, 6. Relocation of Nonconforming Signs, Notwithstanding any other provision of this Article, any sign which is a legally existing nonconforming sign hereunder may be relocated on the same lot or tract of land if the sign is required to be removed from its present location because of the acquisition of the property upon which the sign is located by any governmental agency or other entity which did or could have acquired the property through the exernise of its power of eminent domain. Such relo- cated sign shall be placed, insofar as poosible, as to compl; with all the provisions of this Article. The termination period specifi.ed herein shall not be extended because of such relocation. Signs Located on Nonconforming Premises. Where, on the effective date of this ordinance, a sign is located on a premise which is a legally nonconforming use of the premise and such sign is used in regard thereto, the sign may be usad and maintaine, thereon, even though it would not be a permitted use, so long as such premise is continually vsed as a lawful nonconforming use; provided, however, If. such sign is nonconforming as to heign:, area, or setback, such sign shall, after the termination peri:c allowed herein, be brought in conformity with such requirement> applicable to the zoning district in which such sign is located. 1. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLUWED. 1. The Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception f._= the provisions of this Article for the setback or height o' a nonportable sign under the following circumstances PAGE 20 (a) Visibilic Obstructions, When fifty percent (50%) or more o t e e ec ve area of such sign a$ located or to be located in accordance with the setback or ho,14ht requirements of this Article cannot or would not be visible from at least one "visibility point" because erected location or the prior a to building effectivet,dateonofruthis ordinance, For the purposes of this provision, "visibility point" shall mean the viewing locations, at a height of b feet above the general surface level, determined by extending the required side yard setback lines of the premise on which such sign is located or to be located so as to intersect the curb line of the public street fronting said premise; then measuring from said inter- section points along the curb line in the direction of the nearest side lot line of said lot for a distance _n street froneindirection, the of 100\ feet. allows, traffic 1 flow the directiony fromn whichattraffic ~~the curb approaches said premise shall be used to determine t Illustration visibility , 14d)requirement herein, (See Appendix (b) Medical Emernenev Signs, When a sign located on the prem se o an emergency medical treatment facility would, because of the setback or height requirements of this Article, not be readily visible fram adjacent Public streets, For purposes of this provision, Emergency Medical Treatment Facility' shall mean any hospital, clinic or other facility where medical aid is offered to a person or animaL who suffers an unexpected injury or illness which requires immediate medical attention, 2, In granting special exceptions allowed herein, the Board of Adjustment shall specify, by written order, the particular setback or the particular height that will be allowed and in doing so shall not allow deviation from the provisions of t;nis Article beyond what is minimally necessary to remedy the situation allowing for said special exception. J, HISTORIAL LANDMARK SIGNS The provisions of this Articla shall not apply insofar as they confict with any provision applicable to a sign designated as a historical landmark pursuant to the provisions of Article 28A of Appendix B-Zoning of the Code of Ordinances of the of Denton, Texas, K. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS The definitions and provisions of this ,article applicable to signs shall control over any other conflicting definition or provision found in Appendix B-Zoning of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas. PAGE 21 1 §EaION I I I That the Appendix Illustrations of Appendix 9•;loning of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton are nereby amended by adding the following illustrations: 141 SIGNS 14a1 Measurement of Setback, Sheer 1 I 'urb IIne 14b. Measurement of Height SIGH l I Curt trine street P A r P' 7 t ~ 1 1 1401 Setback clearance Zone 4 0 -7 •s00 sauart fret f+ 00 s + sQ. N. w I 50 I f / I SttAaCk Z (in toot e ~o is ~o sc - straet Curb tino 14d, visibility Point p -oiailtty point etback / line Street a PACE 23 SECTION IV- That the definitions of various type signs of Article 12 01) through (59.1) of Appendix B-Zoning of the Code of Ordinances of the City of,Denton are hereby repealed in their entirety, said numbering to be reserved for future use, SECTION V. That Article 19 C of Appendix B-Zoning of the Code of Ordi- nances of the City of Denton relating to special development signs is hereby repealed in its entirety; said paragraph C to be reserved for future use SECTION V1. That Article 27 (52) of Appendix B-Zoning of the r.,-)de of Ordinances of the City of Denton defining ''sign" is hereby repealed in its entirety; said number reserved for future use. SECTION VII. That Section 5-4 of Article 1 of Chapter 5 of the Code :i Ordinances of the City of Denton relating to permits for signs is hereby repealed in its entirety, said section number to be reserved for future use, SECTION V111. That "I, Sign and Identification Uses" of Article 7 ;f Appendix B-Zoning of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas is repealed in its entirety. SECTION M Any person who shall erect, construct, locate, place, main- tain, seep or make use of any sign in violation of any provisi:ns of this ordinance or otherwise violate a provision of :.-as ordinance, or who fails to comply therewith or with any of the requirements thereof, or of a permit issued thereunder, shat: be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable oy a fine not exceeding ':.,o Hundred Dollars ($200.00). Each such person shall be deeaed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of this orc'.%ance is committed, or continued, and upon conviction of any such violations such person shall be punished within the limits above. PAGE 24 SECTION X. That if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any persor or circumstance is held invalid by any court of compatenc jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of th;, remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of t'nte City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have enacted suca remaining portions despite any such invalidity. SECTION XI. All ordinances, or parts of ordinances in force when the prc- visions of this ordinance become effective which are inconsisten: or in conflict with the terms or provisions contained in th-f ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of any such conflict. SECTION XII, That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) da-,a from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is here': directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be publish.&, twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official newspaper the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 198• MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ATTEST: CL fRTE n ;%TTY ECA'rMM' CITY OF DENT0N, TEXAS APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: J. TAYLOR, JR., CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS BY: PAGE 25 CITY COUNCIL. AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET DA'Z'E OF MEETING: June 19, 1984 COUNCIL. AGENDA ITEM N: Consent SUBMECT: BID #9266 PAVING IMPROVEMENTS E. PRAIRIE ST. SUMMARY: This bid was received by purchasing to be bid on from Jerry Clark and Jeff Meyer. We properly advertised and sent this bid to several prospective bidder/contractors and received, on April 19, only one bid from Calvert Paving. We understand this award is subject to grant funds; therefore, this recommendation is subject to receiving these funds or approval of the grant. ACTION REQUIRED: Approval by Council SOURCE OF FUNDS: Approved Funds RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to Calvert Paving Co, for the total of $47,400,50, As you will note above, the bid was received on April 19 with 60 days for award, Therefore, we should award now subject to funds becoming available within the next 30 days. If the bid is not awarded now or if the funds are not received within the next 30 days, we will have no other alternative but to re-bid the project, Therefore, we recommend award now, This bid awarded subject to compliance of all regulations contained therein, EXHIBIT: Single-Bid Tabulation Sheet SUBMITTED BYi ,,John J. Marshall, C.P.M. Purchasing Agent i BID # 9266 Poll WORK DAYS 20 EAST PRAIRIE PAVING IMPROVEMENTS BID TABULATION SHEET Item Description Bid Quantity Unit Price Ext Total 100 preparation of Right-of-Way L.S. $4500.OPL.S. $4500.00 104-A Remove Concrete Pavement 14 S.Y. $ 5.00/S.Y. $ 70.00 104-B Remove Curb and Gutter 350 L.F. $ 3,00/L.F. $1050.00 260 Trevira Subgrade 1353 S.Y. $ 1,50/S.Y. $2029,50 340B Type D Asphalt Patch 10 TONS $ 80.00/TON $ 800.00 360 6" Concrete pavement 1360 S.Y. $ 27.00/8.Y. $36720.00 432 4" Concrete Riprap 10 S.Y. $ 18.00/S.y. $ 180.00 479 Adjust Existing Manhole 1 Ea. $200.00/Ea. $ 200.00 520 Integral Curb 300 L.F. $ 4.00/L.F. $1200.00 524-A Concrete Driveway 23 S.Y. $ 27.00/S.Y. $ 621.07 S P-2 Sawcut 6 L.F. $ 5.00/L.F. $ 30.00 $47,400.50 Bid Total Mone Addendum Received Alternate Bid - Asphalt/Concrete Combined Items 100, 104A, 1043, 340-B, 432, 479 and SP-2 Remain the Same $6830.00 FROM ABOVE 260 Trevira Subgrade 1300 S.Y. 1.50 S.Y. $1.950.00 340Al 1/2" Ty;.e G Asphalt 625 S.Y. 15.00 /S.Y. $9375.00 340A2 1 112" Type D Asphalt 625 S.Y. 6.00 /S.Y. $3750.00 360 6" Concrete Pavement 676 S.Y. 27.00 /S.y. $16252.00 520 InCegrai Curb 208 L.F. 4.00 /L.F. $ 832.00 522 Concrete Curb and Gutter 112 L. P. 8.00 /1..F. $ 896.00 524-A Concrete Driveway & Radius 39 S.Y. 27„00 /S.Y. $105..00 $35,, 1.08.00_ ALTEIRNATE TOTAL $ 42, 938. 00 P.- 3 BID SUMMARY TOTAL BID PRICE IN WORDS Forty Soven 't'housand Pour. Hundred Dollars and Fit:ty Hundreths, Alternate Bids Forty Two Thousand Nine Hun<lred Thirty Eight Dollars and No Flundreths. In the event of the award of a contract to the undersigned, the undersigned will furnish a performance bond and a payment bond for the full amount of the contract, to secure proper compliance with the terms and provisions of the contract, to insure and guarantee the work until final completion and acceptance, and to guarantee payment for all lawful claims for labor performed and materials furnished in the fulfillment of the contract. It is understood that the work proposed to bey done shall be accepted, when fully completed and finished in accordance with the plans and specifications, to the satisfaction of the Engineer, The undersigned certifies that the bid prices contained in this proposal have been carefully checked and are submitted as correct and final. Unit and lump-sum prices as shown for each item listed in this proposal, shall control over extensions. Calvert Paving Corporation CONTRACTOR BY - (.r~✓ P.O. Box 268 Street Address Denton, n'exa s 76201 City and State Seal & Authorization (If a Corporation) (817) 387-3966 Telephone P 9 11 The"I'34i , icy Q7 coIIIpanics D,III;,; roo!, 7f,201 POWER OF A'rTORNGY CY Illlsi fldfiSt.Fi7 '.•;,!'.ITY UIJIVFRti.Al. ItISURANCE`. C1.1;1Pld;Y r"t 11rtA~!I(t:'!!,'. RJSCi1~,'A^J~.i !.O!~I>ANY, a . rporutio~ •p ,d IRIF,1ITV LP,1V£.I,F1' Oi' INC., j, :-r;,.,ro+ion d) M. G. WjEY, TERRELL W. KING, III OR RANDALL L, f ~1111N~f ln• F o DENTON:J ' TEXAS , • I,.,. j 'f Ly' • ; o,, J wrery 1,.r J., nos a,,J u11 e,r o, r,w ewi; :f ,r ;r ,•'i i-', cI 1: bdSlno Ss, and 1 recd e c_ Ir'.er„I,,, o-. lo I of -ONE- I-LLWN-AND-NQ/1atL i •r pr ~ w, t•. ,I , ,v:•,❑r, .f . ~ ,L. . , r rrrl r.. n-. IPIII1-1Y I,IF,1I~CF :iA-I101tlAL IN. .1', FAN 1' n; •I IpIIII"If' lI1,1% i,~_ I'f,'..~ t. 1Cff P;A!I'SAS, i.; h.Lra oa~'h I an I..•. led li. . r,,, r 1 rc~ -15th - y _ `D r - 11- ,~J(j~r~1}. l 7 rl d•I, h.hf lrCREtAgv AUTHORITY FOR POWER OF ATTORNEY ,1 111' 1tr11VEi6AL ItISUiil111:_E L 0%'.ir ti,AT !itiAl. C!',JL•" vN'~! (O';PAIJII ra poruli -m 'r'd lkjlI 1 'VlI . NI 11;. a Konso, n.!'r it, 1, !'i f,.. r r { ••i, . I.,.,, ...,i\'u I': Ird of - ,t•~y , .I I,':r; h, II; , - 1 I i h rr !,iVi, ~^rI i''`p ufP grapy; '~Ihrt it.i _I•, ')•y Vr -n,li• of i tie rand L.: o.tn~:ri.,• li. V ,_•n , , ~ Pc"' of . I'.~!I"p i•~Lr YI i, I fl.r :.1' ~ .if :IJI~I: f• -r.. d l !,~,Ii, !'r r r', rlrr'•.ri.l cr r„ r. r. .r SV L., f „ierl , l ii ,1., r , rjl~l'.I !.,f 11. _t fin 7n IPSI J 1 'I I i' "f IIJI'r II ~ r: i n!~i'1 , Iy in.. ]C„r 1'... fl J. r.. ' ' I• r L ) ..n i'.,..rf'v'~f lr'r.ry,~• rot, r,. -.i ri I. I I, ~ iii 1r . iS.. c p:. •,F ~r or rot r-i -irte i -:.rnfy r li„~ L3, r I. i Lfr, r ,,avi:-_i fa d... CERTIFICATION OF POWER ;\TTORNE'f TRINIIY UNiYf- INSURANCES COMPANY, SEiCURfrY NATIONAL I ISUi.' ii'F. COiMPAIt Y 'CRINI iY IJNIVCrtS"I. IN!AWANCE C 0 M P A N I OF KANSAS, INC. do hereby ,.,I,f/ ! . , r , , . i I:... Power AIFJ~-,..1 Irun and csrrr rl ar,l 'rir still in full tun Iand •f P,•.-r. 'A'11 1f I AA 1111111114 OIPI II 'Til ~ Y~ 'n,/n;L,.,✓ '/q4yllli litl'APS~ rylnbliNn,.ti• The"Trinkty Trinity Univorsal Insurmrco Col y Nntlalril Insuranvo Co, .6 . Sncurlt Trinity Univorsol Insurance Co. M comka mes AAAA of Kallsns, Inc. 15201 BID BOND 3Know nit ocn bIu 014ror Vrrunts, That eve, _.__CALVERT PAVING CORPORATION of DENTON, TEXAS (hereinafter called the Principal), as Principal, and SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY` (hereinafter called the Surety), as Surety tare held and firmly bound unto ~z_Q~-IaNxo~. ~cxAS__----•-- (hereinaft v called the Obligee) in the penal stem of FIVE PERCENT OF BID---_-----_.__ (5%~-DOI,IsARS for the payment or wllieh the Principal and the Surety bind themselves, their heirs, execlttors, administrators, successors and assigns, Jointly nnll severally, Iirlril> by these presents. SIGNED and SE:AI,LD this. 19th__--_- tiny of ---App 1____ 1;1-_M- THE; CONDI'T'ION OF THIS OBLIGATION Is ~)tiG11 That, Whereas the Principal has submitted or is about to submit it proposal to the Ohlil;ee on a contract for aVIAI and im rowments to East: Prairie Street, DenLorn, Texas NOW, TE111"IZ FORE, if the said contend be :1%~arded to the I'riucipal and the Principal shall, vv Olin Fueh Uln? ! as may he specified, crit,.'r Inlfi the contract ill wl'ilanr and give lxmd with Stu•etp isceelilnblc to the Obliy;ee, farr thy' lnitllful Ix'•1•fornl1ulce of the said contract, then this ilNigtttioll shaill he void; oUwl. wi'se to renulin ill full force and tITect, CALVER'T' PAVING CORPORATION Y/ Not . 05......... SECURITY NATIONAL _INS C CONl1:I i X S'1 A L;. " 42 y;ASS, 01( CGS, * ; y ~s~.•,,.,.,,: , ~ . - ~ ~_J"7 z ~'S.l~':...•**~ '1iylLlL.. ''6<~4,nuinn,d0;o°'` ' y//~~1 ~ ~ Y4111YlIlYN\4 ' f I ♦ ' ~ :1t o1 e, ~.I,C~. O PURCHASING DEPARTMENT BID INVITATION City of Denton 9Q,1•8 Texas St. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Denton, Texas 76201 Dale May 16 , 1984 BID NUMPER 9292 CONTROLLER 'TERMINALS, BID TITLE: REPLACEMENT KEYPADS .at10 TERMIWL PRINTERS Diverse Compu ct'r, Marke Lers Seated bid proposals will be recelved until 2:00 p.m. 4020 Micki Lynn May 31, 1984 at the nlylce of the Fort Worth, TX 76107 - Attn: James Stephens Purchasing Agent. 901.8 Texas St., Denton, TfIas 76201 For additional Information rr• act JOHN J. MARSHALL, C.P,M. Tom D. SHAW. C.P M, PURCHASING AGENT ASSIST. PURCHAStM-', AGENT office DIRK Aletrr: 817.566.8311 817.267404LI INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS 1. Sealed bid proposals must be received in duplicate, on this form, prior to opening dale and time to be consNaered. Late proposals will be returned unopened. 2, Bids shall be plainly marked as to the bid number, name of the bid, and bid opening dale on the outside cr : ompletely sealed envelope, and mailed or delivered to the Purchasing Department, City of Denton, 901 •B Texas St., Denton, TX 76201, 3. Any submitted article deviating from the specifications must be Identified and have full descriptive data a1:,;ompanying same, or It will not be considered. 4. All materials are to be quoted FOB Denton, Texas, delivered to the floor of the warehouse, or as otherwise inmc,ated. 6. The Clty of Denton, Texas reserves the right to accept separate items In a bid unless this right Is denied ov the bidder, 6. In case of default after bid acceptance, the Clly of Denton, Texas may at Its apllon hold the accepted bidder contractor liable for any and all resultant Increased costs as a penalty for such default. 7. The City of Denton reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive all Informalllles and require that s+„nmitted bids remain in force for a sixty (60) day period after opening or until award Is madu; whichever comes first. 8. The quantities shown maybe approximate and could vary according :o the requirements of the C.-~ of Denton throughout the contract period. 9. The Items are to be priced each net, (Packaging or snipping quantities will be considered,) 10. The Purchasing Department assumes responsibility fot the correctness and clarity of this bid, and all infovviation and/or questions pertaining to this bid shall be directed to the City of Denton Purchasing Agent. 11. . Any attempt to negotiate or give Information on the contents of this bid with the City of Donlon or Its i;:1rCSenlatives prior to award shall be gounds for disqualifications, 12. Thr conditions and terms of this bid will be considered when evaluating for award. 13. The City of Donlon Is exempt from all sales and excise taxes. (Article 20.04•B) *BID NUMBER 9292 BID PROPOSALS Page 2 of 2 ITEM QESCRIPTION T OUAN. PRICE AMOUNT A remote 16 post controller capable of communications 1 --NO BID- with an IBM 4331 at 9600 band rate and capable of having an IBM PC 3270 attached to the controller and having either an ITT Courier terminal 2780 or 2700-13, or IBM terminals Model 3278 attached to the controller. 2. Terminal IBM 3278 or equal that can be attached to either 10 $2,075,00 $20,000 an IBM 3274 C6 controller or an ITT Courier, 7601 Controller, w/ 10 key pad, (8k0731) 3. Replacement keyboards Model Number 1033 with 10 key 10 --NO BID- pads or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2780 terminals, 4. Replacement keyboards Model Number 1025 with 10 key pads 10 --NO BID- or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2700-13 terminals. 5. Terminal printers as ITT Courier Model Number 702 or equal 2 --NO BID- The City of Denton may award this bid by item and the vendors are not required to bid all items, The bidders must be responsible for the completeness, compatibility and quantity as those listed, Please include freight and/or delivery charges to Denton, Texas, in your bid. Full descriptive data will be required with your bid on all models or brands not mentioned above for complete evaluation. Unit price considers unit shipping, total price considers quantity shipping. TOTALS We quote the above f.o.b. Denton, Texas. Shipment can be made in_ 30 days from receipt of order. Terms riet unless otherwise indicated. In submitting the above bid, the vendor agrees that acceptance of any or all bid items by the City of Denton, Texas within a reasonable period of time constitues a contract. 4020 Micki Lynn Diverse Cotnnuter Marke4 rs1ISl r+L lung Address bidder Fort Worth, Texas 76107 city State ZIP / Signature 817 X35-9.611 Nations Accountn.a;S er__. Title Telephone PURCHASING DEPARTMENT BID INVITATION City of Denton f 901•B Texas St. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Denton, Texas 76201 Dale May lb, 1984 BID NUMBER 9292 CONTROLLER TERMINALS, BID TITLE REPLACEMENT KEYPADS AND TERMINAL PRINTERS Sealed bid proposals will be received until 2;00 p.m. ITT Courier Terminal Systems, ___htav 31, 1984 at the office of the Inc, Purchasing Agent, 901.8 Texas St., Denton. Texas 76201 P.O, flax 29039 Phoenix, AZ 85038 For additional Information contact JOHN J. MARSHALL, C.P.M. TOM D. SHAW, C.P.M. PURCHASING :.GENT ASSIST. PURCHASING AGENT Office UFW Metro 817.56&8.311 817.267-0042 INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS 1. Sealed bid proposals must be received In duplicate, on this form, prior to opening date and time to be considered. Late proposals will be returned unopened. 2, Bids shall be plainly marked as to the bid number, name of the bid, and bid opening date on the outside of completdly sealed envelope, and mailed or delivered to the Purchasing Department, City of Denton, 901 •B Texas St.. Denton. TX M201. 3. Any submitted article deviating from the specillcations must be Identified and have full descriptive data accompanying same, or It will not be considered. 4. All materlais are to be quoted FOB Denton, Texas, delivered to the Iloor of the warehouse, or as otherwise in4icalod. 5. The City of Denton, Texas reserves the right to accept separate Items In a bid unless this right Is denied by the bidder. 6. In case of default alter bid acceptance, the City of Donlon, Texas may at its option hold the accepted bidder or contractor liable for any and all resultant increased costs as a penalty for such default. 7. The City of Denton reserves the right to (elect any and all bids, to waive all infurmalllles and require that submitted bids remain in force for a sixty (60) day period after opening or until award is made; whichever comes first. 8. The quantities shown maybe approximate and could vary according to the requirements of the City of Donlon throughout the contlact period. 9. The Items are to be priced each net. (Packaging or shipping quantities will be considered,) 10. The Purchasing Department assumes responsibility fur the correctness and clarity of this bid, and all inlozmatlon andior questions pertaining to this bid shall be directed to the Oily of Denton Purchasing Agant. 11. Any attempt to negotiate or give information on the conlents of this bid with the City of Donlon or its represonlativ,~s prior io award shall be gounds for dIsquallfIcalions. 12. The conditions and terms of this bid will be considered when ovaluating for award. 13. The City Of Denton Is exempt from all sales and excise taxes. (Arlicle 20,04.8) IsilJ'i Itldls'1'G itl.D NUMBU 9292 BID PnOPQSkiLS Page 2 of 2 ITEM OESCRIPTIOM - QUAN. PRICE AMOUNT 1. A remote 16 post controller capable of communications 1 $6450 $0450 with an IBM 4331 at 9600 band rate and capable of' having an IBM PC 3270 attached to the controller and having either an ITT Courier terminal 2780 or 2700-13, or IBM terminals Model 3278 attached to the controller, 2. Terminal IBM 3278 or equal that can be attached to either 10 $1000* $10000 an IBM 3274 C6 controller or an ITT Courier 7601 Controller, 3, Replacement keyboards Model Number 1033 with 10 key 10 $ 450** $4500 pads or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2780 terminals, 4, Replacement keyboards Model Number 1025 with 10 key pads 10 $ 350 $3500 or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2700-13 terminals, 5. Terminal printers as ITT Courier Model Number 702 or equal 2 $3515 $70 30 The City of Denton may award this bid by item and the vendors are not required to bid all items. The bidders must be responsible for the completeness, compatibility and quantity as those listed. Please include freight TNS_Ur. i)[[,lvt,:r,' $171.3; and/or delivery charges to Denton, Texas, in your bid, Full descriptive data will be required with your bid on all models or brands not mentioned above for complete evaluation, * Tt'n 2 presents ITT 1700 as an cTial which includes the typewriter keyboard with 24 PF keys and an attached li) Key Para. Spec sheet attached. item 3 includes a $100 installation fee per device. TOTALS $311,651 We quote the above f.o.b. Denton, Texas. Shiprrient can be made in 45 days Iron, receipt of order. Terms net unless otherwise indicated. In submitting the above bid, the vendor agrees that acceptance of any of all bid items by the city of Denton. Texas within a reasonable period of time constitues a contract. Willing Addretf q Bidder chV state Zlp Signature Telephone T • / 1 ar CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET DATE OF MEETING: June 19, 1984 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: Consent SUBJECT: BIDP9292 CONTROLLER, TERMINALS, KEYPADS AND PRINTERS SUMMARY: This bid is for the con.-Inued update of our Data Processing hardware equipment. The controller is necessary to add other terminals, printers, etc. and to connect the new IBM PC's to the main frame computer. It is also for the addition of terminals and update the keyboards on present terminals. ACTION REQUIRED: Approval by Council SOURCE Of' FUNDS: Budget Account 100-004-0017-8509 Lease Purchase RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be approved for the lease/ purchase of t'e controller @ $6,450.00, eicht terminals @ $1,000.00 each, ten keypads @ 450.00, and ten k(+'pads @ $350.00 for a total purchase price of $22,45U.00. The approximate total lease/purchase payment per month for the above equipment will be $660.00. Item 5 of the bid will be rejected as the printers bid are not compatible with the other equipment. EXHIBrrs: Tabulation Street and Back Up Material from G. Collins SUBMITTED BY: John 0. marshalI C.P.M. Purchasing Agent 'PAW 13 1 r)_29301.LLR, TERMINAL, KEYPADS & PRINTESS DIVERSE IBM ITT ITT COMPUTER TOTAL. OPC1'l May-$I, 1984 2 alm, ~ MARKETERS (ALTERNATE LEASE/ PURCHASE ACCOUNT Jf 100-004-0017.8509 TY x T C 1P YOV - N -E, VLNDOH --V Nt)0 -v-PEN-co it V1,N-D V1~~It~01t~ 1 1 16 Post_Contro11er .Z,6 0.0 _ 8,450,0 6a 450, 00 _ g5q 9Q___~= _l~ roval_, _ 2 8 Terminal 2,075TOJ 11389,00 1,450,00 - 11000,00 81000.00 s10 Keyboards for 2780 450,00 450,00 4,500,00 10 Keyboards for 2700 350.00 - 350.00 v - ' 3,500.00- _ 2 Terminal Printers 3,515,00 3,515.0~ e^ted Delivery 30-60 Days 45 Days 45 Days Totals 36,196,11 315651.32 225450.00 Estimated Payments 660,00 Mo. MINUIVES CITY OF DENTON DATA dROCESSING ADVISORY BOARD l ; i994 June 11, 1984 Call.e,i meeting of the City of Denton Advisory Board, Monday, June 11, 1984 at 6:00 p.m, at the City of Denton's Data Processin.z office:, 324 East McKinney. i blombers Present: Gerald Cardwell Dale Maddry Ray Pittman Members Absent; Ronald McDade Bill Shanks Others Present: Gary Collins of the City Staff 1. The meeting was opened by Gerald Cardwell and the minutes of the March 28, 1984 meeting were considered. Dale Maddry made a :notion the minutes be approved as written and Ray Pittman seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. 2. Gary Collins presented to the Board the bids for the terminal equipment necessary to permit on-line inquiry and data entry for the new Equipment Management System and the proposed Municipal Court System. Ray Pittman made a motion to recommend to the City Council that the City of Denton enter into a lease/purchase agreement with ITT Courier Corporation to acquire eight (8) 1700-13 computer terminals, one (1) ITT controller, ten (10) model 1031 replacement keyboards and ten (10) model 1025 replacement keyboards, Dale Maddr.,y seconded the motion. Motion carried unp nimously. Minutes not approved. BID COMPARISON 48-MONTH PURCHASE LEASE/PURCHASE MA:RTENANCE ITT Courier 2700-13 $1450 $ 38/Month $ ITT Courier 1700-13* 1000 27/Month 1C 'Month .ITT Controller 6450 169/Month 4"" Montli IBM Controller 7600 192/Month ?~/Month IBM 3178 Terminal* 1389 35/Mon _h i4/Month 2075 /Month Diverse Computer 282/Month t/Month IBM Controller (COMDISCO) N/A IBM 3178 Terminal N/A 67/Month .4/Month i SID NUMBER 9292 BID PROPOSALS Page 22 of 2 ITFM OnSCRIPTION OUAN. PRICE AMOUNT 1. A remote 16 poet controller capable of communications 1 L with an IBM 4331 at 9600 band rate and capable of having f4 1,! an IBM PC 3270 attached to the controller and having either an ITT Courier terminal 2780 or 2700-13, or IBM terminals Model 3278 attached to the controller, 2, Terminal IBM 3278 or equal that can be attached to either 10 /36c/°-`' an IBM 3274 C6 controller or an ITT Courier 7601 ~~(f/try„J~etGtFe, Controller, 7J' -1I1rr4d,6 0 20 r 3. Replacement keyboards Model Number 1033 with 10 key 10 pads or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2780 terminals. 4. Replacement keyboards Model Number 1025 with 10 key pads 10 or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2700-13 terminals, 5. Terminal printers as ITT Courier Model Number 702 or equal 2 The City of Denton may award this bid by item and the vendors are not requi,-ed to bid all items, The bidders must be responsible for the completeness, compatibility and quantity as those listed, Please include freight and/or delivery charges to Denton, Texas, in your bid, Full descriptive data will be required with your bid on all models or brands not mentioned above for complete evaluation. TOTALS We quote the above f,o.b, Denton, Texas. Shipment can be made in days from receipt of ^rder. Terms net unless otherwise indicated. In submitting the above bid, the vendor agrees that acceptance of any or all bid items by the City of Denton, Texas within a reasonable period of time constitues a contract. ! Q•.. 7 f, Mclllnq Address clly sut• Zip signelure Telephone Tlli• PURCHASING DEPARTMENT BID INVITATION r City of Denton 901 - B Texas St. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Denton, Texas 78201 Dale May 16, 1984 610 NUMBER 9292 CONTROLLER TERMINALS, BID TITLE REPLACEMENT KEYPADS AND TERMINAI PRINTERS Comdisco, Inc, Sealed bid proposals will be received until 2W p.m. Beelitee __M 31 • 1984 _ , at the office of the Purchasing Agent, 901 •B Texas St„ Denton, Texas 76201 For additional Information contact 3001 Red Hawk Drive JOHN J. MARSHALL, C,P,M, Tom D. SHAW, C,P.M. Grand Prairie, Texas 75051 PJACHASINe AOeNT ASSIST OUACMASINO AGENT Office D1FW Metro 817.586 8311 817.267.00,,12 INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS 1. Sealed bid proposals must be received in duplicate, on this lorm, prior to opening dale and time to be considered. 1..ate proposals will be returned unopened. 2. Bids shall be plainly marked as to the bid number, name of the bid, and bid opening date on the outside of completely sealed envelope, and mailed or delivered to the Purchasing Department, City of Denton, 901 •B Texas St., Denton, TX 76201. 3. Any submitted article deviating from the specillcattons must be identified and have lull descriptive data accompanying same, or It will not be considered. 4. All materials are to be, quoted FOB Denton, Texas, delivered rJ the floor of the warehouse, or as otherwise indicated. M 5. The City of Denton, Texas reserves Iha right to accept separate Items In a bad unless this right is denied by the bidder, 6. In case of default after bid acceptance, the City of Denton, Texas may al Its option hold the accepted bidder or contractor liable for any and all resultant increased costs as a penally for such default. 7. The City of Denton reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive all informalities and require that submitted bids remain in force for a sixty (60) day period after opening or until award Is made; whichever comes first, S. The quantities shown maybe approximate and could vary according to the requirements of the City of Denton throughout the contract period. 9. The Items are to be priced eneh net. (Packaging or shipping quantities will be considered.) 10, The Purchasing Department assumes responsibility for the correctness and clarify of this bid, and all informalion andlor gitestions pertaining to this bid shall be directed to the Clty of Denton Purchasing Agent, 11. Any allemot to negotiate or give information on the contents of this bid with the City of Donlon or its representatives prior to award shall be gounds for disqualifications. Q. Thn conditions and terms of this bid will be considered when evaluating for award. 13. The City of Denton Is exempt from all sales and excise taxes. (Article 20.04•B) HID NUMSPR~ 9292 S I D PROPOSALS Page 2 of 2 ITEM DESCRIPTION QUAN. PRICE _ AMOUNT A remote 16 post controller capable of communications 1 (See attachment) with an IBM 4331 at 9600 band rate and capable of-having 3274-61C an IBM PC 3270 attached to the controller and having either an ITT Courier terminal 2780 or 2700-13, or IBM terminals Model 3278 attached to t,ne controller, 2, Terminal IB14 3278 or equal that can be attached to either 10 (See atta hrnent) an IBM 3274 C6 controller or an ITT Courier 7601 3178-C30 Controller, 3, Replacement keyboards Model Number 1033 with 10 key 10 No Bid No Bic pads or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2780 terminals, 4. Replacement keyboards Model Number 1025 with 10 key pads 10 No Bid No Bic or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2700-13 terminals, 5. Terminal printers as ITT Courier Model Number 702 or equal 2 No Bid No Bid The City of Denton may award this bid by item and the vendors are not required to bid all items. The bidders must be responsible for the completeness, compatibility and quantity as those listed. Please include freight and/or delivery charges to Denton, Texas, in your bid. Full descriptive data will be required with your bid on all models or brands not mentioned above for complete evaluation, TOTALS We quote the above f.o.b. Denton, Texas. Shipment can be made in__I.J_days from receipt of order, Terms net unless otherwise indicated. In submitting the above bid, the vendor agrees that acceptance of any or all bid items by the City of Denton, Texas within a reasonable period of time constitues a contract. 3001 Red Hawk Drive Comdisco Inc NUHInq Address id der Grand Prairie TX 75051 City 51410 zip Scott Thom b~'f 214/641-3255 Marketing representative ~ Telephone Tltle Attachment to Bid Proposal Form City of Denton - Bid No, 9292 Bid Opening; May 31, 1984; 2;00 p,m, 36-Month 48-Month Term Term Item Description _Q~y Unit Cost Total Unit Cost Total 1, 3274 61C 1 $ 343 $ 343 $282 $282 Control Unit providing the capability of attaching up to 16 3270 Information Display System displays and printers to System 4300, 2, 3178 C30 '10 78 780 67 670 Display Station with up to 1920 characters and provides an 87-key typewriter keyboard which, with its numeric pad, is identical in layout to the keyboard provided with RPQ 1038 for the 3278, This model attaches to the 3274 and requires a no-charge RPQ in the control unit. Items 1 and 2: Totals: $1,123/month $952/month ,PURCHASING DEPARTMENT BID INVITATION City of Denton ' 901.6 Texas St. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Denton, Texas 76201 Dale May 16 , 1984 BID NUM13 ER 9292 CON7ROLLER TERMINALS, BID TITLE REPLACEMENT KEYPADS AND TERMINAL PRINTERS ITT Courier Terminal Systems, Sealed bid proposals will be received until 2A0 p.m. Inc. _M 31, 1984 _ , at the of!:,ce of the 4141 I31ue Lake Circle Purchasing Agent. 901-B Texas St., Denton, Texas 76201 Suite 137 Dal las , TX 75234 For additional Inlormallon contact JOHN J. MARSHALL, C.P,M, Tom D. SHAW C.P.M. PURCHASING AGEN1 ASSIST. PUKHAS i45 AGENI Office DlFW hiolrc 817.566.8911 617.267-004: INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS 1. Sealed bid proposals must be received In duplicate, on this form, prior to opening date and time to be consii-tred. Late proposals will be returned unopened. 2. Bids shall be plainly marked as to the bid number, name of the bid, and bid opening dale on the outside c' completely sealed envelope, and mailed or delivered to the Purchasing Department, City of Denton, 901.8 Texas St. Denton. 1X 76201. 3. Any submitted article deviating from the speclficatlons must be ioyntifled and have full descriptive data ac~:ompanywg same, or it will not be considered. 4. All materials are to be quoted FOB Denton, Texas, dellyered to the iloLr of the wareho•rse, or as otherwise inda:.aled. 5. The City of Denton, Texas reserves the right to accept separate Marrs in a bid unless this rlghl is denied by the bidder, 6. In case of default after bid acceptance, the City of Denton, Texas may al its option hold the accepted bidder conlraclor liable lot any and all resullanl increased costs as a penally for such default, 7. The City of Denton reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive all informalities and require that sv:~silted bids remain in force for a sixty (60) day period after opening or until award Is made; whichever comes first, 8. The quamities shown maybe approximate and could vary according to the requirements of the C ;y of Denton throughout the contract period. 9. The Items are to be priced each net. (Packaging or shipping quantities will be considered.) 10. The Purchasing Department assumes responsibility for the correctness and clarity of this bid, and all infor~ation andfor questions pertaining to this bid shall be directed to the City of Denton Purchasing Agent. 11. Any attempt to negotiate or give Information on the contents of this bid with the City of Denton or Its re;,esentalives prior to award shall be founds for disqualifications, 12. The conditions and Ierlns of this bid will be considered when evaluating for award. 13. The City of Denton Is exempt from all sales and excise taxes. (Article 20.048) 'BID NUMBER 9292 RID PROPOSALS Page 2 of 2 ITEM DESCRIPTION QUAN. PRICE AMU;-'NT 1, A remote 16 post controller capable of communications 1 $6450 $6450 with an IBM 4331 at 9600 band rate and capablo of having an IBM PC 3270 attached to the controller and having either an ITT Courier terminal 2780 or 2700-13, or IBM terminals Model 3278 attached to the controller. 2, Terminal IBM 3278 or equal that can be attached to either 10 $1450 $1450 an IBM 3274 C6 controller or an ITT Courier 7601 Controller, 3, Replacement keyboards Model Number 1033 with 10 key 10 $ 450 $4500 pads or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2780 terminals, 4. Replacement keyboards Model Number 1025 with 10 key pads 10 $ 350 $3500 or equal for replacement of keyboards on ITT Courier 2700-13 terminals, 5. Terminal printers as ITT Courier Model Number 702 or equal 2 $3515 $7030 The City of Denton may award this bid by item and the vendors are not required to bid all items, The bidders must be responsible for the completeness, compatibility and quantity as those listed. Please include freight and/or delivery charges to Denton, Texas, in your bid. 1N51DL FXL,1VF-K%' $218.11 Full descriptive data will be required with your bid on all models or brands not mentioned above for complete evaluation, * Item 3 includes a $100 installation fee per device. TOTALS $36,198 We quote the above f.o.b. Denton, Texas, Shipment can be made in25 days from receipt of order. Terms pct unless otherwise indicated. In submitting the above bid, the venrior agrees that acceptance of any or all bid items by the cir, of Denton, Teyas v thin a reasonable period of time constitues a contract, ~I ul 4 wt >r C'"r t 1-T C y~> 2 - Numnq Address Olddsf city state ZIP Signs lure r rerephone TI s / I Z1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET DATE OF MEETING; June 19, 1984 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT; BID #9293 TRANSMISSION POLES SUMMARY: This bid is for the purchase of wooden transmission poles. They are replacements for warehouse stock and will be used by the Electrical Distribution Department in the maintenance and new construction of the electrical distribution system. ACTION REQUIRED: Approval by Council and Award of Bid SOURCE of FUNDS; Working Capital Fund Account #710-004-0598-8708 RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest bidder of Niedermeyer Martin in the amount of $85b41.90 with delivery in 45 days. EXHIBIT: Tabulation ,h t 0 UBMITTED BY . - _ SJc% Tom D. Shaw, C.P.M. Assistant Purchasing Agent nil) 9293 DID T^ANSM1SSlON POLES Colfax McFarland Niedermeye OPirN June 7, 1984 2 p. pi, Creosoting Cascade Martin ACCOUNT _VP _.c~'rk; 'rt t ursc~itil~'rioca _T _ r uon D_N T-_-vEND011~ V Do>z-- Dorz i uo ~1.T;;aaor%~ 1 4 495409 75'/2. 964,70 874.50 768,05 2 4 495410 804/2 11120.25 997,20 856,30 3 2 495415 901/2 1_LU_8 X85 . _ 2-L_ Total 11,191,80 10,004,50 8,541.90 _ Shipment 111 45 D.iys 45 Days 3045 Days Terms Y Net Net Net r ~ CITY COUNCIL. AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET DATE OF MEETING: June 19, 1984 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM N: Consent SUBJECT: BID #9296 FIRE DEPARTMENT 14INDBREAKERS SUMMARY: This hid is for the purchase of windbreakers for the Fire Department. The bid was sent to several vendors and we received three bids. This type jacket/windbreaker in the navy blue are the type used by most fire and police units. They repel water and wand but are not as bulky as most others. ACTION REQUIRED: Approval by Council SOURCE OF FUNDS: Budget 100-006-0051-8108 RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the low bidder, Blaver Manufacturing Co., Inc., at the low bid price of $38.50 each. This would make a total for 92 at $3,542..00. EXHIBIT: Tabulation Sleet SUBMITTED BY: - fG !_-4_~?._~r. John J. f4rshal1 C. P.M. Purchasing Agent 1.1.11) p fl.(f)~~ FIRE DEPT,_14INDBREAKERS _ J,f3,8ATTLE FACTORY BLAVER OPEN Juno 7 1)34 _~_2 ~,SALES MFG, CO„ _1- INC. ACCO MP # 160.006-0051-8108 Q'I'1' --'i'1'1 p1 ~G~S( RI~"1'I ~1 ttT [?t DUlt ~/LND0~2 LNDQH VCN Oft j%) ~f2^ ''ENUU[Z ! 92 Reversible Windbreaker 47,95 _ 39.50 -38.5,0 !3laver P345 or Equal - - - Shipment 30-45 Days 30 Days 60 Days i TOTAL SID 4,411.40 ~ 3,634,00 ~ 3,542,00_ i I c 1 / //''''rte CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET DATE OF MEETING: June 19, 1984 COUNCIL. AGENDA ITEM 0: Consent: SUBJECT; P.O. #62329 SUMMARY; This Purchase Order is for the emergency purchase of parts for Primary Sludge Pumps at the Waste Water Treatment Plant. The parts are for Moyno Pumps and are a basic one source from the manufacturer or his distributors. ACTION REQUIRED; Approval by Council SOURCE OF FUNDS; Budget 620-008-0470-8339 RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this emergency purchase of Sludge Pump parts from G.R. Haley Co. be approved for the total amount of $3,193,27. EXHIBIT: P.O. #62329 and Invoices SUBMITTED BY; John J. Marshall, C.P.M. Purchasing Agent A5 216 E MoKINNlY ST, PURCHASE ORDER DENTON, TX 76201 P, 0. NUMBI±R DATEI %DOR NO, DOCUMENT 7YP r,:. 1?r) p / 8/84 SO'Y 1 HALS4000 VENOO~i; SHIP TO; G. l • F ALt:Y CITY OF DEiNTONr P31,14 I R V I NG OLVt). N/'8 TREATMENT PLANT DNLLASr TX 75207 1100 MAYHILL ROAD DENTON• TX 76205 ***N;7TH: THIS PURCHASE ORDER SUPERCEEDS Pe0*0 62329 SENT 03/05/84 ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER UNITS NUMBER DESCRIPTION 810 NO. LINE AMOUN 01 6?0 00r: 0470 8339 3 #C71F_FI R PRI SLUGMG`aA343~14 _ 2*264.56 02 620 001k] 0-71) 033: :1 #C310FO MOYNO PP-f=1FOF'S1-C00 005016 03 620 ODn (1470 0339 1 FREIGHT 305 I TOTAL FOR P.O. 3193.1? The City of Denton, Texas Is tax exempt • House Bill No. 20. Reference P.O. Number on all B/L, Shipments and Invoices. ; Shipments are F.O.B. City of Denton, or as Indicated, Send Invoices 'TO, Direct All Inqulrfes TO: City of Donlon, Accounts Payable John J. Marshall, C.P.M. Purchasing Agent 215 E. McKinney St,, Denton, TX 76201 Tom D. Shay, C.P.M. Asst. Purchasing Agent Phone 8171568.8223 817/56(1-8311 DWW Metro 267.0042 ' The City of Denton Is an equal oppOftunity employer G. R. HALIY COMPANY MANUFACTURNRS' RFPRFSEIPATIVO 2611 IRVINO BLVD P1O1 FOX 1015 DALLAS, TEXAS 75207 INVOICE NO, D56$5 (214) 431-M" p 4/11/86 INVOICE DATE S CITY OF DZNTON $ 0 ACCOUNTS PAYriNAL : N MVTZ tVR,M TRtAT'ML"NT Px,A T I 215 rl. MORINk lY STREET P 1100 MAYMM MAD T DENTONv TX 76201 T DLNTOWe TX 76205 0 ,yj HIOM DALLAS PA,F, m iVV11 <SRD ER NO RLOU 8171011 wARK YIA i 62329 TLX PACFC__ _ PREPAID a CO!lEC7 NL'T 30 QAY4 4110/84 I iiuAH7lrv oROLREO DESCRIrnorr -AWADD Y ` rRlcE Awouh7 i 3 C71EFI. R(MR 3 (761.52 2284.56 3 C310FQ STATOR 3 301.7? 905.16 3189.72 i I ~ I I I SWE TAX I Y E5 NO ;tX 0, i MINIMUM BILLING $15.00 1 TRWLICAI[. INVOICE Go R,, HALEY COMPANY' MANUFACTURN RS' RkPAI$fNTAlNIS 2$111RVINO slurp, P.O. IOX 107$ D5900 DALLAS, TEXAS 76201 SNYOICI NO. (214) 01.0430 .4/24/94 INVOICI DATE s CITY or bEs,\MVN s ACCOU,ITS PAYABLE i WASTEWATER TREATMENT KAM' D 215 E 14CKMEY STROBT P 1100 MAMLL ROAD T DENT(C)NI TX 76201 T DEMN TX 76205 0 FROM F.O s, DALLAS DALLAS'. - •QUR ORDfR HD NE4UISITION MARK JWA T[11M9•y~ ~P~ •NI►P~D 4 ~7 6< 62329 KXREPAI) [n COLLECT ZTE 30 DAYS , - ---y may- n_ 1._ _ _ _ ' VVA N T I[V ORDLR ED DESCRIPTION AND Ly},ID _ _ _ - Oy1►H ~[O N11LE AMOLIH l i PREPAXD FREIGnT CHARGES 3.55 COPY ATTACHED AItTZEI( TO INVOICE #05655 i I E ~I SIAN' TAX NO XX AolliM MUM BILLING $15,00 li>.n :ll ~~i[ irlyolCt ~ CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UF SUMMARY SST MEETING DATE: June 19, 1984 SUBJECT: Approval of the preliminary replat of the Haywood-Jester Addition SUMMARY: This 0,583 acre tract is zoned commercial (C) and is located adjacent and north of Smith St. between Dallas Drive and Johnson Street. The intent of the replat is to establish a one lot resubdivision from two existing tracts and part of lot A, block 1, Rainey Addition. Water and sewer facilities are in place (81' and 6" respectively), Smith Street is a public street by prescription (40 feet in width). Five (5) additional feet of right-of-way is being dedicated by the replat. ACTION REQUIRED: Approval of preliminary replat RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning commission recommends approval of the preliminary replat. ALTERNATIVE: Approval of the replat ATTACHMENT: Map David Ellison Development Review Planner 0569g „ I, SGll~v~ _ tall. _ . uJc:~,710~! 414P ' t' ~ i:COc7' ~ ts, r p o 0 533 4c % t ` ~A~~FJe +v " CITY COUNCIL AGENDA §M -UP SUMMARY SHENT MEETING DATE. June 19, 1984 SUBJECT. Approval of the preliminary plat of the Patio Garden Homes Addition SUMMARY; This 5,105 acre tract was recently approved for planned development (PD) zoning permitting 50 residential dwelling units (25 duplex struc- tures), Private recreational facilities will be provided on site, Streets will be private and all ammenities except actual living area will be under common ownership, Adequate public streets, utilities, drainage and other public facilities are in place or availatle for extension or installation. I ACTION REQUIRED: Approval of the preliminary plat RECOMMENDATION; The Planning and Zoning commission recommends approval. ATTACHMENT, Map David Ellison Development Review Planner 055eg 4. t al ! y lA!40jA Rw- q rl i kVRIwaI~Q~ A 1. ? LOCATION WP NOT TO S(,ALC V 'I a )5 A _ 1 ~-..1 r` .,117 A~'';1 Jam. 'l I _ l,' I,f . J c- ;i~ 11-1 "Fl LOT LOC ^ i - 1.' 1 1 v - e 47 too, DRlV - - I NOTC I iC•`I rGC2 NLP ^!'CR P^'a.R S:' JV SCALE 1"100' 'VAY 29,19e4 Owner Bob rRIOP, Traelee 6Ga34 Chevy Chasa Dallas, rx. 75225 'ItELIMINAKY PLAT PATIO GARDEN HOMES ADDITION LOT I 3LOC,< I 5.105 Acres in the BC53 tC.R.,R.CO 5Y.A•106 OTY < COUNTY V Dcmronr, rx. MAY 30 1984 6RAPVIC 6c.1LE ru Ik:ET' CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET MEETING DATE; June 19, 1984 SUBJECT: Approval of the preliminar plat of the Mack Center Addition SUMMARY: Five (5) lots are proposed for approval in this subdivision, The total tract encompasses 4.34 acres and is zoned general retail (GR), Lots 1 and 2 front on Audra Lane. Lots 3, 4, and 5 have frontage on East McKinney, Future driveway access is a major consideration because both Audra Lane and EaAt McKinney are major arterials. The owners have agreed to joint access between Lots 4 and 5 for preliminary platting purposes. Plans for some water and sewer improvements will be required during the final platting phase, but the major concern is in the area of drainage, ACTION REQUIRED: Approve the preliminary plat with or without conditions RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat with the following condition: The developers will be responsible for improving the channel along the east side of their prop- erty. No development will be permitted on lot 5 until the property to the north is developed ane the channel is connected to the east side. ATTACHMENT: Map aV son < c- Development Review Planner VICINITY I N4 S<W1 . , Y ey \ 1 4241 H 11 11A11 I r C 6, C OEVELOPWNT CO. FN I MACK AppIT10N ' ZONE GENERAL RETAIL 1 1 r1 , l i.CNE 'SENERAL RETAIL' 1 / S 88.11'45"E 80676, 10.14 1 210 0' r Y i 220.0' ~ ! 28 .d ' n I ¢j' . .'~co r.11 X1:3• '13' f ~1 pp _ n A l L,OT 2 aRr ZONE GENERAL RETAI L Ch~V91~'07E,1iv--L i~ R 00 \ 7942 -.2 2Bri I l i w L 1 l I W C h 1 4315' M va9vlswl 1 V LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5~ 1 11 .I1n1.1M 1~ ' furry, IU N L w1'M00 L I It3111, W N L 1 NI'na0~ 1 oaf ItAIw C) s {.OT I Z x 43403 ACRES : 1503 -•,98.61--, ; ---'220 28830' w `Y tN3 N89°0 0w wN.88*11'45'W. 71194' W_.__ • . N .N-----,~ W4 4e6) lJ 3 ~ I ~ E RICHARD HARE, FN " I McKiNNEY PROPEkTY GROUP, AMERICAN uANO ASSOCIATION, FN ZONE MF-I 4 3403 ACRES F14 " CITY 8 CCUNT'r -V CIENTCt4 5 LOTC LC~C :r.NE1441- RE OWNER PAUL 4,r^w000 420 S ::ARR,:'-L OENTCN. `ERAS 75: owrj$ scold HAMMETT - cKC care CONSULTING I NGINEE ~c e -Iruln CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET MEETING DATE: June 19, 1984 SUBJECT: Approval of the preliminary plat of the Morse Street Addition SUMMARY: This is a 3.016 acre SF-7 tract located adjacent and south of Morse Street and adjacent and north of the Willowcreek Addition. Fourteen (14) SF-7 lots are proposed, A change in zoning request for PD zoning permitting 5,000 square foot lots at this site was denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 22, 1984, Strong neighborhood opposition to the extension of Scott Drive (standard residential street with 50 feet of right-of-way and 31 feet of pavement) as well as reduced lot size and potential char- acter of housing was evident during the zoning public hearing, Staff informed neighborhood representatives of this upcoming preliminary plat action as promised during the zoning pro- cess, Opposition to plans for Scott Drive is still strong. Plans for Scott Drive do not violate Subdivision Regulations and Land Development Code Standards, Several interested residents of the area attended the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and two individuals addressed the traffic issues. Alternatives to opening Scott Drive were discussed. The alternative of cul-de-sacing the street at the Morse Street end would violate current subdivision regula- tions limiting the length of a cul-de-sac to 1,000 feet. The alternative of opening a street off Morse and placin- a cul-de-sac at the south end of the tract adjacent to existing dead-end Scott Drive would shut off rhru-access without violating subdivision regulations but the devel- oper would probably lose at least one lot. A minimum 8" sanitary sewer line is proposed for extension along Scott Drive, Existing 6" water and 8" sewer is in place along Morse Street. An earth lined drainage channel at the southeast corner of the site will require some off-site improvement. Lot 7 is more than 7,000 square feet in overall area, but it is shy of the minimum lot depth requirement, The Planning and Zoning Commission attacfted a recommended condition to deal with this lot. City Council Backup Morse Street Addition Page 2 ACTION REQUIRED: Approve preliminary plat with or without condition RECOMMENDATION; The Planning and Zoning Commission expressed interest in the neighborhood's position and considered their concerns, However, it was pointed out that the preliminary plat as pro- posed does not violate the subdivision regula- tions and any modification should be made by the developer voluntarily. Two of the commissioners commented on the need to extend Scott Drive for logical planning purposes. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval with the condition that no building permit be issued for lot 7 unless a lot depth variance is granted. ALTERNATIVE: Approve preliminary plat with or without condition ATTACHMENT: Map .Cil I'll ,~.L: l.f.. d..l•l.~ David son Development Review Planner Ne,:* LtY ~ gt' S7FiEEY f ; t5.'el f .a..efb MORSE 16:, _ = 1 I rj If / lI. I S ~ r. r ,p•~fi pP li i \ 1 r y ` ~ til 1 SCALE 50 ual 5tl, 190A J o;~ f I y II~ f1 11n CRElIAl1MA PY PL A7 f] ;i 01 Morse Slreel 4ddilion ' 3.016 AC. ' N lA' 171E R IF AGUE SURVEY A'12GG C-l • 1. c')o F,r Or nnrlolr. rk IAS 7gIPS. Ifn4~ F 1 n 1"'"t1n 15n fUt1 li" IPi'1 1'prla , CITY OF DENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: June 19, 1984 TO: G. Chris Hartung, City Manager FROM: Jeff Meyer, Director of Planning and Community Development SUBJECT: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN The purpose of a Capital Improvement Plan {CIP} is to determine the priorities of capital expenditures plus to coordinate the projects selected. The first objective of the CIP is to decide the most effective way to allocate our limited capital improve- ment dollar. The CIP provides an opportunity to coordinate the City's physical and fiscal planning and finally, the CIP pro- vides a means to coordinate capital improvement projects admin- istered by different City departments, The CIP is adopted as a plan with the knowledge that it will be revised and amended in response to changing circumstances, Each year the entire plan is revised in a comprehensive way and one new year is added within the five year planning framework. U e f'~Ff e y e r sh n283s CIJ'Y COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET MEETING DATE: June 19, 1984 SUBJECT: Receive the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for the five year Capital Improvement Plan SUMMARY: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing to gather input from the public concern- ing capital improvements on April 4, 1984, The capital improvement needs addressed at the public hearing and those through correspondence along with the master list of suggested capital Improvem,,~nts was used in arriving at the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation, All projects listed beginning with the 1986.198" year will require a Capital, Improvement Plan Bond Election, ACTION REQUIRED: Receive the Planning and Zoning Commission recor..- mendation for the Five year Capital Improvement Plan. ALTERNATIVYS: Receive the recommended Capital Improvement Plan RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommends the attached Capital Improvement Plan, The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the Utility Capital Improve- ment Plan. EXIIIBITS: 1. Capital Improvement Plan Funding Schedule 2, Suggested projects and correspondence 3. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. C__ Y~2.~ , sd rf ~f.1i2.~ ZMrrIes at ns Senior Planner 05388 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING SCHEDULE 1984-1985 Prairie Street Drainage 166,000 Yellr;Wstone S',-'craton Drainage: S 724,000 Up6ate Signal Equipment -.1_0,000 Total 5!00,006' 1985-1986 U.S. 380 R.c.W, Acquisition 200,000 t;a~c),ina ru•rj6s "or U.S. 380 ~ 700,006 Fire Substation; ~_-450,000 Total X1,350,000 :h(- projects listed );,eloH' will require C.1P scolj Election: 1986•-1987 Loma Del Ray Drainage $ 825,0JO Br:.cige on Woodrow Lane $ 250, 000 Reconstruct Oriole Street S 117,000 'traffic Signals 25,000 Sidewal.} on liefcales S - 15,000 Total p11 L32,000 CPpital Improvement Funding Schedule Page Two 1987-88 Improve Woodrow Lane $ 525,000 Stuart Road - Selene Drainage $ 320,000 Wiliowsprings Drainage $ 337,000 Traffic Signals $ 25,000 Total $1,207,000 1986-49 Oversize raving $ 150,000 Stuart/Sunnydale Drainage 8 350,000 Taylor Park Drainage S. 300,000 General Traffic:: Signal 1mpr(~vementS $ 50,000 Windsor/Sherman Drive Signal $ 50,000 Pave Davis Street $ 15,000 Burning Tree Bridge t 150,000 Burning Tree Drainage $ 64,000 Avenue E (Eagle to service road) 40,000 Total $1,169,000 0469-~ ! b,, N U'1- E S PLANNING AUD i:C)N NG C:C:Ir%M1SSlUIi l4ay 141, 1:'c+4 Special called r.'_'Otinc cf t""(1 plar,nll, and Le>nlrrg C:oralnission ()f the City of Dente+n, Texas was held of Monday, May 14, 1984, at 7:00 p. m, in thtt Utility Department "enference Room of the Municipal Building, Pre,;ent: Robert LaForte, Andy Sider Thomas Pearson, Ruby Cole, and Gary Juren Absent; F,B. Fscue and Bill ClaibK me Pres!.nt rC''m Staff.: Charles 1+atkins, Se nicr PIa,..ler, Jerry C1a1:k, City Engineer, David Hain, Assistant Director of Ut.ilities• for Water and Wastewater, Ernie ]ullos, Superintendent of Electric Division, Charles •1lt~ - ~ I:.udget and Rate Ac.rnirlistrator Cryan, Utl~ , Chairman La}=orte called the meeting to order. 1. Bold a study session to develop a recornmendaticn to the City Council or. he capital improvement plan. Mr. Roland Laney, Chairman of the Public Utility 13a,.,,-6, presented the 1985-801 utility capital improvement plan to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The five year capital improvement play for utilities includes X49,8211000 of capital improvements in the electric, water, and sewer, This plan also includes a proposed t26,000,000 revenue bond election for mid 1984. The electric system will require $13,500,000 in new bond funds, the water system, $9,000,000 and the wastewater system $3,500,000. The utility capital improvement plat, was developed on the basis of a 4 percent growth in the electric system and a 3.5 percent 9rov.,l."n in the. ',.ater and sewer syster. 1 ii. 1.Oer grc'i-;t 1 t'nt.CS 4--1CCL:1' , it i~lc\' L";, 'leCf_SSc,t•}' tC' ~,c.ceiE-ratr cal-+jt~..~ ~r.d c],e I]rcucced cal:'tt..1 r_e suf - flciol-'t for t!'a full f]ve years. Crers r.f tt,c. F 1c 1 L' i 1: C: t u C. i t. I' C L: l C. 1 l+a nl; V 510 rI e16l'e l'._ _ t. t~Ie i La f . .9r tI+C' CC+f,C IU.:1C. n Ci `h (z -3 ScUSS 1C:-, ..f _Ile 1.11CtaI Ir. Q E: t7 t - ' };r 1-.1-Irke ' Gr,G 8ta1.r 1",e iaC et i nC . Planning and Honing Commission Minutes of May 14, 1989 Pace Two The Planning and 'Lonir,g Commission and staff discussed t'ne list: c,f suggcsI . projects and arrived at the fol-c-cl 1owir,c3 1.ist of ,7rojects for the fifth year of the al~.it al ;i.crcver;ent plan; 1. Oversized paving 150,000 Stuart/Sunnydalc drainage 350,000 Taylor Park drainage S 3001000 Genertraffic signal Improvements 50,000 Windsor/Shermar, Drive signal S 50,000 6. Paving of Davis Street S 15,000 7. Burning Tree bridge $ 150,000 Tree drainage 64,000 C, furl"i -ja 9. Avenue E (Eagle to service road) 40,000 TOTAL $1, .165', 000 Eighw,%y 380 acquisition was moved from the c.irrent. fis- cal year to 1985-86 t,L-CaUSe the Highway Department is not ready to ber,in this project at this time, The Planning an() Zoning Commission also discussed the need for a bond election for street repairs and the con- sensus of the Commission was to recommend another bond election to the City Council. Meeting adjourned at 8:50 p. m. G`.3 P z Minutes Page 2 7I , r ,;pr.rov :1 or the ('ity cf I>' ntor. Ca it l Improvement _ and the ~''tJ lity capltal Tmprovoment Flan. Mr, ttiat,ins explained the CTP plan ar.c stated the t:le t eic ^yui s' ti cvn rc',, E'a twav 3H, was t:r e.C as Jear plan was not tended. 'C1 the ra 1'e: "e no Chan:esl fCr 9o7-F}h:w'sic'a ga^}E:. Xr. Fa:7i sta-1ed he feC.IS tha c 1- 7.:, _e.sentea tC the cor'Tmissioll is a .-rood i'C'C-rc:T and stated he hae, no o::her comments to make. Xr. Si cr mace a r:0t10 n tc pro're ti:c Citp of :.pen _:..'s C a'?,l tc`.1 7n'. rG\'E:I'iEe:it i'1a:1 ar;G♦ t:le .;.it.;' Cn, l.tea .11. ar?Y^_Vei~:'.t Plan. .eco..i-e- firer, anu uni- (.usly zarr-.eca (6-Ll) Z 660 s is the c . .:`\'e_ C-:-, r•-G:T'/ 11c. rec-f--st..n a r'n nct: a.~I 1r.:a` ned develoF.)ment (PD-19) ano sincle fa!-ilv (S` C` a revised ^lanned c:eve'c•'-,e::t class`ca:ticn en .4 4 acres be C'.^.ninc at the iIltersect_C: c= TCaSi.e'' L3.._ and RSC eA'a`,' Drive. .r.-istinc 4-D-1'- i5 cemprisec _ 42. net acres (10.5 acres c: aene:'a_ -eta; _E. acres of cluster housing at 12 unitS per acre-, and _ acres Of ,lllta-Lami v at 26 units tier acre) he ance of the 161.7 acre tract (11°. acres) is pre s lv zoned to accommodate since fa,,.iIy detached lan :=e on mini:'.U.m 1.0,000 square ;,,°1Ct lots. if apprcved, pronose!d 161.7 acre planned deveIopr,lrnt v:111 e. s the fe:.low, k.nq : 1. n reccnfiauraticn of exrstin PD-1P to the e::s side of Ridaeway D_'ive to respect the new ali . sent. (Permitted lane; uses and net acres are ~:.e same as those in e::istine PD-19.? 2. Sinale fa.mil}' (SF-10) on a 14.44 acre rarce; bealmdrlci adjacent a,16, -,%7cst of Ridgeway D_-2'. . r S - ^C.49 acre pace lOCat Gd E'.ast C a,-(, n- in&.arv c` the Site. i % _lw . i..' W c-. I CITY OF DENTON MEMORANDUM I TOt The Mayor and Members of the City Council FROMs Bill Angelo, Assistant to the Director of Public Works DATF.i June 19, 1984 SUBJECT CONFEDERATE AIR FORCE AIRSHOW As you know the Confederate Air Force (CAF) has requested permission to conduct an airshow at the Denton Municipal Airport on July 14 and 15, 1984. Last year, the CAF airshow was extremely successful and was conducted without incident. The airshow generated approximately $4,60C, in revenues for the airport last year. Again this year the CAF plans to conduct a full "Class A" airshow which is the most elaborate and largest class of airshow which the CAF con- ducts, The CAF Headquarters in Harlingen, Texas, has approved only six "Class A" shows for this year. We are fortunate that Denton has been selected as a site for one of these events, We have recently met with representatives from the CAF regarding the mechanics ,f the airshow and the issue, of compensation to the City for the use of the Airport. The CAF has agreed to pay to the City of Denton a base fee of $3,000 plus 3% of the gate receipts. Although our revenues will vary with attendance, I feel that the City can expect revenues after expenses to exceed $7,000 for the two day event, For thi.a fee the City will al.l.ow the CAF use of the runway, taxi-vays, the Terminal Building, and unimproved airport lands for the airshow on July 14 and 15, 1984, The City will also provide for Police officers, a fire truck and crew, water truck, front-end loader and an equipment operator to be located on the airport during the airshow. In addition, the City will increase the level of sanitation service at the airport during the two days and provide several electrical drops to be used by concessionaires, The CAF will also have various concession stands on the airport which will sell drinks, food and souvenirs, The CAF has also requested once again permission to sell beer from these stands at the airshow, CONFEDERATE AIR FORCE AIRSHOW June 19, 1984 Page 2 The light industrial zoning classification at the airport is appropriate for the sale of beer. The City Attorney is of the opinion that the City would not suffer any legal exposure resulting from the sale of beer by the CAF concessionaires at the airport. Additionally, the representa- tives of the CAF have developed a security system which has been suc- cessful in preventing any unpleasant incidents; there were no problems or incidents at last summer's show. The CAF will employ 20 off duty policemen for the airshow. These officers will be responsible for, crowd and traffic control, and general security. The CAF will. also maintain a security work force composed of experienced CAF members. These persons will be stationed around air- craft and the ramp and taxiway areas prior to, during, and after the airshow. One hour prior to the show the ramp and taxiway areas will be cleared of all unauthorized personnel and spectator restriction lines will be rigorously enforced until the show is complete and all aircraft have been shutoff. Along with the success of the airshow last summer came a huge traffic tie-up on FM 1515 (Airport Road). During the winter the State Depart- ment of Highways and Public Transportation was contacted and approval was obtained to permit one-way traffic inbound before and one-way traffic outbound after the shows. Tenants and businesses along Airport Road have been contacted and have no objections to this plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is apparent that the airshow will benefit the Denton Municipal Airport in terms of revenues and public exposure. Tile airshow will al,5 benefit the entire community based upon the two day tourist attraction resulting from the event. The staff, therefore, recommends that the Airport Advisory Board and the City Council approve the request from the CAF for permission to use the Denton Municipal. Airport for the CAF Airshow on July 14 and 15, 1984. Once again, in regard to the sale of beer during the airshow, the staff can find no reason to deny the request. Since the security system has proved to be adequate, and there is no legal exposure to the City, the staff would also recommend that the Airport Advisory Board and the City Council. allow the CAF to provide for the sale of beer during this two day event. CONFEDERATE AIR FORCE AIRSHOW June 19, 1984 Page 3 Should the Council review this request favorably, it will be necessary for tha City Council to authorize the City Manager to execute an agree- ment between the Confederate Air Force and the City of Denton under the terms expressed 1n this memorandum, We wov.ld also appreciate your recommendation and authorization to close FM 1515 to one way traffic during peak periods of the show, Should you have any comments or questions on this matter, please let me know. Respectfully submitted, C Bill Angelo ti BA/sc MINUTES 01TY OF DENTON AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD JUNE 6, 1984 A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OF' THE. CITY OF DENTON AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 6, 1984, AT 12 00 NOON, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM OF THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING, MEMBERS PRESENT: Arno, Garland, Click, Hayward, Keith MEMBERS ABSENT: Carrell, Smith OTHERS PRESENT; David Severen and Randy Severon of North Texas 11lt.ra Lights; Bill Smith and Otho Henderson of Maverick Aircraft; Jon Weist of the Denton Record Chronicle; Bill Angelo, Clint Lynch and Bruce Cardwell of the City Staff 1, The Board considered the Airport 1984-85 Budget. Mr. Keith ques- tioned the priority ranking of the Unicom Radio and the fencing material, suggested that the mower be deleted from the budget, and suggested that interest from the Airport Improvement Fund be used to finance the engineering studies, asphalt repairs and fencing materials. Mr, Angelo pointed out the the City Airport radio operated by Maverick Aircraft is almost 20 years old and that it must be replaced. Mr, Click agreed that it was money well spent. Mr. Angelo also stated that the mower was needed at the airport, especially with the changes in the Airport mowing requirements expected in the future. Mr, Arno suggested that the Airport Improvement Fund be left alone and not be nickeled and dimed by various small programs. A motion was made and seconded to recom- mend that the Budget he approved as written. 2, The Board considered the City of Denton Confederate Air Force Airshow Agreement, A motion was made and seconded to recommend to the City Council that the CAF Airshow Agreement be accepted as written. The motion carried unanimously, 3. Mr, Otho Henderson and Mr, Bill Smith were asked to provide the Board with information on the Maverick Aircraft/Confederate Air Force Agreement for the airshow. Mr, Smith stated that because t1he matter was still being negotiated, he did not want to go into details, but that he saw no problems and felt that a final. agree- ment would be reached soon. Mr, Smith also pointed out that Maverick would be issuing a license to the CAF for the use of their facilities and that because this was not a sub-:Lease, it would not require City approval. MINUTES AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD June 6, 1984 Page 2 4, The Board considered the application with the F.A,A. for an Airport Master Plan Study Grant. A motion was made and seconded to recom- mend to the City Council that a new Master Plan Study be conducted and that the staff should proceed in applying with the F,A.A, for such a grant. The motion carried unanimously. With no further business, the Board adjourned at 1.15 P.M. TU STATE OF TL%AS I AIRPORT WE AOR THM COMM OF DENTON f This Agraomat, made and entered into by and between the City of Denton, s Muaiei- pal Corporation at the State of Texas (hereinafter referred to as "Citl") and Confedsr- ats Air Force, (hareinafter referred to as "CAP"), is "de for the qurpose of allowing CAF to use the Denton ltuaicipal Airport (hereinafter reterred to as 'Airport") owned by the City, for a tamp :ary airshov in accordance with the following tomal 1. CAF may ose the Airport on July l4 and IS, 1984, for the purposes of staging an airshow for the benefit of the general public, CAP may use all facilities ar property of the Airport for laid airshov As designated by the Airport Maaaser, 2, The City will also provide the following equipment and sarvicas in support of said aitshovt (a) $1,000 towards :ha salaries of police officers at the airshow, with the CAF picking up the balance of such eostst (b) Two fire trucks and two awn crew; (c) One water truck, a front-end louder and one equipment operatorl (d) A ainiaua of twelve (12) sanitation containers vhieh will be emptied s minim- of twice, after b F.M. on July 14, and July LS, 1984; and (a) Up to four (4) electriae.l drops, three (3) from existing poles. CO, in consideration of the foregoing, agrees as follows: (a) To pay to City Three Thousand Dollars ($3,900) plus three percent 0%) of all adaission fees; (b) To provide the City with evidence of comprshonsive public liability insurance in the amount of Five Million Dollars ($$,000,000) pit occur- ranca, insuring the Clty and CAP against all liabilities or losses arising from any bodily injury or property damage cocurrence suffered by any person as a result of the use, occupancy or operations of the CAF at the Airport{ (c) To restore and repair any damage at loss suffered by the Airport grounds, buildings or improvements thereon caused by the use, occupancy or operations of CAPI (d) To cause the removal of all littar or trash deposited on Airport proper- ty As a result of the ctir,hovt and (e) To allow the City at any reasonsblu time to audit financial records of CAF pertaining to the airshow cc dsaensine City's parcencage of sdmis- aion fads. Executed this the day of , 1984. CI'TY OF DENTON, TEXAS BYc R1 HARD 0. STWART, MAYOR ATTEST: CONFEDERATE AIR FORCE CIWL(M£ ALL"tN, CITY SECRE ARY CITY OF DEVT011, TEXAS 8": APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM, ATTEST= C, J. TAYLOR, n, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF DEVON, TEXAS BY: COMMISSION STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS ENOINEER DIRECTOR AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MARK 0. 00006 ROBERT H. OEDMAN. CHAIRMAN JOHN R. BUTLER, JR. P. 0. Box 3067 ROBERT 14, LANIER Dallas, Te};as 75221 March 15, 1984 IN REPLY REFER TO FILE NO. Control 1951-1 F.M. 1515 Denton County Mr. Clinton Lynch Manager Denton Municipal Airport Municipal Building Denton, Texas 76201 Dear Mr. Lynch; We acknowledge receipt of your letter and plan for handling traffic on F.M. 1.515 during the air show on July 14 and 15, 1984, 't'raffic control is a responsibility of the local police or sheriff and on occasions, such as the air show, we offer no objection to the plan provided it will be administered by them. You may find it helpful to use some tem- porary signs and we recommend you publicize your plans through the local press. Yours very truly, Robert L. Yielding District Engineer CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET MEETING DATE: June 19, 1984 SUBJ ECT: Hold a public hearing on the proposed annexation, of approximately 9,013 acres of land beginning approximately 700 feet east of Sherman Drive, (A-4) SUMMARY: This property is part of a proposed multiple use development along the east side of Sherman Drive, The property is vacant at the present time but is proposed for single family residential devel- opment in conjunction with an overall 130 acre planned development. ACTION REQUIRED: Hold a public hearing (no other action is required). ALTERNATIVES: 1, Hold a public hearing 2. Discontinue annexation proceedings SOURCE OF FUNDS: Departmental budgets RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of annexation by a vote of 6 - 0. EXHIBITS: 1. Service plan 2. Map 3. Minutes of Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of May 300 1984 acres Watkins Senior Planner 0539g II l PLAN OF SERVICE FOR ANNEXED AREA, CITY OF DENTO&, TEXAS WHEREAS, Article 970a as am-anded requires that a plan of service be adopted by the governing body of a city prior to passage of an ordinance annexing an area; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton is contemplating annexation of an area which is bounded as shown on a. map of the proposed annexation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THIS CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS; Section 1. Pursuant to the provisions of Article 970a as amended, Texas Code Annotated, there is hereby adopted for the proposed annexation area the following plan of service, I. Basic Service Plan A, Police (1) Patrolling, radio responses to calls, and other routine police services, using present personnel and equipment, will be provided on the effective date of annexation; (2) Traffic signals, traffic signs, street markings, and other traffic control devices will be installed an the need therefore is established by appropriate study and traffic standards. B. Fire (1) Fire protection by the present personnel and equip- ment of the fire fighting force, will be provided on the effective date of annexation, C. Stater (1) Water for domestic, commercial and industrial use will be provided at city rates, from existing city lines on the effective date of annexation, and thereafter from new lines as extended in accordance with article 4,09 of appendix: A of the code of the City of Denton, Texas. D. Sewer (1) Properties in the annexed areas will be connected to sewer lines in accordance with article 4.09 of appendix A of the code of the City of Denton, Texas. E. Refuse Collection (1) The same regular refuse collection service now pro- vided within the city will be extended to the annexed area within one month after the effective date of annexation. Service Plan Annexed Areas Page two F, Streets (1) Emergency maintenance of streets (repair of hazardous chuckholes, measures necessary for traffic flow, etc.) will begin on the effective date of annexation, (2) Routine maintenance on the same basis as in the present city, will begin in the annexed area on the effective date of annexation, (3) Reconstruction and resurfacing of streets, installa- tion of storm drainage facilities, construction of curbs and gutters, and other such major improvements, as the need therefore is determined by the governing body, will be accomplished under the established policies of the city. G, Inspection Services (1) Any inspection services now provided by the city (building, electrical, plumbing, gas, housing) sanitation, etc.) will begin in the annexation area on the effective date of annexation. H. Planning and Zoning (1) The Planning and Zoning jurisdiction of the city will extend to the annexed area on the effective date of annexation. City planning will thereafter encompass the annexed area. 1. Street Lighting (1) Street lighting will be installed in the substan- tially developed areas in accordance with the established policies of the city. J. Recreation (1) Residents of the annexed area may use all existing recreational facilities, parks, etc., on the effec- tive date of annexation. The same standards and policies now used in the present; city will be fol- lowed in expanding the recreational program and facilities in the enlarged city, K. Electric Distribution (1) The city recommends the use of City of Denton for electric power, ~ Y service Plan Annexed Areas Page three L. Miscellaneous (1) street name signs where needed will be installed within approximately 6 months after the effective date of annexation. II. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) The CIP of the City consists of a five year plan that is up- dated yearly. The Plan is prioritized by such policy guide- lines as; (1) Demand for services as compared to other areas based partly on density of population, magnitude of problems compared to other areas, established technical standards and professional studies, and natural or technical restraints or opportunities, (2) Impact on the balanced growth policy of the city, (3) Impact on overall city economics. The annexed area will be considered for CIP planning in the upcoming CIP plan, which will be no longer than one year from the date of annexation, In this new CIP planning year the annexation area will be judged accordingly to the same established criteria as all other areas of the city. I i ~ i~CY~. ./.y~~-* j~~ _ Tr' Y .r~~rYr►."~,~•~I~rw~r~,•+.rt~~1':.tM; ~ r~?u 4 !1.. ? rw~~••. '~f'f~'t~~~~~~~ `r ♦ au K:i?•IWn'f'~r.`V•^~• •R`I{ ~ w .rw..r..y.• 1...~~>'~'~y'rt""'p U7^w.w~~l«.!{'~Y .c1t;r.t. ~ j ' ~.~r+•-.~.. ~I r .t ~'Y .M~ ^yI''^Y'7'~'~ 1~ ~►•r~~ ~ ~.~FyK.~. .:J-.S..r+' ~ "R . I ' , I, ~'at Si...~ ~ . r yr, ^'r~ , w• +~~T• A. ~ , _ ~ In - ~ ~ -'r ,f .~./^L~/ •_.t~r 'l Oil, s 205,01 Pool 'too OP P, 1,1 - \ I ,r 11~ C: noxhoF. = 205.02 . ¢ 204.02 ~ t`tp ,1," ,,il r, w.rlp,, r 1~~ N11~Irf'~ err b Itrr r S.K.>bG r, ,,rr ru ~rur H1r,r 11 `t 4C 1 .uru ru rnun'r r1 0101 PO r rrr'r 206.07 yt•`~ . C rn ~ ° 204,03 F - C " = 206,0. rY.... CI rrr n. rrrc X ru,nruHrr rir, ilrr llrn,U,rllrrH,nrrl nrrbrrrr' « of r.ln M1~! 57. 2Q / O'h Si. 1 nnU run, '11,0041 tell rurr,r' rrr nrr l nnnr uururu l O11f lr rr rrrl4urr V I rrr r, 114,4 rrr 'rr 1ICAA! S~I r'1 C r1/1r„rr, V 2 l 0 11,, 92111 L,%rL: Cit. rnr~,rl I 2~r ~ 208 209 ulrru,lAnlurrnnA ,•n 1~ .1~C 111Q! PJ 213 to, 1111'',' I . _ / rruruu n44r...... iu 4n nnnnrrrb i / I P & z minutes 0. Consider making a recommendation to the City Council on the annexation of approximately nine (9) acres of land located on the east side of Sherman Drive north of the existing city limit (A-4). ~r Mr, Watkins stated this is in reference to the Holloway case and being conducted at the request of the Holloway Corporation. He stated staff recommends approval. Mr. Juren made a motion to recommend the annexation of approximately nine (9) acres of land located on the east side of Sherman Drive north of the existing city limit (A-4), to the City Council. Seconded by ,Mr. Claiborne and carried unanimously (6-0). r 5.-76o • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET MEETING DATE, June 19, .1984 SUBJECT: 11old a public hearing on a proposed annexation of approximately 31,335 acres of land located along Park Street) the ) and the side of FM ' east Twin Lakes 6 Mobile (North Home Locust west SUMMARY: This property located between North Locust Street and the Twin Lakes Mobile Home Park has been vol- untarily requested for annexation. The property owners intend pmobileihomeoparkazoning this site and will seek for this property. ACTION REQUIRED: Hold a public hearing (no other action is required) ALTERNATIVES: 1. Hold a public hearing 2. Discontinue annexation proceedings SOURCE OF FUNDS: Departmental budget RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Community Development Department recommends annexation of this tract of land for the purpose of exercising control over the land use and if the City Council ultimately approves this location for a mobile home park so that the mobile home park ordinance will apply. The Plan- ning and Zoning commission will consider making a recommendation to the City Council regarding this annexation at their next regular meeting. EXHIBITS: 1. Service plan 2, Map Charles S. Watkins Senior Planner 0560g PLAN OF SERVICE FOR ANNEXLM AREA, CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS WHEREAS, Article 970a as amended requires that a plan of ser~,iee be adopted by the governing body of a city prior to passage of an ordinance annexing an area; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton is contemplating annexation of an area which is bounded as shown on a map of the proposed annexation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS; Section 1, Pursuant to the provisions of Article 970a as amended, Texas Code Annotated, there is hereby adopted for the proposer annexation area the following plan of service, 1. Basic Service Plan A. Police (1) Patrolling, radio responses to calls, and other routine police services, using present personnel and equipment, will be provided on the effective date of annexation; (2) Traffic signals, traffic signs, street markings, and other traffic control devices will be installed as the need therefore is established by appropriate study and traffic standards, B. Fire (1.) Fire protection by the present personnel and e~,uip- ment of the fire fighting force, will be provided on the effective date of annexation. C. Water (1) Water for domestic, commercial and industrial %ise will be provided at city rates, from existing _Lty lines on the effective date of annexation, and thereafter from new liners as extended in accordance with article 4,09 of appendix A of the code of the City of Denton, Texas, D. Sewer (1) Properties in the annexed areas will be connected to sewer lines in accordance with article 4.9 of appendix A of the code; of the City of Denton. Texas. E. Refuse Collection (1) The same regular refuse collection service noaw pro- vided within the city will be extended to the annexed area within one month after the effec-.ive date of annexation, I Service Plan Annexed Areas Page two F. Streets (1) Emergency maintenance of streets (repair of hazardous chuckholes, measures necessary for traffic flow, etc.) will begin on the effective date of annexation, (2) Routine maintenance on the same basis as in the present city, will begin in the annexed area on the effective date of annexation, (3) Reconstruction and resurfacing of streets, installa- tion of storm drainage facilities, construction of curbs and gutters, and other such major improvements, as the need therefore is determined by the governing body, will be accomplished under the established policies of the city. G. Inspection Services (1) Any inspection services now provided by the city (building, electrical, plumbing, gas, housing, sanitation, etc.) will begin in the annexation area on the effective date of annexation, H. Planning and Zoning (1) The Planning and Zoning jurisdiction of the city will extend to the annexed area on the effective date of annexation. City planning will thereafter encompass the annexed area. 1. Street Lighting (1) Street lighting will be installed in the substan- tially developed areas in accordance with tine established policies of the city. J, Recreation (1) Residents of the annexed area may use all existing recreational facilities, parks, etc,, on the effec- tive date of annexation. The Fame standard; and policies now used in the present city will LNe fol- lowed in expanding the recreational program and facilities in the enlarged city, K. Electric Distribution (1) The city recommends the use of City of Denton for electric power. f service Plan Annexed Areas Page three L, ,tisce1taneous (1) Street name signs where needed will be installe1d within approximately 6 months after the effectiTe date of annexation, II, Capital Improvement Program (CIP) The CIP of the City consists of a five year plan that is up- dated yearly, The Plan is prioritized by such policy g+:ide- lines as; (1) Demand for services as compared to other areas based partly on density of population, magnitude of problems compared to other areas, establ.isbed technical standards and professional studies, i.nd natural or technical restraints or opportunities. (2) Impact on the balanced growth policy of the city, (3) Impact on overall city economics, The annexed area will be considered for CIP planning is the upcoming CIP plan, which will be no longer than one year from the date of annexation. In this new CIP planning year he annexation area will be judged accordingly to the same established criteria as all other areas of the city, .17 ' 1 R- M I u 11 I L, 11,1, pM1 ~ 1 r"A M, ~ rs 4.. W ~ y X. si r. ~ 1 y r 1N•t+'•j!1 1 1 ~1riM SON ~,,p~,y ♦ .111`F~4Y'7 i ^ ~NL SaJL~ a!..s6>,' I'. t~ ~ J ~ ' , ' ~ ~ 1 r ' }'•"~t ' : ~,y~ ,i r~ 4 f 1, I- wrgw. \l.. < '`S 1 t F} ~Sy~m•4: ^1 ♦.r' t' r!C` ash ' 1ST I 1 'VM7::I~ n 1 J 1 t ,h s r .Ji,•x,, '1 s1:V ,t Y\1i1, a•..f s t ~T ~,s 'n. IJ jw,31o~ „ t l rJR}, Jwt r: t'~ 'min y~ IC'~In 4 CrF••,~„`~'•11 ' Jib ii Gt:.l / srv l; t, Kati1'1„~"~If n \ ~+i~t~wt u•;i '-"~i. t^R~J:~D'i w. .~h,\NJj''(. .y SI: SI/ul~.•IIfIUCI~`y♦~ t d~ sY r-~ ifslrt's~ J. '>r '~1 . R 1 n u..s f{ ♦ s Ly L` s t I. L' i:•. t 1 nr.f~,ya1.~ ~r~~ S'F r'I . ~Yi.<t sty')Ybi-`7I•r+1~1t~.'tit+sl , "'•..t fi''" ♦ 1 ~'f`;'+'^', I ' J~y,M.r~`J, \T IntiI~LM ~1SIa Y f lL~ W\ ~ ICY, M1~4. .i. f. I { 1 ~ r~~ Y4 ~ l 51 ~fi'}1 1'. r sJ Is. s i 11I L s4 s 1 i l j 1 I. I, 1 ~ - ( I r I . J I i 1T••-^I 1. 11 «I' 11{ I ~ I i-~~-I"' +.w. ~ 1 ~ 1 I r-..~Y I l I I ~ 1 I 11 1'7 4 I Z 1 i/,' 1 ♦ I ~L 3 Sic. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA'T'ION TO THE CITY COUNCIL Too Denton City Council ~ Case No,~ Z-1659-- - Meeting Date; June 19,-1984 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Morello M. Miller jail Bolivar Denton, TX 76201 l Status of Applicant: Financial interest Requested Action: Change in zoning from single family (SF-7) to the light industrial (LI) classification Location and Size; Approximately 2,32 acres beginning at the southwest corner of Morse Street and Woodrow Lane Existing Land Use: Single family residential (a substan- tial amount of scrap metal and discarded objects are stored on the property as well) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Light industrial, single family: LI, SF-7 South - Light, industrial; LI East Vacant, Light Industrial; LI West - Single family, vacant; SF-7 Denton Development Guide: Area is designated as low intensity. (case # Z-1659) Page Two SPECIAL INFORMATION Transportation Morse street is designated as a and Traffic; secondary major arterial which re- quires a total right-of-way width of 60 feet to 80 feet. Woodrow Lane is designated as a pri- mary major arterial which requires a total right-of-way width of 1.00 feet to 120 £e+et. Woodrow Lane is unim- proved across the frontage of this tract (approximately 800 feet). Drainage; Drainage concerns are minor but an aaalysi6 will be required if platting occurs. ANALYSIS Staff did not have the opportunity to meet with the petitioner to discuss policies governing this area and the intent of the change in zoning before a formal petition was submitted. During the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing, the petitioner indical3d that no actual development is planned. The reason for the change given was to increase the value of the property for the benefit of sale by sick and elderly owners. The site in this request has a low intensity development guide designation and is located in East Denton, older industrial and commercial hind uses exist to the South and North. A substantial amount of light industrial (LI) zoning is already in place to the North, South, and East. Single family residential land use exists to the South and West primarily. Evidence of single family detached housing activity is available in the form of + both current construction and a preliminary plat for additional detached single family housing in the area. Light industrial (LI) zoning at this site seems both unnecessary and unjustified to the considerin -the that existing ~failedhtoidevelopainzansignifi-- North, South, and amount cant manner to (late. The East Denton area is the subject of a specific Development Guide policy which emphasizes the need for ailed emphasis on the objectives of protecting older neighborhoods. it is also speci- fically stated that industrial development is to be monitored closely and limited to the area East of Woodrow Lane (Policy found on page 65 of the Denton Development Guide). (Case #Z-1659) Page Three CONCLUSION It is strongly felt that there is a fundamental lack of need and justification for additional light industrial zoning at this location given the amount of undeveloped lighndustrial (LI) . AA intensity property existing and in close proximity low Development Guide designation, evidence of current residential activity to the west and violation of the special East Denton Development Guide Policy diseourafing light industrial (LI) development west of Woodrow Lane ~s further justification for objections to this request. The petitioner has volunteered information which highlights the speculative nature of the request. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial of Z-1659 b a vote of 5-1. Some members of the Commission intimated that a planned development (PD) request may have been received more favorably if more specific plans for development were proposed, A favorable vote of three-fourths (3/4) of all members of the City Council is required to overrule a recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission that a petition for a change in zoning be denied. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve petition 2. Dony petition ATTACHMENTS 1. Aerial 2, Property owner list 3. Reply form total i 11. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes of May 16, 1984 0511a VIM k eot r ~ r AL ~ o r ~ b I 1 L. e ~ y e } a N _ Ik rig rt~_~}rn :1,~~ ''lE ~n I .:_..!__J_LLL~_L_.-iLG1'(1r(' lad Ln !7, ~ 1•.J G ti 41 i I i c r^I L I- 'I ` !I / I I I~- l f1lll flr r` 1~..~~~^~/.~ ~.•It~ 1~1. `1 ~ I \ I I ' t FR" i' GVNFR RFP:.'i' F 0RMS CITY COUNCIL & 7 Minutes tray 16, 1984 Page Nino tls, Miller stated in rebuttal, that Woodrow lane is a heavily traveled thoroughfare and she feltithe possibility of keeping the property would not be suitable. ,<o one spoke in opposition to request, Chair declared pudic nearing closed, Mr. Pearson agreed witn the logic of the proposal as pres-:nted by Ms, Miller and stated ne would bee fn favor of t'ne proposal if a fence or some type barrier were placed between the neighborhood and lif:nt irncustrial. Seconded by Mr, rlr, uren movea to c den} Claiborne arid carrr ried (5-1). (,`:r. Pearson voted no.,) i, L~1646, finis is the petition of nill Dyer rep- resenting Robert Holloway Corporation, reques tingna pla- cr,anhe in zoning from .:,rricultural l i) classification on an appro:.i- ned develo}:.~ent (FL) {;ateo, 126 acre tract. beginning; zaOacent and ea:'t o: Fri 42a (Sherman Drive) Cambriage Square Subdivision, if approved. the planned developaier,t: (PD) till per- ;nit t; ,e following iano uses; i Sin~1e Family (SF-l(t) - on approximately 15.2 acreas locat:ea ad,}accnt anti east of F',1 426 (Sner:.an Drive) and adjacent and north of the Camoriage Square Subdivision rUxiu&tely 49 2. Single Fainily (SF-;) - on apf acres beginning adjacent and north of Kir.,s i:ot; SF-'A"' and north of the above re erenced p:Oposed Sf-: section 1 - on apl~ra;:irnat:ely Single t'amily -'Csi6entia 13.0 acres (maximum dens,iLy of -4 Units per acre) a, dpie:;cs - on approx.lma(eiv d.-) acres oeginnin~ t'o Hosea SF- adjacent and north oL' the 1 r'iVitl"I8~a11}' ne5laer,Cli.1 - un aE!prL'i:1~1(itely i_.. c-C aCre) oC Y ec I',iLukl'ii'J;a ae]:Cit1' Unit p C, t c & ~t• hates FpI y16, 1984 aa gee' Eight pir, L•1lison explainea the surrounding land use and zoning and stated the area is designated as moderate intensity. rie added Locust is designated as a pri- mary major arterial and 120 feet of right-of-way is requirea, Rignt-of-way for Loop 288 has already been purchased and both Loop 288 and north Locust are state nighway department res.ponsibiIities, !e furtner stated the proposal comprised with the DevLlopment Guide intensity/density standards and a recommenaation of denial would be inconsistant with the current first come-first serve" approach to intensity allocation, tnerefore staff recommends nppruval of /_-1650. i~o one spore in op position td regl.est. hair ceclarec publi- nearing closed. P1r, Juren made a motion to recolm,:,end approval of x_156., Seconaed b`~ .Jr. ieor any carried L.11 i- III oLi sly l6-0) . 0, -i.CJi, lill$ thf_ pC- LitiCn C t .'10 rei e from sin"'iE Lanily egu e t i n ii CnanFe ~ _ n~: rS~ t.; On (S!-ij to Che Iignt industrial lLi, c1aSGif lCat i on on n 'ac r e tract located a the streets 50Ut'nSGESt COl'neI' oil :IOrSe :dlla 0Lo ;7ors'e. Street) . ?,r, L'111SOr1 State6 t1)at So rep).\' :C-:::s ii Er tc j; I,operty o',r el'~ I4itnir, L 0 C icet of proposer pr0pC. i cur i~'ere returned in f aVOr r and c were opposea. xS. ,JOrelle niller, an area rGaltor, stated She hats the property listed for sale for tht o;;ners, Mr. islrs. iii%,,LDonc kr'us and she 15 requesting a cha3l,~,.e irocr sinp,le f Is, to light industrial since there is so ,llucn of t1he surroundint area ,.)ready zoned light industrial and ner feeling: is that no one V,,ould );ant the property aS L resi6enLL lal. Lropertl'r She stater sir. YOc):rus s n ver,' ;%oor health and 11CC-'ds t t' ,hone)' i.rCiL tilC pie bi 17e j+:'t)i~El'tV' CO ail:nei it IIIOUntin~, :7ecjica1, exper,se_ , t~ ,E n ncv-1- 1 C,~ tr C rrG fig V L ul t i U C I_ , 11 ' r, r IC., I D1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO 1I111E CI'T'Y COUNCIL L(-'cage DentOn City Council No.: Z^1660 Meeting Date: ,7une 19, 1984 ' GENLRAL INFORMATION _ Dimension Development Company, Inc, Applicant: 1910 Pacific Avenue Dallas, 'rX 75201 Status of Applicants Owners Requested Action: Change in zoning from planned development (PD) and single family (SF-10) to a revised planned develop- ment (PD) claosification on 161.7 acres beginning at the intersection of Teasley Lane and Ridgeway Drive that will permit the followings 1. A reconfiguration of existing PD-19 to the east side of Ridgeway Drive to respect a new alignment. The 10.5 net acres of general. retail is the same as existing PD-19. Multifamily on 1G.7 net acres (maximum of 390 units is the same number of maximum units as existing PD- 19.) Cluster housing has been reduced from 12 units per acre in existing PD-19 to 8 units per acre in the proposed revised PD and relocated to the south boundary of the tract. 2. Single family (S1'-10) on 14.44 acres beginning adjacent and west of Ridgeway Drive. 3. Single family (SV-10) on 30.49 acre parcel located east oS Ridgeway Drive along the nor,.narn~ boundary of the site. 4. Single family (SF-7) on 35 acres beginning approximately 1,400 feet east of Ridgeway Drive. (Case # 4-1660) Page Two GENERAL 1NEIORMATION (Continued) Requested Action, 5. Cluster t:ousing on 2f3,139'acr.es at (,ontinuod) 11 units her acre (31£3 maximum units) beginning approximately 2,300 feet east of Ridgeway Drive. 6 office use on 4,68 acres located at the northwest corner of Teas- i ley Lane and Ridgeway Drive, 7, City service use (potential fire station site) on , 1,55 acre l parcel located at t:ie southwest corner of Ridgeway Drive and Teasley Lan©, 8. Proposed public park land use on 4.68 acres. Location arid Sizes 161.758 gross acres beginning at the ititer siection of Teasley Lane and Ridgeway Drive Existing Land Usei Vacant Surrounding Land Use and Zonings North - Vacant., single family residential; S1'-10, SF-16, 2•-1-', GR South - Vacant, agricultural, Sundown Ranch, Teasley Lane, Southmor Elementary Scliool, Southmont Baptist church; agricultural, PD-IL) East Vacant; PD-201 agricultural (A) West - Vacant, single family, SY-10 Denton Development Guide: Area is deuignated as low intensity. (Case 1!L-1660) Page Three SPECIAL INFORMATION Transportation and Traffic: Ridgeway Drive has 80' of dedicated right-of-way, A 24' street .section of Ridgeway Drive is under construc- tion at this time, It is hoped that Ridgeway Drive will ultimately be re- designated as FM 2181 and accepted as part of the state highway network, Teasley Lane has 90' of right-of-way and is presently part of the state highway system. An east-west exten- sion of Teasley which forms an inter- section with Ridgeway Drive is pres- ently under construction. The transportation engineer and a member of the Planning staff met with the petitioner's representative and land planner to discuss overall plans for transportation systems both inter- nal and external, The routing of two collector streets and a proposed 4-way intersection were two specific issues discussed. The collector street shown at the southeast corner of the subject tract has a proposed routing that is dif- ferent from that of the approved thoroughfare plan. The petitioners proposed re-routing of the southmost collector for intensity guide boun- dary purposes. (See collector street between areas designated as "Ridgeway Planning Area" and "State School Planning Area" on planning area intensity study map included in zoning information packet furnished by petitioners). The collector street along the east boundary of the proposal is planned so that it will tie into the above referenned collector (which in turn is shown on the thoroughfare plan as ultimately connecting with I-35). (Case #Z-1660) Page Four SPECIAL INFORMATION (Continued) Transportation - and Traffic: These developers will be responsible (continued) for improving half of the collector street (staff would recommend that a minimum 24' of pavement be installed by the developer of the proposed 38 acre cluster housing section with the remaining share made a responsibility of the developer of adjoining PD-20,' The City En sneer has commented on what he feels is adequate sizing for the collector street located along the eastern boundary of the 161 acre site. But, he has questions about the "north extension out of the east collector." A further comment is that the general re-routing of the collector should be outlined ;o the effects are shown, Drainage: The staff will strongly recommend that the city encourage and approve the one major detention pond at the southeast corner of the property to negate all effects of development, The City Engineering Division will require the developer's engineer to consider FEMA regulations on £lood- plain/floodway revisions, The Engi- neering Department also recommends that the number of bridges be mini- mized over creeks. Maintenance and flow interruption ( articularly on residential streets are also worthy i of consideration. f (Case #Z-1660) Page Five ZONISG HISTORY Accoui%ts of past zoning action on this tract are extremely sketchy. Tile records do reflect annexation of approximately 76 acres and subsequent SF-10 and planned development (PD) zoning designation for what was described as 183 acres (of which 42 acres wa8 set aside for PD-19) in July, 1974. No development has occured at the site. The most significant occurence since original zoning action has been right-of-way dedication and the development of Ridgeway Drive. INTENSITY ANALYSIS This site is located in a low intensity area. The general intensity poli~.y for this area is reinforced by the Hobson Lane, Teasley Lane, and West of I-35E special policy in the Denton Development Guide. This policy prescribes that the neighborhood density/intensity standard shall be closely monitored pnrticula-- ly in conjunction with commercial and concentrated high density pressures coming frora the I-35E corridor. The policy goes on t" state that limited commercial adjacent to I-35E is recognized, but s ecifies that high intensity or commercial use circulation be self-contained and not permitted to flow through interior neighborhoods. Finally, it is specifically stated that the Teasley and Hobson Lune Area should not accomodate a major or moderate activity center and the emphasis should be on low intensity (predominantly single family, very limited neighbor- hood services, and small isolated site of multi-family townhouse type uses). Intensity studies for this area are attached (studies 1140 and 40A). The summation of the studies is that the intensity is slightly over the standard based on current zoning. In terms of proposed zoning, the net effect would be utilization on all available intensity through development of this tract, The intensity area boundaries were heavily discussed. As mentioned earlier, the petitioners requested that a collector street alignment (located in the area of the Sundown Ranch) be moved, The movement of the above referenced boundary or collector street had some impact on the intensity standard, but not enough to c- n- sider as a major issue. (Case #Z-1660) Page Six INTENSITY ANALYSIS (Continued) The key intensity issue associated with this request is the already approved presence of PD-19 at the intersection of Teasley Lane and Ridgeway Drive (general retail, multi-family and cluster housing land uses already approved), This previous zoning action insures the potential development of a moderate activity center of significant proportion regardless of, the outcome of this request. The difference in intensity between existing zoning and proposed zoning is not critical, What is critical is the fact that intensity of moderate proportion has been allocated already within the confines of this tract. Addi- tional landowners applying for additional intensity in this area should have their requests denied unless policy changes are made, PLUSES AND MINUSES When initial contact was made with staff, the petitioners indi- cated that their three primary objectives in applying for a change in zoning weret (1) obtaining approval of more SF-7 lotst (2) Reconfiguring PD-19 with no change in scale and scope of area as a result of the final alignment of Ridgeway Drive, and (3) providing cluster or moderate density housing on the east side of property which abuts light industrial zoning approved in PD-20. From a pure site plan or concept plan perspective, there are few insurmountable problems with this request. However, some specific pros and cons of the proposal are as followst MINUSESt 1. Hobson Lane, Teasley Lane, West of 1-35E special policy discourages moderate centers in this area. PD-19 zoning is already in place. Moving toward strict adherence to this policy would involve some reduction in existing intensity of significant proportion. The petitioners are not proposing to increase nor decrease level of intensity in any signifi- cant manner. 2. Existing and previously approved multi-family (15 acres at 26 units per acre) means a potential 390 units in PD-19. Recommended concentration for multi-famiLy in a low inten- sity area is 200 units preferably, but no more than 500 units in one continuous cluster. (Case #Z-1660) Page Seven PLUSES AND MINUSES (Continued) MINUSES (continued) The Planning and zoning commission recommended reducing they number of multi-family units from 390 to 250 units when it considered this requeat. The petitioners made significant adjustments to their plan both voluntarily and at the Planning and Zoning Commission's requests however, the peti- tioners have respectfully requested that the City Council approve the plan with 3':)0 units as originally approved. 3. Proposed PD-Office use at the northwest corner of Teasley Lane and Ridgeway Drive increases overall intensity of pro- posal slightly, but It is far superior to additional general retail if limited in scale and scope as described by the petitioners in their zoning information packet. 4. Overall density (existing vs. proposed) has increased slight ly with the proposal for additional cluster housing in the east quadrant of the tract. The cluster housing at 11 units per acre is not considered high density in style and charac- ter, but 8-10 units per acre maximum may be a more suitable alternative residential land use if the argument that low density single family is not appropriate next to light indus- trial zoning is a convincing one. PLUSES 1. Existing single family housing areas are not negatively impacted. 2. Ratio of SP-10 and SF-7 lots appears reasonable. 3. 1.55 acres and 4.68 acres designated for public fire station and public park use, respectively, are positive features. 4. Collector street access or better is provided for land uses near the more intense and dense end of the scale. 5. Open areas and fifty foot greenbelt between multi-family and SF-7 area appear generous. 6. Contact with neighborhoods and affected individuals seems exceptional compared to most efforts because it appear: that true input into planning process was allowed. Attitude toward working with staff, Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council and within confines of Development Guide policies has been positive as weJl and amongst the best ever observed. (Case OZ-1660) Page Eight RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zonin Commission held a len thy Vublic hearing and considered carefully staff comments, developer s comments and some opposition to specific parts of the plan at its meeting of May 300 1984, After considering all factors, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of Z-1660 with the following conditions by a vote of 6 - 0; 1. That the proposed cluster housing along the east boundary which adjoins Sundown Ranch shall be reduced from 38.4 acres to 28.89 acres (maximum density - 11 units per acre), 2. That the SF-7 section shall be increased from 25,48 acres to 35 acres with additional acreage taken from cluster housing area along east boundary of the tract, be e reduced multi-family from 390 units 3. PDal9 a area maximum shall number 250 units. 4. That plat approval shall constitute site plan approval for single family detached SE-7 and SF-10 sections, 5. That backzunin} to zoning classification in effect before this petition (SF-10) shall be considered for the entire 161 acre parcel if a minimum 20 percent of the subject property, including a minimum 5 percent single family detached and 5 percent moderate high of adoption t1 ofS ordinanceoapprovingcd within five (5) years p change in zoning, of i 250 shall units be limite allowable to acre with multi -family fmaximum section 6, Tht the .7 unitsdensity 16 7. That Lhe density in cluster housing section shall be limited to 8 r its per acre. 8. That development shall conform to approved zoning concept plan, All City of Denton zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes and applicable development stan- dards shall be met unless expressly waived or altered in approved planned development (PD) ordinance. 9. That sidewalks be on at least one side of the streets throughout the development. (Case #L-16GQ) page Nine ALTERNATIVES 1, Approve petition with conditions 2. Approve petition without conditions 3, Approve petition with additional conditions 4. Deny petition _ ATTACHMENTS 1, Aeria), 2, Concept plan 3. Intansity study #40 4. Intensity Study 40-A 5, F,eply form total i 6, property owner list 7, May 30, 19Ei4, planning and Zoning Commission minutes 0526g lEl- v DDD A M l / r • ♦ T 10 OWMA. r • \ M ~ 4 I a ,tab ~ •t - . . +r 40 1 t y Ilk l S Iy 1~ - I ~ it a I. Y - ' fee fv vT r v s 7f / " ' gyp' iJ6r,.~ • N A 14f -L A I 1 ( 1 ,f \ \ I 11/ r J s F' ~ 1 ~ I Il •rt ,It op p • r 11•t , I 1 r r , ~ ; . ~ I P1f ~ •G~ ~lii/•py i ~r / ",~>7M J~! -~°ilr° `::7 '~4 {~i V a ~7./r~ti awl '~,iS}[;t 11, ,rte, ^ ;h~•'..,, r !f ION a lv/ ,r•' si / drys V ^ Q '~f~ .g' ,,.J',. -~?1 I~,f :,0 3,~C<~O 'ply' 1 d ~~`I ~'~.,~/-'J ';lw/~^l•'`, `•a t aB~~ayyoByW°~0a~ ~ 8 i r ski'; $~x~3 Z Fz.':.• mot` - f ~iy • M LAND l1SE Ih''1'ENSITY SyUDY AREA 1140 lnter.state 5E - Ridgeway Dfive - Te;:s'ley Road Neighborhood 1 , Stt,d1!_ 130unr3ax i es This is a low intensity neighborhood of 475 acres bounded on the went ly Ridgeway Drive and Teasley Road; and bounded on the east. by I-35E. The port)-,ern boundary is formed by the separat.on line south of the moderate intensity center at. Ridgeway and 1-35E, Vic southern boundary is formed by a proposed collector street between .easley Road and I-35E. This collector sepatates PD-20 between the light industrial ;zoning and the office, multi-family, and Greenbelt zonings, 'these boundaries were chosen because they cor!~espon~ to cF~finable boundaries (i.e. zoning) or traditional plan- r,ir,g area boundaries (i,e, major streets, easements. ctc,) and still maintain an area close to the 640 acre model. The intensity standard for a low intensity neighborhood is 75 trips per day per gross acre, I [ , Evaluation of laeighboi hood Intensity B.a_sed on Eat in Land Use Step One - Calculate the approximate 'irea acreage from the concept plan. This neighborhood is •1- 475 acres, Step Two - Calculate the total area trips per day: 475 ac x 75 td/ac = 35,625 td intensity standard, Step Three - Estimate existing land use in gross acreage and calculate current trip generation in area; -ti n9-_Ld rtd_Use Ac>'e_aae T_iF!~ N)' 1. t S r a q td! a c 4,2 aC TC tdIs - 142,8 td 0 0 Intensity Study 440 Pago Two Step Four - FstirRate vacant land in area ar.d calculate 111ininlum development right reserve allocated for undevel- oped land; I PINS I TY 475,00 Total acreage of neighborhood - 4.20 Minus acreage of existing 16rld use 470.80 Acres of remaining vaca,-,t land 0 'T'rips per day; minimum ic:velo cult right reserve 1v,1.;4,UU Trips/day; intensity development right reserve Step Five - Estimate unallocated intensity capacity in total stu-ay area; I NT:~NS 1 TY 35,62~~.00 Total intensity standard for area (Taken from Step Two) 142,80 Minus intensity currently useo in area (Taken from Step Three) 14,1.24"00 Minus intensity development right reserve (Taken from Step Four) 21,358,20 Amount of unallocated intensity Step Six - To check the intensity of a proposed devel- opment; Calculate the trip generation of the proposers development and compare to Step Five, If less than the balance o;` Step live, then the proposed development is within intensity policy guidelines, III. Evaluation of Noi_ghborhood_Intensit._k,_t_3asedon_YXistiny, Zoning. `step one - Calculate the approximate area 2Cr0 :1f:'01n the concept ply n. Tills lloichbOth60d is 1 "0' 5 ocr(LS, Step Two Calculate the total area trips per day: '7' ac x 75 tpd/aC - 3`.),625 inten ;:•lty standard, "te17+ Three - Est'..171ate (?Xi Elting land ll'S?.. in C' acr("u('. end calcu]ate current, trip generation in area: Intensity study 040 page Three 1 i c,r p 142.( td o IL Step Four - Estimate cur.1e z011eC; lapel ii1 area and cal culate th,_ rote:: ; ty of cur.rene zoning on vacant lal;d: f.,and._ii 4'71.00 To1:aI acrea;0 of neichborhoed 4 Acreage e£ c:>;iet~ng 137;3 use 470. 8C: A(,, reace of remaining vacant land C`_tRRE~d'r_ 7.ONII~G_ lt~'T.Fa\'SI'PY Acrea e ~r~'~"/p~~ 246.80 ac S.F. 10 x 44 td/ac 10,859.20 - 43,00 sac 4Plex• x 120 td/ac 5,160.00 5,200.00 16.(.)0 ac Multi-family x 200 td/ac 100.00 14.00 ac Gen Retail x. 650 td/ac 4, _ 9040.00 48.00 ac Lig~.t Indus x. 105 td/ac 5,040.00 3 040.00 ].03ac Rgr'_cultural_ x_30 td/ac = TOTALS 3b,444.20 td 470.E+0 ac 7014 1141 _IF PROPOSED CHANGES At'1 jRC) E, D Ac~eave Tri s/Dam 8, 4 3 ac S. E' . 16 x 34 td/ac 2 8 6 . 62 91.817 ac S.F. 10 x 44 td/ac 042 . 28 _ 14 .00 25.48 ac S.F. / 50 td/ac i 1 2 23.00 55.63 ac Cl,:ster x. 100 td/ac 5163.00 15,00 ac N..F. Y. 200 'L6/ac 14.04 ea G oC Pa: x. 3 td/ac. 'j i'6 . 5 7 . 4 10 4 Ld/a 00 487, e. 3 ac 0 1>' \ L) ' 0 Ilitensit)' ;')Ludy 090 Page Four This Zoning change would allow a ')Arid 11re inctease of 17,03 ac of additional vacant land, is p Fife - xstima te unallocated 7Iitei-icity ca j.%aci ty Iri ~ t1)C1)' area; InLen' i t 35,625,00 Total intensity standard for arcra (Tal;0n from Step Two) 142. B0 Minus i nt~ ;lsity czar tent ly used in area . (Ta):en from Step 't'hree) 3.6, i_;L,20 Minus intensity on vacant zoned land (Ta};on froin Step Four} 976.00 Amount of unallocated intensity based on current zoning on vacant land, Prc~.~osed_I ntens i t_L 35,625.00 Total intensity standard f. or area (TaY,on from ;step Two) 142.80 Minus intensity currently used in area (Taken from Step Three) 33.,_436,.64 Minus proposed intensity on vacant land (Taken from Step Four) 2,045,51 A4unt of proposed unallocated intensity based on increasing the amount of land used. The amount of unallocated intensity based on current zoning on the vacant land is presently over the intensity standard, The proposed zoning changes seeks to remedy this only by increasing the amount of vacant land incor- porated into the study area, I 04Bra r E 1 1 I'a 5- 16- 84 C a s e 11 Approval I? I'• P ;S I ON Pf V!AOI'MTN'_' Co!'TANY ]TOPOSFI) I'!I:1'U0P51ENT INTENSITY S'1'(TY AREA 10-A A Lot; Intensity A11,11 vsis P•ased on Current Zoning 1. Study Boundaries proposed developr.ient is within a Io intensity e.iehborhI 1;h1c1) cr.nsists of + 475 aches bounded IN- cw',iY ('ril'e and Teas, lev RC,ihd on tlv '.r~'St; and hN. I on the east . The northt rn boundary is i o I-:- ek, 1) y the se-- c. ratlCfi I111e :?011th of lltr.' vi Odt,'1"ilte 1ntC,!IFltCentel' aL Ridgeti~ay r+r<; I-3SI~. Th s~utllcrn I•,c>1:11daI.V- is formed 1+y proposed collector street 1'eilNecn TeC.sie,v Road and 1-3;F. This collector separates i'1)-2O between the I i g h t industria) zoning and the cffice, multi-family, and Greenbelt onings. TI e<- e b oundaries were chosen by the i'1.~rln.ing and Cormunity 1'evelopment Staff because they correspond to definable boundaries (i.e. Z071ing) or tFadiLi011aI 1`lanning arc-a Boundaries (i.e. marker streets, casements. etc.) and still maintain an area c10se to L110 640 a C r e model stud.v area. For the purpose of this devel01)Went the study area boundaries have been redefined by Dimension Del=elopnlent Company to show the northern boundary as the separation line south of the moderate intensity center at Ridgeway and I-35F,. The western boundary is forllled by Ridgeway Road; the eastern boundary is formed by I-35E; and the southern boundary is formed by a proposed collector street separating PTA-20 between the light industrial zoning and the ofCice, multi - family, and greenbelt zonings. This boundary continues souLhk•ard until it intersects wi th Ridgeway Road. T!•,e total area acreage of the proposed intensity stud\ area has been increased to + 492.03 acres as subeitted with the planning area map s bimension T,evelupment Cniipall)'. 'i151' irltC'i t.y standard L0r is It~w i11t.CI11 l11. 1) c. 111, Ur J i S 'i 5 trips f'er d,). per I,,ro! S acre lntensicy Study N400 P~ipc Two il, Fvaltlrrtior, of lntcnsity FPsl'd on T~i_sine SteI, 011c - f;1ilCul41 te the apl`I-oxlmatc a rea li(riave I'1'01'i the genre}t plan' this neiFhhor•hoed is + 192.03 acres. Step Tua - CcIculc+tc the Cetal area trips 1) c-F davl 192/03 0c x 'S td!ac = 36,902.23 td inte11 sit.y sta1) darc?. Step 'I-liree - Estimate existing land use ill cross acreage and calculate current trip veneration in area; I_xistinc I.and,Use Ac reage. 7'r ay 4.20 ac S. F, _x 34 td/,ic _ - 1, P_ c Step Four - Estimate vacant land in area and calculate t}le ,ninilnl:r: development right reserve allocated for kill dcveIol:ed land; Intensity i?2.t Total acreage of neiga''07.110od 4, 20 ?1.inus 1Cl'eage of existil-ir land use 5 Ac-cs of I'emaining vacallt land x 30 ;1ri,s her day; minimum dcveI opment ri reserve 14,(134,00 Trips per day; intensity deveIopoicnt right reserve Step Five - Estimate unallocated intensity capacity in total study area; Intensity 36,902.25 Total intensity standard for area (tak('n from Step Two) 142.80 Minus intensity currently used in are:: {taken from Step 't'hree) ]4,634.90 Minus intensity development right r e S the (t ('11 fror St01' Four). AClount of u1', located intensity tcp i - C ? li% ci']eCk the !rlic:n5 t' Of a irOpi.'~ci, uCl'l`1F(nt: ~.'1L:111~'!ie L}1P tr'ij'fI.'!I(*1-11-4.01? c' t1)~' }~1'cPc`<ic~ 1 1 1 • Intensity Study H400 Page Three developrlent and Compare to Step Five, if less than the balance of Stej, Five, then the propose''! derv lop+~li nt i= within 1ntC'IISiC~' policy gUi(ii'li110., ' r I-valualloll Of 1 o ilb o r ho o J IIIt11S:-i d ('11 1 St?nL 011111,g' Step One - Ca IcuIate the approximate area acreace from the concept plan: this neighborhood is + 4921(`3 acrt,s. Step Two - Calculate the total area trips pc- r d ay: Cf2,03 ac. Ix 75 tae = 36,902125 td intensity standard. Step Thrr:e - Fistiuate existing land use in gross acrca ce and calculate current trip ecncration in area: L•x i st i nn Land Ilse Acreaj,e 4,20 ac S.F, 34 td !ac = 142180 t.: ac Step Four - i4t11T:iite :oiled laid in ar'e'a and CalCulate Z : of ctlr'•cr•il -.Oiling 011 vac ant Iand Land Use 492,03 Total acreage of neighborhood 4,410 Acreage of existing land use 4F+~, '3 Acreage of remaining vacant Iand x 30 Trips per day; minimum development rig reserve 141 ()34,90 Amounts of unallocated intensity reser', 1'ro-used Zarlirl¢ I i1.LnsiIv On acant land Acreage 'Fri Ls /Dav 8,43 ac S,F,-16 x 34 td/ac = 2:6.62 227, 8I ac Agricultural x 30 td!ac = 6,F34.30 91,87 ac S. 1: .-10 x 41 td/ac - 4,042.28 25145 aC S. F, x 50 td;ac - 1,24.00 55.63 ae Cluster 100 td aC - 5, C0 15, 00 e,C !,I. l x 200 td !ac - 3,C10 0, 00 4.68 ac Part; x ; tC'. C - 1°` Cll ac l..l, x Jn5 td%rlc l,;,, fl { ]1.4, << {Ic•11 x 0 to/h~ S7. ~~3 ac 1,S M Intell sity Study H40'. P'j"e Four ate} Five - Fstila:+tf' unallocated intt'nsit\ caps:city in Stlltll' area: l.llt('11S1t1' j!i t~Q~, t(, •iUtbl 111L(11`: J t)' ~tP.11~1,;11" 1 f PrCa {lBI:C'Il foIfl Stti'}? 144, i•i) t, (1 !'~?ll llti 111t e11Sl e i';t l)' 115E'd 111 3rC'a (taken 1..rolrl tcp 'fhrcc) 37, 436 6 Ld llll5 ll7te1151tV C'f 1Cpo`."6 =oiling ('11 1'ai.allt Ic:Ild {ta c1) :r0!'.1 }hL1r~ 3>7 7 td A: c)u11t of 1111aIlccBtl'd intf-ltsitV' based oh plCpoSell C'1 111C 1i vacd;ll Ialid i11 StlId\' aI ca, St top Six _ The proposed developl-'ent is within i1) tcIl5it) policy guidelines. i\everthcIcss, the issue ror,ainn as to whether other interested Iarld ownerS and developers will he denied t}';fi'll' 1rlterlS]t\' 1']1'.hLa b\' 3lI0tt111C lll'}1 3I1 af!10L1I1t ii5 proposed to Pimens loll Ileveloplient 1.011)N', Another point of Staff concern is the incc'easedh-rne of this l'ropo:,al. It is recomr,ended that. Ole botuldar)' follow the proposed coIIcc tcl street and property ownersllip lines. i Cll. Y COIIINC li rl 6c" ~Z v J> vr. .y ~..1. 40 1 ~ I ~Jf 1 l r SSG1 'Torm~l ~Pn~urz ~~a 1ale•~.r ~1 ~1t 16 _ tee, ~a~ia~ rx--~•s,.~~ 3 ss - 1 r P & Z Minutes Page 2 II. Approval of the City of Denton Capital Improvement Plan and the Utility Capital Improvement Plan, Mr, Watkins explained the CIP plan and stated the acquisition for Highway 380 was dropped as the third year plan was not funded. For 1986-87, there were no ehangesi for 1987-88, basically the samo. Air. Ham stated he feels that the plan presented to the commission is a good program and stated he had no other comments to make. Mr. Sidor made a motion to approve the City of Denton's Capital Improvement Plan and the Utility Capital Improvement Plan. Seconded by Mr, ,7uren and unanim- ously carried (6-0), III, Public Hearings A. Z-1660. This is the petition of Dimension Development CamPany, Inc. requesting a change in zoning from plan- ned development (PD-19) and single family (SF-10) to t, a revised planned development classification on 161.7 acres beginning at the intersection of Teasley Lane and Ridgeway Drive. Existing PD-19 is comprised of 42.2 net acres (10,5 acres of general retail, 16.7 acres of cluster housing at 12 units per acre, and 15 acres of multi-family at 26 units per acre). The bal- ance of the 161.7 acre tract (119,5 acres) is present- ly zoned to accommodate single family detached land use on minimum 10,000 squaw foot lots, If approved, the proposed 161.7 acre planned development will establish the followings 1. A reconfiguration of existing PD-19 to the east side of Ridgeway Drive to respect the new align- ment. (Permitted land uses and net acres are the same as those in existing PD-19.) 2. Single family (SF-10) - on a 14.44 acre parcel beginning adjacent and west of Ridgeway Drive. 3, Single family (SF-10) - on a 30,49 acre parcel located east of Ridgeway Drive along the northern boundary of the site. 4. Single family (SF-7) - on 25.48 acres beginning approximately 1,400 feet east of Ridgeway Drive. 5. Cluster housing - on 38.41 acres at 11 units per acre (422 maximum units) beginning approximately 21300 feet east of Ridgeway Drive. 6. PD-Office use - on a 3.05 acre parcel at the northwest corner of Teasley Lane and Ridgeway Drive. P & x minutes Page 3 7, City service use - on a 1.55 acre parcel located at the southwest corner of Teasley Lane and Ridge- way Drive. 8. Park - on 4,68 acres, Mr. Ellison stated 11 reply forms were mailed to prop- erty owners within 200 feet of the subject propertyr 1 was returned in favor and zero in opposition. Mr. Bob Wachter of Dimension Development Corporation stated that Dimension Development Corporation has owned the subject property for the past 10 years and had rec- ognized a demand in Denton and especially this area for SF-7 type development and cluster type housing, The cluster housing was thought to be more appropriate to be developed near the light industrial area versus the SF-7. He stated the corporation had hired Johnson, Johnson & Roy, a major land management firm to confer on the project. After consulting with staff, he stated area property owners were contacted and he felt there was no opposition, He stated that informal work sessions had been held to basically review the plans for the proposed development with the area property owners and after much thought and revision, he stated he feels has a good proposal, Daniel Cqtt stated lie was. representing his farther Jerome bl, Cott in his absence and read a tletter stating his comments; As the owners of Sundown Ranch, the property all along the southern border of this proposed develop- ment, we are generally undecided about this zoning request, We feel on the 161 acres the number of units is increasing from 973 as per the property zoning to 1,247 units as of this proposed change, There were 119 acres of SF-10, there are proposed to be 44 acres of SF-10. As we understand the Denton Developmen`. Guide of 1981, it is not intended that this area of the City develop this intensely and we recommend that the 973 units previously zoned for the property is adequate. He stated that most of the multi-family housing and cluster housing as proposed is concentrated on the border of our property, and, we believe adversely affects the drainage from this property to our prop- erty in addition to reducing the value of our property. we recommend spreading this multi-family and cluster housing more over the entire 161 acres than all on our border. lie added the general retail zoning class- ification called for would better comply with the spirit of the Denton Development guidelines If this had a neighborhood service rather than a general re- tail zoning classification. And with the inclusion of these comments, w- would recommend proceeding further with Dimension Development Company's planned zoning change. P & Z Minutes Page 4 Mr. Ellison explained the petitioner's request and location as well as the surrounding land uses. He stated that Ridgeway Drive has 80' of dedicated right-of-way. A 24' street section of Ridgeway Drive is under construction at this time and it is roped that Ridgeway Drive will ultimately be re-desil~nated as FM 2181 and accepted as part of the state highway network. Teasley Lane has 90' of right-of-way and is presently part of the state highway system. An east-west extension of Teasley which forms an inter- section with Ridgeway Drive is presently under const- ruction. The transportation engineer and Planning staff met with the petitioner's representative and land planner to discuss overall plans for transport- ation systems both internal and external and the rcu:- ing of two collector streets and a proposed 4-way intersection. The developers will be responsible Ecr improving half of the collector street and staff wo+_ld recommend that a minimum 24' of pavement be installs.-- by the developer of the proposed 38 acre cluster housing section with the remaining share made a res- ponsibility of the developer of adjoining PD-20. He further added that a proposed 4-way intersection as discussed during meetings between the petitions r nd staff and is generally felt to be a potential traffic hazard. He stated the staff will strongly recommend that the city encourage and approve the one major detention pond at the southeast corner of the property to negate all effects of development. The City Engineer- ing Division will require the developer's engineer to consider F'EMA regulations on floodplain/floodway revisions. He stated the engineering department aL_o recommends that the number of bridges be minimized over creeks. Mr. Ham pointed out that if proposed development is permitted, it will utilize all of the available sew---y services. He further added that an existing 18" gravity line which progresses to a 20" and finally a 24" operates from the Hobson Lane lift-station forced .-ain and development will use up any excess of capacity the gravity sewer .line. Mr. Ellison stated the pros and cons of the propos,' and stated staff is neither opposed or in favor o= this request because the difference between existin,- in- tensity and the proposed intensity concept is not critical from a technical perspective. Staff woula consider endorsing this request if the petitioner were willing to reduce the amount of property devoted to genera: retail (GR) land use as a result of approval of PC-19 in 1974. The Teasley Lane, Hobson Lane, West of 1-35E policy is what staff considered to be the major issue, yet existing zoning insures that a moderate center of P & Z minutes page 5 some proportion has the potential to develop and offered staff's recommendations of conditions to be considered upon approval of this request, Mr. Wachter stated concerning the 4-way intersection, his staff does feel this is the best attempt, There should be no problem with reducing the cluster hous- ing from 11 to 8 units and stated he would be willing to meet with Mr. Cott and modify the area bordering his property, !le added he feels his company is try- ing to fill a need for more multi-family in Denton, based on the occupancy rate. The chairman declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Juren commented he feels the proposed develop- ment is a great plan and has a few minor things which can be worked out and would hope that develop- ment would continue as planned with the exception of cluster housing in the southeast corner and re- configuring the SF-7 parcel. Mr. Claiborne stated the proposed development has good potential. Mr. Sidor commented he would have no objections and would in fact be in favor if the SF-7 area were re- vised and the cluster housing area be reduced to 8 units. Mr. Juren made a motion to recommend approval of Z-1660 with the following condi'tionst 1. That proposed cluster housing along the east boundary which adjoins Sundown stanch shall be reduced from 38,41 acres to 28,89 acres (max- imum density 11 units pe.r acre), 2. SF-7 section shall be increased from 25,48 acres to 35 acres with additional acreage taken from cluster housing area along east boundary of tract. 3, That maximum number of multi-family units in original PD-19 area shall be reduced from 390 to 250 units, 4, That plat approval shall constitute site plan approval for single family detached (SF-7 and SP-10) sections. 5. That backzoning to zoning classifications in effect before this petition (SF-10) shall be considered for the entire 161 acre parcel if a minimum 20 percent of the subject property, P & Z Minutes Page 6 including a minimum 5 percent single family de- tached and 5 percent moderate to high density housing, if not developed within five (5) years of adoption of ordinance approving change in zon- ing. 6. That density in multi-family section shall be limited to 16,7 units (maximum of 250 units allowable) per acre, 7. That density in cluster housing section shall be limited to 8 units per acre. 8. That development shall conform to approved zoning concept plan. All City of Denton zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes and appli- cable development standards shall be met unless expressly waived or altered in approved planned development (PD) ordinance, 9. That sidewalks be required thrctghout the develu;- ment at least on one side of tl.a street. Seconded by Mr, Escue and unanimously carried (6-0), 8, Z-1661, This is the petition of James R, Neblett re- qu~estTng a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light industrial (LI) classification on a 43.06 acre tract located adjacent and north of Highway 380E, adjacent and south of the TO and MKT Rainroad, begin- ning approximately 700 feet east of Mayhill Road. ,Mr, Ellison stated 8 reply forms were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of subject property; 3 were re- turned in favor and zero in opposition. He stated tz e site is located on the fringe of the limits of major urban development as defined by the Denton Development Guide and staff recommends approval. No one spoke in favor or in opposition. Chair declared public hearing closed, Mr. Sidor made a motion to recommend approval. of Seconded by %Ir. Pearson and unanimously carried (6-0. C. Z-1662, This is the petition of James R, Neblett requesting a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light industrial (LI) classification on appre::- imately 6,909 acre tract beginning at the northwest corner of Highway 380E and Geesling Road. I PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO THE. CITY COUNCIL To; Denton City Council Case No.: Z-1661 Meeting Date., June 19, 1984 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant; James R. Neblett Box 1066 Denton, TX 76201 Status of Applicant; Owner Requested Action, Change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light industrial (LI) classification Purpose : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Location and Size; Approximately 43.06 acres located Ad- jacent and north of Highway 380E, and adjacent and south of the T&P and M.K,T, Railroad Existing Land Use; Vacant Surrounding Land Ilse and Zoning; Korth - Fishtrap Road, M,K.T, and T$P Railroad line; E.T,J. South Hwy 380E, vacant; (A) Last - vacant; (LI) West - Commercial; (C), PD-18 Denton Development Guide; !'ropert,y is on the fringe of a low intensity area and tho limits of the Development guide study area. SPECIAL INFORMATION Transportation; This site has frontage along highway 380E. (A primary major arterial) The 7'F,P and M.K.T. Railroad line is located along the north property line of the site. Case /I 2-1661) Page Two SPECIAL INFORMATION (Continued) Utilities: The nearest public utilities consist of a 10 inch water O.nes 10 inch sew- er line, and two inch ;as line along Cooper Creek Road, Electric service is available, N}tysical. Characteristics 31ipercent and no significant drainage problems exist. Soil description is mainly composed of Normangee and Wilson clay loams, The depth of rock is more than 70 inches, ANALYSIS This site is located on the fringe of the limits of major urban development as defined by the Denton Development Guide, Conse- quently, the site is also on the fringe of the Development Guide study and policy area. A moderate intensity node is located at the intersection of Loop 288 and Highway 380E. The area east of the moderaate node has a low intensity designation (includes this tract). Light industrial (LI) zoning has been established along the north side of Higliway 380E between this site and 16.9 acres lo- cated approximately 800 feet to the east. The above referenced 16.9 acres beginning at ttie northwest corner of Geesling Road and Highway 380E is owned by t1ae petitioner and is also sched- uled for City Council action on June 19, 1984 [a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to light industrial (M) clas- sification). The 16.9 acre and 43 acre sites are featured in the recently constructed City of Denton Economic Development Factbook (see attachment No. 2). One of the purposes of the Factbook is CO identify and provide information on sites the City of Denton considers well suited for industrial development. Staff has not had contact with an; individuals specifically proposing indus- trial development at the subject sites. However, the petitioner reportedly informed another staff member of a pending contract with a prospective industrial user. (Case NZ-1661) Page Three RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning commission agreed that highlighting this site as one that is suitable for industrial land use in the Economic Development Factbook and denying a request for light industrial (1,I) zoning would constitute misleading and con- tradictory policy decisions on the part of the City of Denton, The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of Z-1661. by a vote of 6-0. AE,TERNATIVES 1. Approve petition 2. Deny petition ATTACHMENTS 1., Aerial 2, Excerpt from City of Denton Economic Development Factbook 3. Property owner list 4. Reply form list 5. May 30, 1984 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes 0545a 1 t r 1; f ` r-r I 'fi Y A 4, 1 1 l 1' 1 r I ' I I' r ' 1 r li , 1' , / I r • f y1 r } q r It* r~al~ Q vl r 1 rTr' r,a i'1' >t 10 1 • ayry lj (1 !.S I,. 1 ♦1 .~l•t Il,r _.r 41 7 Y t `rye # r , i` ~ ~ r if a4 tY 1 k A l+ 1.., 1 , ,1• tI 11 ~I l Y ,~~~i! + ~ ¢l ~~iha d It ~ .Ml 1~ •.1 iyt L r, r: I , ( ! C .•rl ~ A 'r1 # „`w . 1 r1' a ~ , i If.~ ~ 'x1111 ♦ 11',~ 11 1 i .N ~ 1 r X111 Y r~r, ~1 ~or It, qp. % .1, ell L •;j :4 r 1 l iN ~b•` ~ L Y.l~ ~'I~.•~ 751,. -1 y„ L. ♦~rr1►.i~ ~Ir 1• r 'r~•'•f,Y -ell Mee i { If y lit t { ~ 11 Y % 'L.~ r C 1 I A lit # MY. F"1. L '.l l~l ~/r 1~ 1 w4i 14 '1 ;'ii. V aro' 5, 41~i. 14. ~1f~111~. •~~tRl. ` • ~ t a•r tv ~r/~` r~~ I 1 , F , r . to 1 -4 _e 'A I'' r. 1~ ~~.rM~ ~L ~i ~ r u , ' 1 I'I i K I 1 ' '1a'~ it. s Site A w r i Ifl a r{P1.1 rI V. I-It -Xv I~r • U11 tt. 0. Cam, w -i •f~`' r / 1101 ~~J~ 40 SITE A LAND INFORMATION c 77- ;OWNERSHIP, Margaret Ann McMillan and J.R, Nebletf `COTAL LAND AREA:Y 90.4 acres :.t 'ZONING CLASSIFICATION: Agricultural and Light Industrial HIGHWAY ACCESS: This site fronts on State Highway 380, only five minutes from Inter state Highway 35 via loop 288. SAIL SERVICE: A Union Pacific-IhliSSOurl Pacific Railroad Ilne is locaied along ;he northern property line el the site. Connections Santa =e Llnes are available in Benton and tinese lines wide i se:,rice to ry point in the country. SAIL OESCRIPTICN: is - CC':^_ - of f\~Or:"an^,e an 'r~Yjlc,^r c Ca'? 1 77 The area is jen,!v sioci,,_,c at one i0 threa e'Cer,i r.nd ,nc2rBa -'as 1 .1 nC ~'CCd 0 1e- S y^e eCi of fOC 5 J.e a' ; Q inC eS. Sii fs i0re'ir sC- rVlcec ;h sev. er. v, ate ;nai urai ^a ; i.,...-_.. .-..w .~.,...-"r>'. --era ..ti. <-r f. :'r"- - =Via..,,- tti _+rw rhwy-~_ z• icdz :Zg 7, P, el A f /i , i r r, l a ~ij ~!~,1 1. 5 ' ' rt f ff''~~ G7 ^ r L 7 •r rnYA rf nr Y) , O C •IC Cr. t'iy ~Lfp%Jr ~lna ~~1 ~ .r r /C ~.!Cr ~ 1'.~ till, ~~n ~k:~( I ~ ~ r i I ~ e r f~ r r r ; 1, P / ! / A ~ ~ ~ 11 ~ F ti 1 ` ~r~ 1 f h ~ •1 ♦ r 1^ T I /1 n I r Cle~~!^ rtcL Rd n l a J Ai,s ~ 7'r<<c+` j'{ F I 5~~, Fvllrr i ,r I~CX 1~y5. l~rri~G.n! E ~t ~allrrp,d le. r r 7S"~ c'7 LIC e N. 1<O C~lt,l ~ls ~t: jl ,'J~I`i 11~ ~1 ~C[J. ili f,1e,a ~ I i I I i_ ~r; ,rr• Cff: 1 7 ,5* C yroh i I I PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FORMS CITY COUNCIL Z~16(1 ^V 0R OPPC'SI:iO.~' t'_"`ECIUi" & z rs~,nutes Ya e 6 ~ t including a minimum 5 percent single family de- tacnr.: an(: 5 pGrCeil t :noGerate to high aensity housi.ny, if not develcpe(: within five (5) Fears ;.f adoption of ordinance apprcvin~! change ,n zon- ing 6. That density in multi- family section shall be _ir,.ited to 16.7 units (maximum cf 230 units allowable) per acre. 7::ate deals t\' in chaste:' housing ;section Sha11 )-)e i iteCl tC F u nits per acre. 1;1at d@\'F_cClient shall C,,I- ''_:,li tO ap't:I-Cved :iCai;':" concept plan, .111 City of Denton zcninC CrGillanl= . 1 C06 es cl idl nUJ dint' ,:ld app' \'i 6 G;1 rec.l:1at1C115, CoCes a cable development standards shat i lb? met unlEss aC YC\'eC. tan:'.6'C1 OXFressly %.,,aived Ol7 altered in develop;rent (PD) ordinance. U That Si.d8ttial):S be '_'eC::irEd ..h C't1C., t silent at ieast o:: Gne side of the street. Sec,.:.ced by :'.r. Escue and unanimcus'_y carried (6-0) . B. 2-1661. This is the petition cf ,lames R. Neblett re- Cue!~tlnQ a change in zonln: from af1riv,lltural. (A) tc the light industrial (LI) classification oil a 43.06 acre trct located adjacent and north of Hiah\ray 3€C-- adjacent and south e_` th(. T5? and Rainroad, beer - of layhill. Road. ;king appro::i:~.atei ,.y 700 feet east P ~P Mr. Ellison stated 8 reply forms were mailed to prcc owners within 200 feet of subject property; 3 were turned in fa\'or and zero in opposition. He stated site is located on the fringe of the limits of n'ajar urban development as refined by the Denton Developme:- Guide and staff recorinends approval. N'.c one spoke in favor or in cppositicn. Chair declared public hearing clcser,. Cl :Cr T',a"E ? ;nOtiCi1 ,:O re CC,•._:.E.'•C . ..\'c._ cct.c:e _ . :ear „ an .....,nimc: st._ . _.i: tCP1:t W- Ci1atoC.e Cam, _:.C::'. c.C.._C',,..~..1L.~ i,.-. the light s c PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL To: Denton City Council Case No.: Z-1662 Meeting Date: June 19, 1984 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: James R. Neblett Box 1066 Denton, TX 76201 Status of. Applicant; Owner Requested Action: Change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light, industrial (LI) classification Purpose. . . , . , . . , . . . . Location and Size: Approximately 16,9 acres beginning at the northwest corner of Highway 380E and beesling Road and south of Fish- trap Road Existing Land Use; Vacant Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Harwell's Garden Center, single family, T$P and M,K.T. Railroad; (A) South - Flwy 380E, vacant; (A) East - Geesling Rd., vacant; PD for mobile home subdivision West - Vacant; LI Denton Development Guide: Property is on the fringe of a low intensity area and the limits of the Development Guide study area, SPECIAL INFORMATION Transportation: This site has immediate access to Highway 380E, This site also has frontage along Geesling Road and Fishtrap Road, both of which are unimproved perimeter streets, (Case # Z-1662) Page Two SPECIAL INFORMATION (Continued) Transportation (continued); The T&P and M,K,T. Railroad line is located along the north property line of the site, utilities,, The nearest public utilities consist of a 10 inch water lice, 10 inch sew- er line, and two inch gas line along Cooper Creek Road. Electric service is available, Physical Charactertstieso This site has a gentle slope at 1 to 3 percent and no significant drainage problems exist, Soil description is mainly composed of Normangee and Wilson clay loamy. The depth of rock is more than 70 inches. ANALYSIS This site is located on the fringe of the limits of major urb,.tn development as defined by the Denton Development Guide, Conse- quently, the site is also on the fringe of the Development Guide study and policy area, A moderate intensity node is located -at the intersection of Loop 288 and Highway 380E. The area east ~f the moderate node has a low intensity designation (includes this tract). Light industrial (LI) zoning has been established along the north side of Highway 380E between this site and 43,06 acres located approximately 800 feet to the west. The above refer- enced 43.06 acres which fronts along Highway 380E is owned by the petitioner and also scheduled for Cit Council action [agricultural (A) to light industrial (Ll~ change in zoning request). The 16,9 acre and 43 acre sites are featured in the recently constructed Cit of Denton Economic Development Factbook (see attachment No. n1).e o Me purposese ac oo is to identify and provide information on sites the City of Denton considers well suited for industrial development. Staff has not had contact with any individuals specifically proposing indus- trial development at the subject sites. However, the petitioner reportedly informed another staff member of a pending conL-r.act with a prospective industrial user, (Case #Z-1662) Page Three RECOMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission agreed that highlighting this site as one that is suitable for industrial land use in the Economic Development Factbook and denying a request for light industrial (LI) zoning would constitute misleading and con- tradictory policy decisions on the part of the City of Denton, The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of Z-1662 by a vote of 6-0. ALTERNATIVES 1, Approve petition 2. Deny petition ATTACHMENTS 1, Aerial 2, Excerpt from City of Denton Economic Development Factbook 3, Property owner list 4. Reply form total 5. May 30, 1984 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes 0546a S I f !i_ l " t It ,i y r , f W+`1 S 1 I •,'Y ~ttil w. 1 v l t Ir " !e YI~'' r~~ "ff r t Ir.. ~ ~ ~ ,~I~ I I ~I ~t~t'~• ,~i, are 1A N L,~4 ~y F~ I, r' Ptl r i ~pY) - Nr'~.. 1i ,1~~fL.l ) , ^ , 1 1 t l 'n n}~ < I S 1 7 t t { sA ~ ~ ~SI ~.'r:r, r~V%}'~ .:,'L t^}I~) ~k,f: ~It ~`y'• t, I •.'CScs, ~t j~ f ~ ' 7 '.r l~t t ~ ~ ~r ii,~ . ~ ,~J ~+JI ~ ..rf 'ir i~' 1 1 ~ r. J .r ~Iy~p~ ~ fry w ,-vv r '.r t ,p. 3t i~S ,:fns or, 6010o4alvo 0, i 7• < r ,t a , r t4 V r 1th t fl AN, yy 1 / it t f. ' n •.A .fit,' t .Pr r t p t'rY'i , ' ro cr. k't,1.I a~ 1. r~ # f iy~ h~ ~ p .,1 `r i f f t 'y~ ~ r f l 'y { t t L ~ t q I' !r i ~ i,; ! r ~ ' ~11 ~ 4 ~ • v , t ry im~ ~ I n.' e r IC ~y^Aly, l• i, i S ` 1 r/ y' 'E 1 1~ 1/ + . 1r. yl~ 1 I ' 'WfJ~ p p1 4':, VK rv~r $ r~` r ' ~r' t ,Tr hiS..~ I t~~~irt .qlt Vr~l rAy-' wf ' "U'77 zr"v w r / \ l 1 11 1 .,l~r~,~/' /~i r ~ r i / r ~ • V.0 ~ • • rS f i'. r L „ V 'z^ ,ir f -.y It a-~~,',~cr',". ,r• ~ 1; I i' `3 w C l7v I . S i t e M y _ ^ ' V 4T'~Z'•.r` l.I ~ ~ r l ry 1 c lar . Iw 'r ~V ~ ; „ 1111 ✓ ~ Irl 11 1 ~ ; J:f I ~ ~ ` i1y,~. w ~ ~ ..._-.~,~~a„~„~ / 11 : t T` y-• .c• r ~,.f ' SITE A LAND INFORMATION - _ '0`IVN~RSHIP; -r Margaret Ann McMillan anc J.R. Neblett - ` .r L - iOTAL LAND Ar^,EAi 90 acres - - 'ZONING - _ ' CLASSIFICATION, ' Ac icul,ural anc Lic, incus,,nal P ~IGNWA Y CCSS S: This site !rcr.;: cn Sia;e r~icr~w ay 3C, CnIN, five n*ll)u,IeF LZI Siam SIC ;1YZ1' \'4a IC'Cp 2Bb. M, 11 _ i aC+ ~ 5. `G's~ `.G •CGC 'iii vC G',_,. _ - `rG ny-.. Ia v.-..alp . _ • _ _ v • r r... 6 .I /~+l•^~~ e~'~ .SFr ~f ~i,r'r. Iii. i'i;, r{rj ~ E rl /t n r r 7- 71-Y i I I ~ I Ji' I r L r ~ ~ - • I - - - - - - - - - - - - PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FOFXS C~;Y COL^NCiL P & Z Minutes page 6 including a minimum 5 percent single family de- tached and 5 percent moderate to high density housing, if not developed within five (5) years of adoption of ordinance approving change zon- ing. 6. That density 16i7 units multi-family (maximum of section 250 shall units be limited to allowable) per acre. 7. That density in cluster housing section shall be limited to 8 units per acre, 8. That development shall conform to approved zoning concept plan. All City of Denton zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes and appli- cable development standards shall be met unless expressly waived or altered in approved planned development (PD) ordinance. 9. That sidewalks be required throughout the develop- ment at least on one side of the street. Seconded by Mr. Escue and unanimously carried (6-0). B. Z-1661. This is the petition of James R. Neblett re- questing a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light industrial (LI) classification on a 43,06 acre tract located adjacent and north of Highway 380E, adjacent and south of the T&P and MKT Rainroad, begin- ning approximately 700 feet east of Mayhill Road. Mr. Ellison stated 8 reply forms were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of subject property; 3 were re- turned in favor and zero in opposition. He stated t,e site is located on the fringe of the limits of major urban development as defined by the Denton Development Guide and staff recommends approval. No one spoke in favor or in opposition, Chair declared public hearing closed, Seconded by Mr, aPearson recommen (6Z -I Q- -0? .1 C. Z-1662. This is the petition of James R. Meblett requesting a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the light industrial (LI) classification on apprc::- ° imately 6.909 acre tract beginning at the northwest corner of Highway 380E and Goesling Road. P 4 2 Minutes Page 7 Mr. Ellison stated 6 reply forms were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of subject property; I was returned 44in favor and zero itna opposition, He ca ed on the fringden<of atnhe limits statema or urban ide v- elopment as defined by the Denton Development*Guide and staff recommends approval. No one spoke in favor or in opposition to request. Chair declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Sidor made a motion to recommend approval of Z-1662, Seconded by Ms. Cole and unanimously carried (6-0). E. Z-1664. This is the petition of William B. Rogers requesting a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the single family (SF-16) classification on lots 31 13, 14, 15, Solar Way Addition, Section I, and lot 30, Solar Way Addition, Section II. Mr. Ellison stated 10 reply forms were mailed to prop- erty owners within 200 feet of subject property; 1 was returned in favor and 1 in opposition. He added these lots have already been subdivided without permission of the City. Mr. Bill Rogers stated he is a local resident and the developer of Solar Way. He stated in 1979 and 1980, he was partners with Bob Gcodson and their main inter- est was a conclusive development with a solar energy conservation concept. He stated most of the lots in the development are 1 acre however, some are two-thirds of an acre. He stated at the suggestion of staff, he was requesting to replat all lots with metes and bounds changes, rezone to SF-16 the 7 lots that are less than one acre and to seek a variance for the 7 lots for status quo and retain the lots as they originally were, He added they are trying to adjust and bring up to standards since the area was annexed into the City. He stated the development has existed for four years and all lots have been sold. No one spoke in opposition, Mr. Ellison stated in 1980 when lot 3 was originally subdivided there was a shift in a boundary line, there- fore reducing a lot to less than one acre. He stated the specific issue at this time is a request for a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the single family (SF-16) classification on lots 3, 13, 14, 15, and 30, Solar Way Addition, Sections I and I#; lots 14, 15 and 30 are already developed. Staff feels it would be inappropriate to act on a replat that in- volves lots less than an acre in size in an agricul- 1 ~ ~I PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ,•~M RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL I To: Denton City Council Case No.: Z-1664 Meeting Date: June 19, 1984 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: William B. Rogers 206 Goodson Way $1 Denton, TX 76205 Status of Applicant: Original Developer Requested Action: Change in zoning from agricultural (A.)I to the single family (SF-16) classifi- cation on Lots 3, 13, 14, and 15, Solar Way Addition, section I and Lor.~ 30, Solar Way Addition, Section II Purpose: Zoning that permits single family de- tached development on lots less than i one (1) acre in size i Existing Land Use: Single family detached housing on Lots 3, 13, and 14, Lots 15 and 30 are vacant Surrounding Land Use Single family detached housing or and Zoning: vacant lots with an agricultural (A) zoning classification t Denton Development Guide: Area is designated as low intensity. BACKGROUND The Solar Way Addition, Sections I and II, accomodates single family detached housing that utilizes the concept of solar ener- gy. The subdivision is located in the southwest portion of the City along the west side of Bonnie Brae Street and south of Corbin Road. The City of Denton annexed the Solar Way Addition on February 13, 1984. All annexed property is automatically assigned an agricultural (A) zoning classification, Agricultural (A) zoning permits the development of single family detached housing on minimum one (1) acre lots, The Solar Way Addition was originally subdivided prior to annexation with lots at least. one (1) acre in size, But, at some point, the developer and p*- titioner de:;ided that one (1) acre or larger lots were "econom- ically unfeasible" and subsequently proceeded to divide and sell formally platted lots by "metes and bounds" description without the benefit olf an official replat. (Case # Z-1664) Page Two BACKGROUND (Continued) The major portion of the subdivision is developed, however, undeveloped lots less than one (1) acre in size are not eligible for building permits unless zoning is changed to some classifi- cation authorizing development on lots less than an acre in size. Approval of a formal replat reflecting current and actual lot sizes is also required, And, to further complicate the situation, the original subdivision sections were approved prior to annexa- tion and adoption of an ordinance extending City subdivision requirements and development standards into the extraterritorial jurisdiction area. As a result, a subdivision originally develop- ed without City streets, drainage and sewer (septic tanks through- out the development) is now technically subject to such require- ments by virtue of the soon to be considered resubdivision request. HISTORY Solar Way Addition, Section I was approved by the City of Denton in February, 1980. Fourteen (14) lots at least one (1) acre in size were approved in Section I (Attachment #3). Again, platting requirements governing the extraterritorial jurisdiction area (E.T.J.) were imposed. County street standards were imposed. Solar Way Street is seal coated with no curb and gutter; Goodson Way is a gravel road; and, Bonnie Brae and Corbin Road are unimproved perimeter streets adjacent to the subdivision. Septic tanks and inadequate drainage facilities are also representative of the lack of City required improvements. City water service in the form of an 8" line was approved for extension to the subdivision. Solar Way, Section II, was approved on March 2, 1982 (Attachment #9), Sixteen (16) lots outside the city limits were established with a minimum lot size of one acre. It has been recently dis- covered that the south boundary line of Solar Way Addition, Sec- tion I, was relocated when Section If was platted in 1992. In the words of the petitioner, "some acreage in Section I was re- platted to provide more lots in Section II, with two lots reduced to less than one (1) acre, the City itself participating in this procedure" (see attachir,-nt 02), The two lots reduced to less than an acre in size are altaady developed and have little substantive effect on today's conditions; however, staff feels obligated to point out that no formal replat of Section I was considered in conjunction with Section II. Furthermore, no depiction or illu- stration of adjusted lot size changes in Section I, was made in conjunction with Section If (see attachment #2). In retrospect. staff does feel that the effect of relocating the original bound- ary line on Section I should have been questioned when Section II was reviewed. But, any inference that "city participation" or staff knowledge of the scale and scope of the developer's "metes and bounds" sale of property and unsanctioned resubdivisiog is unwarranted. (Case #Z-1664) Page Three HISTORY (Continued) F aff was made aware of the extent and result of the difference what is officially platted in the Solar Way Addition and what s actually been sold when Mr, Al Stewart, pending owner of lot , applied for a building permit in March, 1984, Mr, Stewart produced a map of the subdivision which reflected lot lines different from the official plat. The "lot" Mr. Stewart proposed to build on was not one acre in size and a building permit was not issued. Staff immediately contacted the petitioner and explained that undeveloped agricultural lots must be at least one (1) acre in size to meet City zoning requirements for single family detached land use. A series of meetings was held and the petitioner expressed a lack of knowledge of replat requirements. Staff further explained the need for a change in zoning and formal replatting. The developer was also informed that recent annexation and the extension of City Subdivision Regulations into the E.T.J. now give the Planning and Zoning commission and city council the authority to impose City of Denton requirements for public facility improvements. The petitioner is concerned about the possibility of being held accountable for such public improvements as paving, curb and gutter for streets and drainage facilities. A request for variance waiving City of Denton subdivision improvements in the area of streets and drainage particularly has been filed, The Planning and Zoning Commission will consider the variance and replat requests at its meeting of June 13, 1984. ANALYSIS The specific issue before the City Council at this time is a request for a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the single family (SF-16) classification on lots 3, 13, 14, 15, and 30, Solar Way Addition, Sections I and II. Lots 14, 15 and 30 are already developed, Although the zoning, replatting and variance requests are obviously related and will undoubtedly be discussed during the public hearing for zoning, staff felt that it would be inappropriate to act on a replat that involves lots less than one acre in size in an agricultural (A) zoning dis- tract. Staff did feel that some action should be initiated on this matter for the benefit of the lot owner(s) in need of some decision or indication of how things may progress while building permits are being withheld. (Case #Z-1664) Page Four CONCLUSION Much has been said regarding the background and history of this unfortunate situation as seen through the eyes of staff, Staff is of the strong opinion that the need for rezoning, resubdivid-~ ing and consideration of variances would not have developed if extremeiinonaturea thisdoecurenvedishanfexamllerofethe Although the negative effect of sale and subdivision of p P y by Potential and bounds" as opposed to standard city andpcounty subdivision or resubdivision proceedings. Those affected the greatest are typically individual lot owners that may not become aware of problems until after financial commitments are made, Decision makers may subsequently be faced with a choice between deepening individual hardship or making a decision that may not be in the best interest of the City or general public as a whole. RECOMMENDATION Fdifficult ning and Zoning commission appeared to support f thee conclusion that the change in zoning reqst t is or ! theree mplicated consideration. one commissioner went on to III at the replat and variance request would be much more issues to resolve. No objections to the change in zoning request were raised during the Planning and Zoning com- mission public hearing. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends a by a vote of 6-0. PProval of Z-1664 f 1 ALTERNATIVES - - 1. Approve petition 2. Deny petition ATTACHMENTS , Letter from E F5. . Aerial . Plat of SolareWayiAddition, Section 1 . Plat of Solar Way Addition, section II Proposed replat of Solar Way Addition 6, Property owner list 7. Reply form total f 8. May 30, 1984 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes I 0516g f +1 4 r i ~t - Y` s a WgL.A it sj - ~ N r I n J rung% r F i t L • • ~ ' ~ ~a:a J. f ~ ;Yy.~•+ w M jot Ira,, ~ .r ~ ( J 00 f P J a- .44 4 • j ,~t i , • y ~A4X 4 V' 4 .I May 3, 1984 To the Planning and Zoning Commission, City of Denton, Following the recent annexation of Solar Way Addition by the City of Denton, these actions, are proposed in order to conform to City regulations: 1. The repiatting of all lots of one acre or more in size eor which metes and bounds changes have been made. 2. The rezoning of seven lots less than one acre in size. 3. The seeking of a variance to maintain the pre-annexation standards of Solar Way Addition for the rezoned lots following annexation. With the granting of these requests, Solar Way (Sections I and II) will continue to consist of thirty-five lots on approximately forty-four platted acres, an average size of well over an acre. All thirty-five lots were sold, committed, or under construction prior to annexation, with the completion of some final transactions now awaiting the outcome of this application. There will be no further development under the Solar 1,'ay aegis, Plans for a Section Ill have been abandoned and will not be resumed. Section I of Solar Way was platted in 1980 outside the City limits within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City when annexation was not immanent, with an average lot size of two acres, However, it was discovered in time that the combination of development expenses and the cost of the oro. perty made such large lots economically unfeasible, One acre lots were then projected as the standard and average, When Section II was approved, most lots approximated one acre. Some acreage in Section I was replatted to pro- vide more lots in Section II, with two lots in Section I reduced to less than an acre, the City itself participating in-this procedure. Other necessary chances were made by the standard metes and bounds procedures: The integrity of Solar way has never been compromised by lot sizes of less than an acre on average. All changes made were open and above board, and everything is on public record. Upon the recent annexation by the City, the denial of building permits came as a surprising jolt, with considerable hard- ship to one owner on a tight building schedule. Other lot owners as well will shortly require building permits. This request and application is made to oro- tect lot owners who bought and built upon these lots in good faith, just as they were sold in good faith. The proposed rezoning and the variance apply to the seven lots which are slightly less than one acre in size. Four of the seven have completed horres. The other three lots have also been sold. There are no problems which would call for changes in the pre-annexation situation. City sewers are not available on Bonnie Brae and the approved septic systems are completely adequate for the large lots. City water and electricity have been in place from the beginning. Bar ditches and drainage are completely adequate on the west side of Bonnie Brae and on the new roads. However, we can not speak for the east side or Bonnie Brae, some of which was left outside the City limits. 7.ie blacktopaing of Bob Goodson way by the County will be carried out as soon as the weather is warm enough. Thank you for your consideration of this request. /r - William B, Rogers for Solar Way Addition ign<yllWdl ~ - W ..I I. Irli u I / it ! I , ~y I A~7 ' a~ 3A t . ! n,.M;,,. K• ,'11'/'-1 CCI I Ae 0~1~'Ld 171 ~ /"'i ! Ad. 1 +e 6S3,Sa i I EC ION I W e ~ lic r~1a 1 I ' fyfC 1 d53"t¢ 7 r •1. ~ ~ i ~ j " W4 _.K 00. .1 'n 9 a \ \ Thy I: .%4 F ~.o[G y ) 1\A•'.'\ • {I~• ~`b e[., , r~ 7R 4t.~ r," +/r '.'1 I. hY a \ A t v ~9 0 II 12 y 131/ 14 . , 11\\+J49A \x 1225 0161 AA $0' 7AC f 03A4 V ! N d! N % \ \ ' J alas 01 y. nl'd ' ~ I I v.••1 U7'•1 ~,lY tt. ~ ~ dr. tn.luH IN i< \ \ ,dN iH`e v t0 11 i ~ h,•1Nt.!•• n I v,•11.t- 5 II 17 . 104AC J15 1$ p ndl M: 41 1..1. N\!N^ 'T YVQ L. X821 k. /i / SECTION f, ; -wt g o4Nt Gid M . ' NIA: f J'r, 1 ~ • r 22 :`1•: X Ocr1Ur. SRI ..,.ui._✓` .';9r4 i~'•~ ~~---re~r~' ~ < .i.::aun+vorOdrl,n.n w i o' 411101 Mtl. Vif .tii!•MI .1 1allw[sGJa.[ ~C~~-'+✓ ~ , e. I'd 400, h•. I 29 '.CY ~ L.Pq •NMw4V lH., IiHr. 3,7M1~JpV~41 p• @~f a zor - ow 11 3 seta Ida HA,MMETT NASH, INC. )a!t 1 dtvlunl.e Cno jaau CONSUI.i?,VO ?"70u`IE~?S $ 9.pVEYrpS I IE I O V M. Rv1 f I ~ ~e ~f^Zoa f•..$,ff, Fff /'H1Ntl',~71j'n j 5Q 2i 242 Pa I~ J 1' II ! S [ h l / r tC i V 1•..11'3F Inn' t t .4 ~ j CU k Z • 6b - 4 eo4 J .5 z .261 -So- lob J' ri ~ + r -24 tit, fb r 1u rr o1 y r r, f~ Nnlt ~G.2 r c r of 13 <p~t n~~rr S A~ouv. 1 rI AG - - t ; r 1 7 { 1 t t! 1J i I 1 Tr '7l ~a1 r' i r. , n rnGu~., Ot,':~~R arr-Y FORMS CITY COUNCIL E; I { P & Z Minutes Page 7 Mr. Ellison stated 6 reply forms were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of subject property) 1 was returned in favor and zero in opposition, He explained the surrgending land e, and stated the sit is o- catod on the fringe of the limits of major urban ev- elopment as defined by the Denton Development Guide and staff recommends approval. No one spoke in favor or in opposition to request, Chair declared the public hearing closed, Mr, Sidor made a motion to recommend approval of Z-1662. Seconded by Ms. Cole and unanimously carried (6-0). E. Z-1664. This is the petition of William B. Rogers requesting a change in zoning from agricultural (A) to the single family (SF-16) classification on lots T 31 13, 14, 15, Solar Slay Addition, Section I, and lot 30, Solar Way Addition, Section II, Mr, Ellison stated 10 reply forms were mailed to prop- erty owners within 200 feet of subject property; 1 was returned in favor and 1 in opposition, He added these lots have already been subdivided without permission of the City. Mr, Bill Rogers stated ht) is a local resident and the developer of Solar Way. He stated in 1979 and 1980, he was partners with Bob Goodson and their main inter- est was a conclusive development with a sol,-a- energy conservation concept. He stated most of the lots in the development are 1 acre however, some are two-thirds of an acre. He stated at the suggestion of staff, he was requesting to replat all lots with metes and laoun<as changes, rezone to SF-16 the 7 lots that are less than one acre and to seek a variance for the 7 lots for s*_stus quo and retain the lots as they originally were. He added they are trying to adjust and bring up to standards since the area was annexed into the City. He stated the development has existed for your years and all lc_s have been sold. No one spoke in opposition. Mr. Ellison stated in 1980 when lot 3 was originally subdivided there was a shift in a boundary line, ther4- fore reducing a lot to less than one acre. He state- the specific issue at this time is a request for a change its zoning from agricultural (A) to the single family (SF-16) classification on lots 3, 13, 1.4, 15, and 30, Solar Way Addition, Sections I and II lots 14, 15 and 30 are already developed. Staff feels it would be inappropriate to act on a replat that in- volves lots less than an acre in size in an agricul- i~ P & Z Minutes Page 8 tural (A) zoning districts however, staff did feel that some action should be initiated on this matter for the benefit of the lot owner(s) in need of some decision or :indication of how things may progress while building permits are being withheld. Staff also feels that the need for rezoning, resubdivid- ing and consideration of variances would not have developed if the petitioner had not disregarded the formal process, however.-, single family (SF-16) zoning as currently proposed will probably have little negative impact on the existing character of the subdivision, and staff recommends approval of Z-1664, Chair declared public hearing closed. Mr. ,7uren made a motion to recommend approval of Z-1664, seconded by Mr. Escue and passed unanim- ously (6-0), F. Approval of the preliminary replat of lots 3, 41 and 5, block A, of the Lincoln Park Addition. Nis. Spivey stated 39 reply forms were mailed to prop- erty owners within 200 feet of subject property; 1 was returned in favor and l in opposition, and 23 courtesy notices were mailed to adjacent property owners, She stated this .38 acre tract is located at the northwest corner of Lincoln Place and Chambers Street. The property is zoned single family (SF-7) and single family development is anticipated. The intent of the replat is to creat two 75' lots where three 50' lots now xis+. Water, sewer, gas, elec- tric, telephone, street,:, and drainage facilities are in place and staff recommends approval. Mr, Billy Redmon stated his intent is to make l.arrer lots. No one spoke in opposition. Chair declared public hearing closed. Mr. Escue made a motion to recommend approval. of the preliminary replat of lots 3, 4, and 5, block A, of the Lincoln Park Addition. Seconded by Nis. Cole and unanimously carried (6-0). TV. Considerations A. Consider making a recommendation to the City Council concerning the proposed sign ordinance. On question from Mr. Claiborne, Mr. Watkins explain- the sign ordinance, set backs and restrictions. He requested that a historical sign not be restricted to this ordinance. He stated in a survey done in Z-1664MILLIAM B, ROGERS 1 NO, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AS SAME WAS ADOPTED AS AN APPENDIX TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, BY ORDINANCE 60. 69-1, AND AS SAID MAP APPLIES TO LOTS 3, 131 14 AND 15 OF SOLAR WAY ADDITION, SECTION I AND LOT 30 OF SOLAR WAY ADDITION, SECTION II, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREINI AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINSI SECTION I. The Zoning Classification and Use designation of the followi14 described property, to-wit, i All that certain lot, tract or parcel of land known as Lots 3, 13. 14 and 15 of Solar Way Addition, Section I and Lot 30 of Solar Way Addition, section ti in the City of Denton, Texas. I is hereby changed from Agricultural •A' District Classification Use to Single Family 'SF-16' District Classification and Use under the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, The Zoning Map of the City of Denton, Texas, adopted the 14:` day of January, 1969, as an Appendix to the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, under ordinance No. 69-1, be, and :Ge same is hereby amended to show such change in District Classifi- cation and Use, t SECTION I1. That the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby finds that such change is in accordance with a comprehensive plan for :.e purpose of promoting the general welfare of the City of Denton, Texas, and with reasonable consideration, among other things for :ne character of the district and for its peculiar suitability or parti- cular uses, and with a view to conserving the value of the buildin4s, protecting human lives, and encouraging the most appropriate uses :f land for the maximue. benefit to the City of Denton, Texas, and its citizens. SECTION III. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediate; after its passage and approval, the required public hearings hav;n heretofore been held by the Planning and Boning Commission and :;fie City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, after giving due nots:e thereof. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1951. j RICHARD 0, STEWART, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ATTEST; CHARLOTTE ALLEN, CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: C. J, TAYLOR, JR., CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS aye 1 A63T.4r:CY ;'1',;r.. ~sr. .50 8k': TISi1I o',t f I tot 2 15% I ` ,.........,7.1i.,. ~ ~ ~ • Jr, ' 9 iritlw.r ~ ti ' <'1t, 11 16 „ .f l/_~i it _........)nci....,- rn...,-,plt p 17 i;Y15Y.. ' x 19 i.J'd'7 1(I` / / r1 ~i 21 19 ! lfYl,+1 . tNC7l - ...•-yl.y„_.,~ 1' 20 41 1 y iu,wll _ $ , .r;:~'^ )000 ~ / 22 ,41 510 "014 it, 29 I _r '•r ~~IU loll 1 d.~ ~ / 'p t IIti141 ,ice • ~ £ 29 f/ p) • ' ~1'llilwll 2B 27 (I~/ / ~f y 23 i 25 1 ' • ' N; a 24 to lVEI ~1' n4 _l I -4 tV 1 ..1 ^ , .t r~~ ~LLI 1~~.~,-~._-.1 •v. Y.t1'~L_.~I-.~....~ I 11 CW1 G',l 1 1 ..f1r. , Ijyfl9rls~ - 1 vICIM1IY VlP :.il•}i ~ 1111 ~L li5.f-tr Ill 11=----• , al, ..Y tll.S•• 1:4 r •+.r rat--" \ f L • 1 , r1 • • 1 ~ l l I r • I r r Ir ~ I ' I i I • ~p r Y ~ JI 4 ti 1 ~ . J d• U i ~ I i 1' l I~ I, A• ~ ! _ 1, 1 1\I 1 O t I ; ~_r li ii 1 I 1, 1 1 1 I I 1 l s I 1> t - i I p - `r 3 y ' , NO, AN ORDINANCE SETTING A DATE, TIME AND PLACE ON THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY BY THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO PUBLISH NOTICE OF SUCH PUBLIC HEARING. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSI SECTION 1. On the day of , 1984, at 7100 o'clock P. H, in the CTty-Council Chambers o t e Municipal Building of the City of Denton, Texas, the City Council will hold a public hearing giving all interested persons the right to appear and be heard on the proposed annexation by the City of Denton, Texas of the property described oelow, On the day of , 1984, at 7100 o'clock P,M, in the City council Chambers of t e Municipal Building of the City of Denton, Texas, the City Council will hold a public hearing giving all interested persons the right to appear and be heard on the proposed annexation by the City of Denton, Texas of the following described property, to-wits All that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situat,%d in the County of Denton, State of Texas, being part of the M,E.9, $ P,R.R. Company Survey, Abstract No, 950 and the 0, Walker Survey, Abstract No, 1330 and more particularly described as follorreI BEGINNING at a point 250 feet northeast of and parallel to the center line of Interstate Highway 35-E, said point being the intersection of the northeast line of the tract described In ordinance No, 65.43 Tract iI with the southeast corner of the tract described in ordinance No. 78-38 Tract it THENCE north 16036103' east (by ordinance north 16040' east) along the present city limits as established by Ordinance No, 78-38, Tract I, a distance of 464.19 feet to a point for a eornert THENCE south 37156151" east a distance of 739,26 feet to a point fur a corners THENCE north 52403109' east a distance of 360,02 feet to a point for a corner in the southwest right of way line of the M.K.T. Railroad, said point also being the beginning of a curve to the right with a central angle of 70281280, radius of 2914,79 feet and a chord of south 34002'02' east 379.98 feett i THENCE soutneauterly along said railroad right of way in arc distance of 390,24 feet to a point! THENCE south 37046`16' east continuing along said railroad right of way a distance of 351,35 feet to a point for a corner in an i east and west road known as Page Roadt THENCE north 85643116" west in said Page Road, a distance of 792.97 feet to a point for a corner on said present city limits, as established by ordinance No, 65-43 Tract II! THENCE north 48027157" west along said present city limits a distance of 678,94 feet to the place of ueginning and containing 11,2 acres of land, more or less. A-6/BUTTON/PAGE ONE I 1 I 1 ..1 E i SECTION II. The Mayor of the City of Denton, Texas, is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of such Public hearing to be published once in a newspaper having general circulation in the City and in the above described territory not more than forty days nor less than twenty days prior to the date of such public hearing, all in accordance with the Municipal Annexation Act (Article 970x, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes). SECTION III. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately following its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1984. RICHARD 0. STEWART, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, -TEXAS ATTEST; CHARLOTTE ALLEN, CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: C. J. TAYLOR, JR., CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS BY: 1 1 t , i 1 i J1 i A-6/BUTTON/PAGE ONE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON CONTEMPLATED ANNEXATION NOTICE IS HERESY GIVEN TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS THAT1 i The City of Denton, TeXds, proposes to institute annexation t proceedings to alter the boundary limits of said City to add the following described territory to the corporate limits of the city of Denton, to-wits All that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in the County of Denton, State of Texas, being part of the M.E.P. S P,R,R. Company Survey, Abstract No, 950 and the a, Walker Survey, Abstract No, 1330 and more particularly described as followal BEGINNING at a point 250 feet northeast of and parallel to the center line of Interstate Highway 35-E, said point being the intersection of the northeast line of the tract described in Ordinanoe No, 65-43 Tract It with the southeast corner of the tract described in Ordinance No, 78-38 Tract 11 THENCE north 16036103' east (by ordinance north 16040' east) along the present city limits as established by Ordinance No. 78-38, Tract 11 a distance of 464.19 feet to a point for a corners THENCE south 37056'51' east a distance of 739.26 feet to a point for a corners THENCE north 52403109' east a distance of 360.02 feet to a point for a corner In the southwest right of way line of the M.K.T. Railroad, said point also being the beginning of a curve to the right with a central angle of 70281280, radius of 2914.79 feet and a chord oi' south 34002102' east 379.98 feet) THENCE southeasterly along said railroad right of way an arc distance of 390,24 feet to a points THENCE south 37046'16" east continuing along said railroad right of way a distance of 351,35 feet to a point for a corner in an east and west road known as Page Road1 THENCE north 85043116" west in said Page Roao, a distance of 792.97 feet to a point for a corner on said present city limits, as established by Ordinance No, 65-43 Tract III THENCE north 48027'57' west along said present city limits a distance of 678.94 feet to the place of beginning and containing 11,2 acres of land, more or less. A Public Hearing will be held by and before the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, on the day of 1984, at 7;00 o'clock P. M. in the City Council Chambers 3T the' Municipal Building of the City of Denton, Texas, for all persons interested in the above proposed annexation. At said time and place all such persons shall have the right to appear and be heard. Of all said matters and things, all persons interested in the things and matters herein mentioned, will take notice. A Public Hearing will be held by and before the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, on the day of 1984, at 7:00 o'clock P. M. in the City council Cham urs of The Municipal Building of the City of Denton, Texas, for all persons interested in the above proposed annexation, At said time and A-6/NOTICE/PAGE ONE i place all such persons shall have the right to appear and be heard. Of all said matters and things, all persons interested in the things and matters herein mentioned, will take notice, 1 RICHARD . STE RT, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ATTESTi CHARLOTTE ALLEN, CITY SECRETARY i 1 i i A-6/NOTICE/PAGE TWO A-6 ANNEXATION SCHEDULE June I 1, 1984 Submit agenda items ,}une 1', 1~~4 St:hr,~ t agen~'.a tac}:~up ~,lt;»e 19, 184 City Council sets date, time, and place for pubiiC hearing Submit agenda items and June 4 bac}:-up Iune 0> 1c,84 tice to 1jenton fiecord Chronicle Ji;r,c 22, 14E'•41 1'ubliS11 notice n July 3, 1984 C..ity Cot:nci] 1)olds a pudic hearing 1 tiCe to Denton Recorc Chronicle July 64 pub) ish notice July 1984 Submit agenda items July 10, , 1984 Submit agenda back-up nJuly 17 , 1984 City CoUtlCil holds a public hearing July 30, 1984 Subin it agenda items j uly 31, 1984 Submit agenda back-up ,"(August 7, 1984 City council institutes (annexation proceedings August 984 Ordinance to Denton Record .hronicle nl'.c C! 1984 Ub11S}1 OTG1na11Ce S,:tmi t rn i[, i tr}icy Sub;r,it ;secrr,a , rc}: u 5c•~ t. 11. 1°C4 ' t. J' lc 4 Cite actlOn aCti~n ' .r: . \ ......:..u u. ilf4 i,W6.4•...: Mme. u. ...\i.J.. J.♦ I NO, f1~ 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS. AS SAME WAS ADOPTED AS AN APPENDIX TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THI CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, BY ORDINANCE NO, 69-1, AND AS SAID MA2 APPLIES TO APPROXIMATELY 6.74 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF THE ALEXAND3:t HILL SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO, 623, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS) AND MOR.I PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREINI AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. E THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1, j The Zoning Classification and Use designation of the fol uwu:; described property, to-wits i All that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the Aluxan e: Hill Suevey, Abstract No, 623, City and County of Denton, Texas, being all of a First and Third Tracts described in a deed from Mt3. Ben L. Smith to Ben L, Smith, Jr„ et al on December 4, 1) " recorded in Volume 6120 Page 107, Deed Records and all of a Firs: and Second trace: described in a deed from Fannie 8, Overall to gar. L, Smith on June 24, 1940 recorded in Volume 284, Page 490, DeaS Records and part of 4 acres in 2 tracts described in a deed from r. T. C. Potter to G. W. Smith on May 28, 1906, recorded in volume ?3, Page 340, Deed Records and part of a tract described in a deed fr:n R. L. Selby, Jr., to Ben L, Smith on January 15, 1943, recorded -n Volume 300, Page 1, Deed Records of Denton county and being ma:,, fully described as follows: BEGINNING at the southwest corner of the Third Tract described Volume 612, Page 107, Deed Records of Denton County in Clevelsc,e Street) THENCE north 1018105' west in Cl.sveland Street a distance of 124.J feet to an iron pin at the northwest corner of said Third Tracts THENCE south 89449'33' east along and near a fence a distance of 206.0 feet to an iron pin on the west boundary line of the F is st Tract from Fannie B. Overall to Ben L, Smith near a fence corner; THENCE north 1018'05' west with a fence a distance of 130,0 feet to an iron pin and fence corner at the northwest corner of said Fannie B. Overall Second Tractl THENCE south 89049133" east with the north boundary line of 33:3 Second Tract along and near a fence a distance of 100.0 feet tc :in iron pin at the southwest corner. of said First Tract from Mrs. ?fn L, Smitn to Ben L. Smith, Jr„ et. al; j THENCE north 1018105' west a distance of iti0,0 feet to an iron ;;n at the northwest corner of said last mentioned First Tract in Collins Street) 1 THENCE south 89049'33' east in Collins Street a distance of !,:i.0 feet to an Iron pin at the northeast corner of said First Tract sad northwest corner of said tract from R. L. Selby, Jr . to Ben L. $,-I, in: THENCE south 62016'22' eant a distance of 52.18 feet to a steel ;.n at tine west southwest corner of a tract described in a deed from 1s en L. Smith to the City of Denton on December 23, 19751 Z-1649/CHRISTOPHER BANCROFT/PAGE 1 THENCE south 76025'15• east with the south boundary line of the City of Denton tract a distance of 98.15 feet to a steel pin) THENCE south 0°34'54' west with the .rest bondary line of said Cit.,- of Denton tract a distance of 202.70 feet to an iron pin) THENCE south 21035110' west wtth the west line of a City of Dento:t j tract a distance of 157.85 feet to an iron pint j THENCE south 17619109' weal with the west Tina of Ftid City trace a distance of 332.74 feet to an iron pin at the beginning of a curia on the west right of way of Carroll Boulevards THENCE southerly with said right of way and curve to the rrgn: having a central angle of 01157119' a chord bearing and distance :f south 23°53124' west 149.49 feet, a radius of 8965.90 feet and is arc length of 149.43 feet to a steel pin of the south line of said 4 acre tracts THENCE north 84053120' west with the south line of said tract i distance of 127.13 feet to an iron pin and corner tree of :ee southwest cocr,er of said 4 acres from w. T. C. Potter to G, W. Smi:z; TNi:NCE north 01117113' east with the west boundary line of said tract along anti near a fence a distance of 424,84 feet to an iron pin and fence eornnr or, the south boundary line of said aforementioned Thi:6 Tract from Mrs, Ben L, Smith to Ben L. Smith, Jr., et alt THENCE north 89049133" west along and near a fence a distance :f 204.45 feet to the point of beginning and containing 5,374 acres land. All that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the Alexancar Hill Survey, Abstract No. 623, City and County of Denton, Texas, being all of a certain second Tract described in a deed from x:s. Ben L. Smith, Jr., et al on the 4th day of December, 1970, recor:e9 in Volume 6121 Page 1070 Deed Records of said county, and being n,: re fully described as follows: BEGINNING at the northwest corner of said Second Tract at :t.e intersection of a point in Cleveland Street with a point near :^.e middle of Collins Streets THENCE south 89049133" east in Collins Street a distance of lvi.,) feet to an iron pint j THENCE south 1018105' east a distance of 160.0 feet to an iron 1n on the north boundary line of a tract described in a deed from w. a. Peacock to J, C. Ferrell recorded in Volume 3401 Page 632, red Records of Denton Countyi THENCE north 89°49'33' most with a fence a distance of 108.0 fee: to an iron pin near the east boundary line of Cleveland Street) THENCE north 1018'05' west in Cleveland Street a distance of li:.il feet to the point of beginning and containing 0.3966 acres of lan., All that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the Alex37-er Hill Survey, Abstract 623, Denton County, Texas, oeing all a certain tract deeded by W. ,`1, peacock to J. C, Ferrell on the 4th aay of November, 1947, recorded in volume 340, page 632, :eed Records of said county and all jr a certain tract deeded by xrs, Ester Sams to James Clyde Ferrell on the 18th day of December, 1?45, Z-1649/CHRISTOPHER BANCROFT/PAGE 2 _ I L I I as reoordod in Volume 321, Page 104 Deed Records of said County and being more fully described as followso BEGINNING at the northwest corner of said Peacock to Ferrell Trdoti THENCE south 89°49133" west along the north boundary line of said Peacock to Ferrell Tract a distance of 208.0 feet (called 207.5 feet) to as iron pint THENCE south 010189'05' east a distance of 130.0 feet to an iron pin, same being the southeast corner of said Sams to Ferrell Tract; THENCE north 89049133' east a distance of 206.0 feet (called 107.5 feet} to an iron pin in the east line of Cleveland Streets THENCE north 01018105' west a distance of 130.0 feet to the point of beginning and containing 0.6207 acres. All that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the A. Hill Survey, Abstract 6230 City of 04ntin, Texas, Denton county, Texas, being all of a tract deeded by Walter M, Jost to Philip J. Kay, et at on the let day of August, 1980, recorded in Volume 1033, Pale 759, Deed Records of said County and being more fully described as follows BEGINNIHO at the northwest corner of said Kay Tract at an Iron pin; 4,HENCE south 89049133' east a distance of 203.0 feet to an iron pins THENCE south 00017113' west a distance of 75.0 feet to an iron pine THENCE north 89449133' west a distance of 203.0 feet to an iron pins THENCE north 00017113' east near the east boundary line of Cleveland Street a distance of 75.0 t;eet to the point of beginning and containing 0.3495 acres of land. All that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the A. sll SurVey, Abstract 623, City of Denton, TeXas, Denton County, Texas, being all of a tract deeded by Kenneth L. Mitchell, et ux to Rryce L. Ward on the 22nd day of October, 1961, recorded in Volume 4'5, page 431, Used Records of said County and and being more _lly described as follows) BEGINNING at the northwest corner of said Ward Tract at an iron c:nr THENCE south 89049133' east a distance of 203.0 feet to an iron ;;nt THENCE south 00017113' east a distance of 75,0 feet to an iron pin; THENCE north 89049133' west a distance of 203.0 feet to an iron p::,; THENCE north 00017113' west near the east boundary line of Cleveland Street a distance of 75.0 Ceet to the point of beginning and containing 0.3495 acres of land. All that certain tract or darcel of land situated in the A, :-i ill Survey, Abstract 623, City of Denton, 'texas, Denton county, :ex3s, being all of a tract deeded by John Myers to Cecil F. Martin on the 3rd day of January, 1972, recorded in Volume 637, Page 133, :eed Records of said County and being more fully described as follows; BEGINNING at the northwest corner of said Martin Tract at an iron pint Z-1649/CHRISTOPHER BANCROFT/PAGE 3 . '.tibL'r'n nv; i _ _ .u au.i.........V u,. e. r. ~ ire +rr4.~r.~0.J JJN~A9a afL Y`Yl. I THENCE south 89049133' east a distance of 208.89 feet to an iron pin; THENCE south 00°17'134 west a distance of 205,39 feet to An iron pine THENCE north 89049133' west a distance of 208.69 feet to an iron piir THENCE north 00011113' east a distance of 205.39 feet to the point of beginning and containing 0,9849 acres of land. ) All that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the A. Hi.l Survey, Abstract 623, City of Denton, Texas, Denton County, texas, oeing all of a tract deeded by Willie Oct to W. C. Orr, at al on :he 23rd day of November, 1951, reeurded in Volume 375, Page 127, Deed Records of said County and and being more fully described as follo-ra; BEGINNING at the northwest corner of said Orr Tract at an iron pin in Collins Street) THENCE south 89049133' east with the north boundary line of said Orr Tract in Collins Street a distance of 100.0 feet to an Iron pine THENCE south 011181051 east a distance of 160,U feet to an iron qtn THENCE north 89049133' west a distance of 100.00 feet to an iron pin; THENCE north 01018105` west a distance of 160.0 feet to the point of beginning and containing 0,3673 acre of land. All that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the A. Hill Survey, Abstract 623, City of Denton, Texas, Denton County, Texas, being all of a tract deeded by J, L. Pitt to Jim Talley on the l.th day of February, 1955, recorded in Volume 407, Page 261, Deed Records of said County and being more fully described as follows; BEGINNING at the northwest corner of said Talley Tract at an iron pin; THENCE south 89049133' east a distance of 203.0 feet to an iron pin; THENCE south 00°171134 west a distance of 75.0 feet to an iron pin; THENCE north 89049133' west a distance of 103,00 feet to an iron pins THENCE north 0001?'13' east near the east boundary line of C19veland Street a distance of 75.0 feat to the point of beginning %nd containing 0.3495 acre of land, is hereby changed from Single Family "SF-7" District Classification use to Planned Development "PD" District Classification and Use as (1) residential land use on 4,00 acres at 10,5 units per acres (2' a single story 2,400 square toot retail situ (3) a two story 6,300 square foot restaurant and (4) maximum of two (2) office sites snot I exceeding 20,000 square feet eacn and not exceeding three ,31 stories, under the comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas with the following conditions and specifications; 1. Both sides of Collins Street from Fort North Drive to the i intersection of Collins and Cleveland Street shall be improved oy + the developer. Half of Cleveland Street across the entire frontage I of the subyect tract shall be Improved per normal City of Denton perimeter street requirements, Street improvements may occur in phases or as development occurs, Z-1649/CHRISTOPHER BANCROFT/PAGE 4 I i 2. IF. a minimum 25 percent of total development is not completed in five (5) years, the parcel shall be constdered for backzoning to its previous SF-7 classification, i The Zoning Map of the City of Denton, Texas, adopted the 14th day of January, 1969, is An Appendix to the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, under Ordinance No. 69-1, be, and .,e same la hereby amended to show such change in District Classification and Use subject to the above conditions, specifications and site plan, j SECT;ON 11. That the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby finds that such change is in accordance with a comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the general welfare of the city 01 Denton, Texas, and with reasonable consideration, among other things for the character of the district and for its peculiar suitability or particular uses, and with a view to conserving the value of the I buildings, protecting human livea, and encouraging the most i appropriate uses of land for the maximum benefit to the City of Denton, Taxas, and its citizens, SECTION 111, That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately after Its passage and approval, the required public hearings having heretofore been held by the Planning and zoning Commission and the City Council of the City of Denton, Taxas, after giving due notice thereof, PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of _ , 1984. RICHARD 0, STEWART, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ATTEST: CHARLOTTE ALLEN, CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: C, J. TAYLOR, JR., CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS t BY: i i 4-1649/CHRISTOPHER BANCROFT/PAGE 5 r 11 ~ 1 • n i ~ I ~KV NNE OR I r . I f J ~ i i ~ v Ir I ` KII `III~IIIIIIIIl1li O ( c Illillllilllilil Mill 1! III'fllllllllllll~l II1 I111f \ t~ I R r"' U t, ~ ~ 0 1 1 ' ! ~ ~~=~'11 I~l~l~7i4111 Illill I Illli~lllllll, ~r ~ ~ ~ I~~ !'!~I ~Illllil9~~llllll!il!IIQ~ F ~ 1 rr • 1, ~ r ~ ..=p_ 1 4 rL7. ~ ~C ' I ~':~J ~~'Xslrsv = c7 Y I 6 II Iri { II ~ ~ I Z tf~ ~ ~I 9 i Hj~::II I , CITY OF DPNTON MEMORANDUM DATE OF MEETING; June 19, 1984 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM (USE EXACT WORDING AS ITEM IS TO BE PLACED ON AGENDA) Prohibited Parking on the I'sast side of Mesa Drive, SUMMARY; No parking ordinance for the east aide of Mesa Drive from U.S'. 30 to the end of pavement FISCAL SUMMARY; No packing is recommended from liwy 380 to the 'end of pavement on the Gast side of Mesa Drive ACTION REQUIRED; Pass an ordinance ALTERNATIVES: Not to pass an ordinttnce, STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: That an ordinance be passed to prohibit parking on the Gast side of Mesa Drive from U,S, 380 to the end of the pavement, EXHIBITS: 'I'ra f:F.Cr. "aicLy Support Cotrinti.s:.ion Jltno G, 190 3 Pogo G recommended that Mr. Luman18 r.o(J(.to5t be dolt.t.od beGaL11,1e1 J. t. is stttEf's opinion thaL par:}sing prohibition is not warranted. Mr. i.,uman was not present: to present tiny discussion. Virginia C3allian made a motion that parking on Walnut Street remain as is, Rocky Kane seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Item 118: Col ssideration of Parki q zelated problems on ~JUa Drive Dr. P, Moynngh and Dr. Mike Corpany appearod before the Commission to r.ecluest the east side of Mesa Drive be changed to prohibit parking. The request is wide because of the growth in the aroa and the hazard of getting onto and off of Mesa Drive. Koor.o:h Olyat presented staff's report and rec:omme'rided parking be p.ro- hib.iLod from the oast side of Mesa. Roc);y Kr:rnc rnadL a motion that pr.olr.ibl.i:cd ptrrl:incl be, made at the east side of Mesa Drava. Doris Chipman seconded; motion carried unanimously. Item 09: Con-ddorat.ion of llancl9.eu)pe Parl~ing Ordinance, Koorosh Ol.yal. requested that. L.he City of Denton Ordinance on Hand.i- capped parking be re-written Lo exclude diagram kind male Ordinance: conform w.it:h '!'exas Manual. on Uniform Traffic ConL.ro.l Devices. When t}re Ordinance is re-written Koorosh reque;:l:s t:htrt. it be 1, 1 err di r: ctly to the C.i Ly Council for approval. Once the Or.din~ince: is changed 14r. John Shr:ac3c;r's rec;uesL. to relocate the llandi.calrlwd parkincr on S. Elm, ca n by i n corpora a l'.ed. t•ir.. Iothn stirodcr of.' shr:itder I'har.macy appc~ored b^:foi r Ow Commi`Sf-011 to rcquo-'t (:lilt Lhe tiand:i.cappod parking by Lor•C bc, Ir(ovcd do,::n to the ilrc(r locFlLed ill fronk of the Yin(! lu'L.s: 'l'lretrl;rca. NJr. Shr'lI-, c:r'r; Le f:: 0;1 fr r Hier r(3CIlU'.3t. iF that wheal.(" (Aw 11t1c1ilicahl)(.?d l),.rr:l;.i.rrcl slxr::c is ND, AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE PARKING OF VEHICLES ON THE EAST SIDE Cf MESA DRIVE FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH U, S, HIGHWAY 380 TO END ':I' PAVEMENTS PROVIDING A SEVERASILITY CLAUSE) PROVIDING A PENALTY NC,: TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARSI AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I, When signs are erected giving notice thereof, no person shat; park a vehicle at any time upon the following street in the City cf Denton to-wits The east side of Mesa Drive from its intersection with U, 6. Highway 380 to the end of pavement, SECTION II, The provisions of Section I prohibiting the parking of vehiclts shall apply at all times to the street and part of streets deaignatto therein except when it is necessary to stop a vehicle to avoid cc,t- flict with other traffic or in compliance with the direction of a police officer or official traffic control device, SECTION III, Any person adjudged guilty of parking a vehicle in violation :f this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine not to exceed Two Hundred Dollars ($200,J0), SECTION IV, That if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clauat, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to as,y person or circumstance is held invalid by any court of competed jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of :.,.e remaining portiona of this ordinance, and the City Council of :te city of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have enacted s,:;h remaining portions despite any such invalidity, SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen {14) da.s from the date of its passage, and the city Secretary is hera:y directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be publisned twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official newspaper of :t.e City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the _ day of 1984, RICHARD 0, STEWART, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ATTEST: CHARLOTTE ALLEN, CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: C. J. TAYLOR, JR., CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS BY: CITY OF DENTON MEMORANDUM TO; Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM; Charlotte Allen, City Secretary DATE, June 14, 1984 SUBJEC : Agenda Item #7 This zoning petition was tabled by the Council on November 15, 1983 to be brought back when the now Mobile Home Ordinance vA s approved. The public hearings have already been held, I am including the back-up which was provided at the November meeting. Charlotte Allen ca 138507 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Recommendation to the City Council To: City Council Case No. 5-174 Meeting Date: November 15, 1983 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Champion Home Communities, Inc. 5573 E. North Street Dryden, Michigan 48428 Status of Applicant; Owner and prospective developer Requested Action: Specific Use Permit to operate a mobile home park in an agricultural (A) zoning district Purpose: Development of a 652 unit mobile home rental park Location and Size: 104.28 acres located adjacent and north of F.M. 426 (E. McKinney) and adjacent and south of Mills Road (Property is presently in the extra j territorial jurisdiction Existing Land Use: Vacant Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single family, vacant, agricultural; E.W.J. South - E. McKinney, agricultural; E.T.J. East - Brown Crest Arabian Farm, single family, mobile home park, agricultural; E.T.J. West - Single family, agricultural, vacant; Agricultural Denton Development Guide: Area is designated as low intensity. S-1,74) age 2 SPECIAL INFORMATION Public Utilities. City of Denton electrical service can be provided to this site, but the owner has the option of choosing Texas Power & Light services. The petition- ers indicated that City of Denton electrical service will be provided. Extension of city water and sewer service was approved for the site in June, 1983, The developer must extend a minimum 8" off-site water line (staff is recommending city participation on a 12 line) for a distance of appproximately 4,560 feet, The line must be extended at the developer's expense (with exception of oversizing cost). Sewer is available for extension to the site and should be routed overland to the southwest directly to a 33" outfall line, A gas main would have to be extended from Mayhill Road for gas service. Telephone service is available. Drainage; Detailed plans for required drainage improvements must be submitted for approval during the final platting stage. Several persons appearing in opposition to this request cited drainage as a concern during Planning and Zoning Commission action on November 9, 1983, The engineering department has reviewed a preliminary drainage study and feels that a proposed retention and detention system will adequately handle runoff generated by the proposed development. Transportation., F.M. 426 (E. McKinney) is part of the state highway system, thus, no perimeter street improvements are required. Mills Road is not being 1 annexed, therefore, no improvements are required for it either. Ingress- egress is proposed from both Mills Road and E. McKinney. Internal streets must be a minimum 30 feet in width and must be built to standards prescribed in the City of Denton ! Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer I Ordinance. Internal streets will be privately maintained and are not dedicated or accepted for use by the public. Now (S-174) Page 3 SPECIAL INFORMATION - continued The City of Denton Transportation Engineer advised the Planning and Zoning Commission that the carrying capacity of F.M. 426 0,11 be exceeded if this development occurs based on i existing conditions. However, two things to keep in mind with respect to traffic are; (1) The analysis of traffic should take into account both the existing two lane goad and ultimate plans for F.M. 426 which shows a four (4) lane state highway; and (2) Regardless of the tyyppe of development, F.M. 426 will be impacted by anticipated future uses. Widening and improvements to F.M. 426 will not occur until it is justified by traffic generation. Physical Characteristics; Rolling terrain that slopes upward towards the west and north. Vegeta- tion consists of grass and trees. BACKGROUND Beginning in Spring, 1983 and prior to official contact with the City of Denton, staff began hearingg rumors that the proposed 104 acre mobile home community was to be built at the site in question. On May 5, 1983, a local attorney representing Cha ion Home Communities, Inc. submitted a letter to the Water and~ewer Division of the City of Denton Utilities Department requesting permission to extend and tie onto Denton's public water and sewer system. At some point afterwards, a land planner and engineer, representing Champion Home Communities, and Mr. Phil Phillips met with members of the Planning and Community Development and Public Works Departments to discuss development requirements and assorted city procedures. Initially, Champion's representatives informed staff that approximately 800 units were proposed and plans for streets and other minor facilities and amenities would not meet City of Denton standards. Staff advised the developers of annexation policies, zoning requirements and platting requirements and expressed concerns about plans for density and streets, particularly. . . ~S • 1.74) age 4 BACKGROUND - continued Champion Home Communities then expressed a desire to compromise with the City of Denton in satisfying certain requirements if annexation occurred; however, it appeared during the early discussion stages that density and streets were to become a major point of disa reement. Following subsequent meetings during the Summer, fni.tiation of annexation proceedings and submission of a preliminary plat, Champion Home Communities agreed to comply with all applicable City of Denton requirements and they proposed number of units was reduced from approximately 800 to 652, The Public Utilities Board recommended approval of Champion's request for city water and sewer service at its meet-ing of May 25, 1983. The City Council subsequently approved the request for utility service on June 7, 1983. Annexation action began on this tract and surrounding property on August 16, 14,83; final action is scheduled for November. 15, 1983. A preliminary plat of the proposed mobile home park was approved 'oy the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council on October 12 and October 180 1983, respectively. A final plat and accompanying engineer- ing plans for utilities, drainage and other required public facilities have not been submitted for review and approval. In the past few weeks, Champion representatives have expressed considerable concern over the prospect of investing considerable time and dollars in an attempt to meet city re uirements, yet once annexed, having their request for a specific use permit denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission and/or City Council. The abutting landowner to the east has been on record as being strongly opposed to the proposed development since prior to approval of the request for city utility service. Mobile home parks in general have received a great deal of media attention recently and negative sentiments towards mobile homes have been expressed throughout the annexation process. As a reaction to the fear of being denied zoning, Champion representatives recent ly advised staff that they would begin construction of the mobile home park without final plat approval and prior to final annexation and zoning action with the obvious hope that if denied zoning, the courts will decide that the development may continue. At this time construction at the site is limited to the cutting and grading of streets. Staff has consulted the legal department on this matter in an attempt to determine if the City of Denton can take any actions to prevent construction of the mobile home park before final plat approval is ranted. No firm answers have been provided. This case perfectly ! dramatizes the difficulty of controlling development in extra territorial jurisdiction areas. i t (S-174) Page 5 ANALYSIS Evaluation of mobile home park requests has become a difficult j task largely because most are proposed in extra territorial jurisdiction areas. Also, no specific policies have been f adopted by the City of Denton to cover this type of develop- ment. Mobile home parks are similar to multi-family develop- ments in some ways but drastically different in others. For example, though rental in orientation and more dense than traditional single family housingg application of the multi- family 500 unit concentration policy to mobile home parks is probably not appropriate, Multi-family development typically concentrates 15-30 units or more per acre of land, whereas, though in excess of 500 total units, the Champion proposal is located on 104 acres which results in an average density of approximately 6.2 units per acre. Potential population increase and concentration is considerable, however, previously refer- enced 6.2 unit per acre density level in this proposal is con- sidered respectable, Streets in multi.-family developments and mobile home parks are both privately maintained, but construc- tion standards for mobile home parks are clearly outlined and substantial as opposed to a general hard surface requirement for multi.-family. In both the typical mobile home park and apart- ment complex the resident does not own the land, but the majority of mobile home park dwellers own their individual living units. Again, the preceding examples are intended to illustrate the fact that mobile/manufactured housing is a viable force that is significantly impacting the City of Denton and the housing market as a whole, yet there is little available for use as a specific evaluation tool. Champion Home Communities, Inc. has reduced the number of units in thins request from 800 to 652 and has complied with a staff recommendation that average density not exceed 6-7 units per acre. Research of national trends in various planning related ournals has revealed that the 6-7 unit per acre density level s considered an acceptable model or guideline for mobile home communities. The petitioners have also modified an earlier plan that proposed streets and turnarounds that were not in compliance with City of Denton standards. Essentially, the proposed mobile home park will comply with applicable City of Denton development codes and standards. Compliance with city standards is a major factor associated with this request. Provisions for, this type of affordable and alternative housing is also considered positive, however, there is a growing concern over the fact that the overwhelming majority of mobile home parks and low to moderate income housing in general is being concentrated in the ea.%-ern quadrant of the city. The City of Denton has approved requests for alternative forms of housing in several recent actions and more is needed; however, control of developments in the extra territorial jurisdiction invariably places decision makers in a reactive rather than proactive situation. (5-174) Page 6 CONCLUSION Champion Home Communities has addressed major technical W--e design concerns Final plans for streets drainage uO.lities and other public facilities cannot be evaiuated until the final platting stage, The idea to begin construction before annexation is Champion's reaction to an admittedly legitimate fear of investing time in u►eetl.ng city requirements and dollars in land costs and plan preparation. Staff is concerned about ~ I protection of existing and surrounding properties; but as stated many times severe legal deficiencies exist in the area of land use controi in the extra territorial jurisdiction area. I i PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HEARING The Planning and Zoning Commission held an extensive public hearing for this request at its meeting of November 9, 1983 (durati.on was approximately three hours for this item alone). Approximately 35-40 residents in the area appeared in opposi- tion. The vast majority of those present intimated biases against mobile/manufactured housing and parks in general. Several people including a property owner to the north across Mills Road cited concerns about traffic and drainage. Police protection, fire protection and impact on the school district were additional issues that generated considerable discussion and questions. The school district owns approximately 77 acres adjacent to this site to the west and they have requested in enclosed correspondence that traffic and other issues be reviewed with the potential high school in mind. Only those property owners within 200 feet and in the city limits are required to be notified by direct mail and provided with a reply form. Outside of Champion the only other property owners meeting the above conditions are Denton Independent School District and Mr. Felix Callahan. Mx. Callahan also appeared in opposition to the requests I If owners of 20 percent or more of the property within the required 200 feet area file written protest to the request, the favorable vote of 3/4 of all members of the City Council is required to approve the petition. Staff will advise the City Council of the 3/4 vote implications at the November 15, 1983 public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commmission minutes will also be provided at the meeting. (S-174) Page 7 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HEARING - continued Finally, Mr. W. Lamont Brown owns property adjacent and east of the proposed mobile home site. He has been a visible, and 1 considering his personal connection, an objective opponent of the development since the inception of any official action. Mr. Brown cited concerns about traffic impact of the development on his family's lifestyle and business and several development guide policies with varying, but generally not acceptable application to this request. Mr. Brown's property will not be annexed, thus, he is not eligible for official reply in terms of the 20 percent rule. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of 5-174 with the following conditions by a vote of 4-2: 1) Development shall conform with approved site plan and all Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Ordinance requirements of the City of Denton. 2) Final City of Denton lot of record approval must be granted before issuance of building permits. 3) Ad acent landowners should have protection of adequate eight (A foot wood/masonry screening along Bast-west property line with ratio of wood-masonry content to be determined by staff. f ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve petition with conditions. 2. Approve petition without conditions. 3. Approve petition with additional conditions. 4. Deny petition. I ATTACHMENTS 1. Aerial 2. Site plan 3, Reply form total 4. Property owner list 5. Correspondence from Denton Independent School District r. ~ 1` • 1.. • '1 .'I`. 1,. ,Y,GN +YYYf. Y~ . ~ • V41t~'1 `<'Y n x.: ~ . ~ rt i 1, ~ e~ i ~ ~t ~ y„ ~ ; , ♦1 ~~Mr~ 1' 1 , : 1 , ~r,... 1 ~ 1 ~ 't r A, , 1'.t, M, A ~y .r K~ . .',~1~►~J~{~1~1'r,~1h~."~ ~,Ic~. 1~' ~I 1 M ' t JR. ~`v " ..q ~+.1 ',{t! ♦ ~ 1 • r~'~'P tee.' C.••~° V . ~J.. " i, ~ v~,, pit t ` 1 ,~1 ~~W~ 1 1~ I 1 r I I' 40 A w '"'Z''ll" A k. 1 tvm~l 1. IL. . 1 l rt .r. ,lyl~ r~!,~ ~'.`VI YF ~ ` h ~y ~1• k ~ i4 I ~ ~ i' + ~~\~~~t ♦1 Vwwh'"l~' /5 I ~ Hp``'y5`R~~,7 i y1r1' ~ 1.~,' , V r u Y , M ' , h ~1 ~ l ,l' Y YI 1/ R I11 n I ~'11 h'~~ • h 1 I !T I , ~.~I•', li, •i 11t 1 A. tl~ t~^ r 1 ~y,~" ♦ Y♦ 10 ~ 1 Y 1, ,I k1 1 * FYI 1+ ~ :r fk 04 4 4, -l • /1 R/ ~ I N I 1 1Y. ~ ~1M L ~t 1, I ,'.a I ~','tkly. ! •~)1 Al.r(',1,~ 1' . , hrt! 1 r' 4~'1~~J,t rig, h S w 4 . N ~ S' nu 4, , It'll It, • ' , ~ X11.' w, t" ~:~F , .i t ~4 ~ ~ w v 1~^ t Lt"n't I,F1~~1 I its f 1 ~ ~ R y~IF \ tt 1 " y i 1 s s j ` ~ t , ' , y ,,~yt, ,lip ~ t ~ ~;x',<'j . lit t slc'~-=~a "Ik1t >1Z,. t i ! i a L iv it! t t i t \ II''1 a l l lit ' l l E 'S ~ s e ~t r li 1 t t t,. ijt t tilt 1 ~ } ! , C ~E • pt ~ a ~ t t 1 t I.~ ~x ~'t~, ti x~e~tlt l R I, ' I ~ ; t t ! /'~'~r z i t 11 t 1il,i 1 1 a 1 t t/i\t , 1 ' 4 I 2 i i ! i t t 1 1 3 1 - -26 PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FORMS CITY COUNCIL S-174 IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION UNDEIDEr. None Received None Received 4d No A e~ S iti'a J n I ' ! T 1 T ! t 21 i Denton independent c5chool District ' 0/1101 01 ?44 Alsip IW? WIOR1044040 pool 11461H466 P0 0 sox R341 DENTON. TEXAS 76202 uctot,ar 17 . 1993 h1r. Jeff hJeyc-rr. C~irr(,etOr of PI arnr,ir,,, and Community' C!e«etOc'mer,t Gi tti o4 De r, tor, 1 a, E 11 c t:1 r, r, e > Dor,ton. Tx 7:•'~G1 Ele?.r :Feff I It hA4 been br.oUr,j ht t:, our D.ttenti:,r, that a mot:ile home Bark i 01 i,rnerd for East McKir,r,er. We h?.tie hehrd that the DI ar, is t atru1:t ikDpr.oximateI sight hundr?d i:41:1) ur,i t_. The Der, tor, Irldeo*r, do r,t S,".hc-c.1 1) i -atr•i t ?.l so 1And on E?.ak 1"I•:Kir,r,+'- The school dia.trirt pI ra tc. cons trur.t lk high s hocl *2 d.N.Y oh i t a. 777 mere 3i to . T h i ymanc.t Occur url t i 1 the %rrd of ci r~4 { ore cid+i. I Arn nat s.ur? hovi Cur i.ite relates 1r, or, oxirr,it), t k Dr•ooosed mOt.iIo home ccrnstr,.icticln, if the Yite ar•e ad,iacrnt+ err the der,si t~, in1,!oIved ir, the moIn1le home FarF: m•9.i cre•i<te a traff Problem when a now hi gh school i cans true ted. I r. o u r f u t u r es _ "i.:1nss le.~ae r uieu,, ,<11 ~rcpos.ed tr-=4~ic C• I A n n l nG s.~ • , p o t ~.r•o:edurka., _ tr- eAt d euetoc,rrlent, Arid traffic conoen_.I or, wl i 1',' p0 ssiIn iliti' c,f i< new hir2h school in mir,d. Thank you for :ur hre 1p in this matter. 8incerelY bert Eern_.te ir` RECEIVED QC~' 8 t58? i City council minutes Meetingg of November IS, 1983 Page Fifteen ACRES OF LAND LYING AND BEING SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF DENTON STATE OF TEXAS AND BEING PART OF THE M, FORREST, ABSTRA~T NO, 417 s DENTON COUNTY, MASIf CLA,SIPYING THE SAME AS AGRICULTURAL "A" DISTRICT PPOPERTYI AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, Chew motion, Stephens second to adopt the ordinance, On roll call vote Barton "nay", Hopkins "aye", Stephens "aye", Alford "aye", Rlddlesperger "aye", Chew "aye", and Mayor Stewart "aye", Motion carried 6 to l with Council Member Barton casting the nay vote. S. Public Hearings A. The Council held a public hearing on the petition of Champion Home Communities, Inc, requesting approval of a specific use permit for it mobile home park on a 104,28 acre tract locate.. adjacent and north of PM 426 (Bast McKinney) and adjacent and south of Mills Road, and beginning approximately 3,006 feet east of Mayhill koad. 8-174 The Mayor opened the public hearing, Mr, Dick Kelsey Introduced Mr, John Seibel, President of Champion Homes, Mr, John Selbel spoke In favor of the petition stating that Champion Homes Builders Company produced housing nationwide with 22 housint plants and 4 component plants, They were a significant part of the Texas housing scene as they had four plants located in Texas wbic* produced in excess of 3,000 homes, This made them the largest producer of mobile homes in the state. Champion's share of 0e Texa$ market had increased annually and now represented approximately 154 of the total market, There was a need for this type of housing as It was affordable to a larger number of the population, The average cost of on-site built housing had increased dramatically, If the trend of these price increases was extrapolat)d, it would show more significant variances by 1990, TDB average house payments were such that only l04 of the people In the United States could afford a new site built home, The persons who could not afford these costs would become the customers for hi;?, quality manufactured homes in parks, Manufactured housing was becoming a very integral part of the housing market, Mr, Seibel than presented a slide presentation of manufactured housing and stated that the industry had We enormous str=ess in the last several years, Housing needs had increased and would continue to increase, Mr, Seibel then presented slides of parks which had been developed by Champion Homes and plans for the park which was proposed to be built in Denton, Mr, Seibel stated that Champion had made major changes to the site plan to comply with CitN' of Denton ordinances, The request for water and sewer service free the City had been granted, The project was begun tinder Countv standards but the property had now been annexed into the city, Mayor Stewart asked about a park aroa on the site plan, Mr. Seibel show the park area on the site plan, Council Member Hopkins asked about the traffic density within the park. Mr, Seibel estimated that there would be approximately 800 cars in the park, Mayor Pro Tom Rlddlesperger questioner the size of the lots, dlr. Seibel responded that lot sizes would vary but would he between 4200 and S500 square feet. i City Council minutes Meetin of November IS, 1983 Page S xteen Hr. Kelsey spoke in favor of the petition stating that when the property was purchased it was in the County. The developers had approached the City asking for utility service, Champion was not told that when the annexation was completed, specific use zoning would be required. The developers had complied with all requests from the City and were only asking that they be allowed to complete what they set out to do, The park residents would own their own homes and rent the lot space and there were persons who wanted to live In this type of development, There was a lot of prejudice against pre fabricated homes, Site-built houses have taken ideas from pre fabricated homes, Champion would be giving an alternative to renting apartments for day laborers who lived In Denton. There would be no problems for the City as for as the utilities were concerned. The payments would go directly to the manager and would be paid by the park and recouped through rental fees, All of the arguments against mobile homes had been considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission and this was found to be the highest and best use of this land. Several opponents to the petition were not inside the City limits and did not want to be annexed, bat they wanted the city to control the development which was adjacet:t to them, Mr. Kelsey stated that there was natural resistance to zoning changes but the P4Z and staff had approved and these changes would come. You could not prevent development because you do not want it. Champion Homes had dealt with the City in good faith and did not feel that they should he caught up In a moratorium on mobile home parks. Mayor Pro Tem Riddlosperger asked if Hr, relsey knew how o-'. n), vacancies there now were in other mobile home parks In Denton, Mr, Kelsey responded he did not know but they all looked full, Mr, Seibel stated that there was a substantial shortage of mobile home park space all over the United States and especially hers in Texas, Council Member Hopkins asked if they were aware of how many new mobile home parks were under consideration in Denton, Hr. Seibel responded that he knew several proposal had gone before the Planning and Zoning Commission but not all of these proposals would be approved. Mr. Lamont Brown spoke in opposition stating that he owned 72 acres which was contiguous to the proposed development and shared 2716 feet of common boundary, Mr, Brown also stated that he was not opposed to the mobile home Industry but felt that this particular development was not appropriate for this acreage and the trend was troublesome In the east quadrant of the city, Champion had stated that $19,000 was the worth of their homes. Since this was about the average price of other mobile homes, Mr. Drown felt that the hones In this park would very much like all other mobile homes and not a cut above as had been stated, Mr. Brown then presented an advertisement from the Denton Record-Chronicle for an on-site hone which showed the payments to be approximately 112 of the price quoted by Champion for this type of housing, There were presently 4S spaces occupied at the Lakewood Estates mobile home park which meant that there were appproxlmatell, 160 spaces which were vacant, All of the homes at Lakewood had an exterior covering which gave the appearance of on-site construction homes, In the beginning stages of the development, Champion Homes did not propose a project which WAS to City standards end Mr. Brown felt a concern for what would happen in the future to the park If the ownership were to change hands, City Council Minutes Meeting of November 1$, 1993 Page Seventeen Mr. Brown then stated that if his 72 acre Arabian horse farm was thenfasked thoseein the audiencedwhotworeoopp sedetoithe petitionoto stand. Objections to the petition included the density of the land use, The Denton Development Guide designated this area as low intensity and the Cha+ ion development would not be a low density use. Mr. Brown also sated that he anticipated a drainage prohlon on the pproperty. The drainage would come toward McKinney Street with 2/3 of the water moving towards Mills goad. With the r.ddltional concrete and asphalt he was concerned about possible run off Mal on Mills Road. The development would also add additional traffic problems and congestion on Mills goad, McKinney Street and Mayhill. A dangerous problem would also exist with turn lanes into the park. Mr, Brown also stated that he belleved a problem would exist with extending City utilities to the area and with the increase this development would cause in the numbers of school children In Denton schools. Mr, Brown stated that, contrary to Mr. Kelsey's remarks, the residents in this area were not opposAd to change but wanted change. There were currently 12 existing mobile home parks in the eastern quadrant and 3 more which had been approved. Mr. Brown distributed booklets which contained photographs of all of the mobile home parks and mobile home communities in the vicinity of the Champion development, Mr, Brown estimated a current 201 vacancy in the existingg parks, A single family development was needed in this area to achieve a balance of housing, Mr, Brown concluded by saying that he was pleased at the opportunity he had been given to know the council and was concerned about the kind of message which would be sent to the mobile home dovelopers, The Council had made tough decisions in the past to assure the future, Mr, Tom Peters spoke in opposition stating that he was not a resident of Denton and his objections were personal, Mr, Peters felt that Champion was trying to find a place to place their mobile homes so as to increase their market, At the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting the Chairperson had a prepared statement which led him to believe that the Chairperson had made up his mind about the recommendation on the zoning prior to the m eting. Mr, Peters stated that the traffic on Mayhill and Mills load had not been checked. He felt that if the petition were appi~,ed It should be stipulated that Champion or the City of both should be responsible for the drainage or other problems, Mr. Steve Logan spoke in opposition stating that he had been a resident of Denton for 3S years and had recently bought a home on Mills goad and had never seen a mobile home park appreciate property values, Mr, Kenneth Stout spoke in opposition stating that he had lived in the area for 2$ years and had not seen the City in this area to ropair street, This would add to the problems which existed and he felt that nothing wou13 be dor. to correct them. Dr, Daniel Dailey spoke in opposition stating that low cost housing would Impact the medical community. Persons who were attracted to this type of low cost housing could not always afford to pay their medical bills would would put art additional load on the taxpayers. Mr, Kelsey spoke in rebuttal stating the technical aspects of thr, petition, such as traffic and drainage, had been studied by engineers, The development would be well wlthln the density called for In the Denton Development Guido, On the Issue of City services, Champion Homes did not petition to be annexed and would hold to the City to the plan of services which accompanied the annexation. f , City Council Minutes ![eatingy of November 15, 1983 Page 8lghteen Mr, Kelsey also stated that Mr. Peters and Mr, Logan had purchased homes near existing mobile home parks of lower quality than this proposed development, The Council would need to look at the highest and best use of the land, The Mayor closed the public hearing, David Ellison, Development Review Planner, reported that most of Mr, Kelsey's remarks were true; however, the Staff had apprised Champion Homes that a specific use permit would be required, Ellison also stated that this petition had been a mess and was Indicative of problems with developments in the extraterritorial jurisdiction, The C„am ion project would have the best street system of any mobile home park In the City. The drainage problems would be the same with a single family doveloPMont, If the project was completed, there would be an over•capaclty situation on East McKinney, This was a state highway and could be widened to 4 lanes, If the area developed at all problems would exist with traffic and drainage. Fences, distance between homes, etc, would have to meet minimum standards, Ellison repotted that the action of the Councll on this petition would be a message to future mobile home developers, The Planning and Zonin Commission had recommended approval by a vote of 4 to 2 with 3 conditions, Mayor Pro Tee Riddlesperger asked If the plans for the development met the standards in the proposed mobile home ordinance. Ellison replied that they met and exceeded the requirements in some instances, Champion had been requested to comform to the ordinance which was in effect at the time of their construction. Mayor Pro Tom kiddlosperger then asked if the development would met the standards in the new ordinance, Ellison replied It Would meet the standard of the old and now ordinance, Council Member Stephens asked how the development could meet the requirements when the new ordinance was in draft form and that Champion might not meet the requirements of the final ordinance. Chew motion, Riddlesperger to table the petition for a specific use permit until the new mobile home ordinance was approved. Motion carried 6 to 1 with Mayor Stewart casting the nay vote, 6, The Council considered approval of the request of Mr, Paul Berry to begin disannexation proceedings on approximately 4,39 acres of land located along the east side of highway 377 just north of Brush Creek Road. Hopkins motion, Stephens second to remove this item from the table. Motion carried unanimously, Charlie Watkins, Senior Planner, reported that this Stem was before the Council in January, Mr, Berry had requested to he disannexed from the City as he was not receiving any City services and his land was used agriculturally, The following ordinance was presented; 83- AN ojir.tN.N 1' '4TTING A DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR PUFLIC HEARINCP cu\;:EFNIN0 A PROPOSED DISANNFXATION ')F APPROX:,IVVGY 79 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE FAST SIDE OF HIOIIWAr S"" YORTH OF BRUSH CPEEK ROAD, Hopkins motion, Barton second to deny disannexation. Motion carried unanimously. 9e CITY OF DENTON MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Charlotte Allen, City Secretary I DATE: June 14, 1984 SUBJECT: Agenda Item #9 This zoning petition was tabled by the Council on January 3, 1984 to be brought back when the new Mobile Home Ordinance was approved. The public hearings have already been held, I am including the back-up which was provided at the January meeting. .4 A- Char otte en ca 1385C/8 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Recommendation to the City Council To; City Council Case No. S-176 Meeting Date; January 3, 1984 GENERAL INFOpu,4A'rION Applicant; W.J. Roddy 1401 S, Stemmons Lewisville, 'T'exas 75067 i i Status of Applicant; Owner Requested Action; Approval of a specitic use permit for i a l97 site mobile home park on lots I typically 50' X 1UO' in size i Location and Size; 3b.9b acre tract located approximately 3,500 feet east of the Iii-35E, service road and adjacent and north of Page Road Existing Land Use; Vacant Surrounding Land Use and Zoning; North - Vacant South - Vacant East - Vacant, single family residential West - Vacant, single family residential, Snerwood Mobile Home Park, T&P MKT RR, salvage yard Denton Development Guide; Property is presently outside of the city limits and outside of the boundaries of the Development Guide study area. (Cases-17b) Page SPECIAL, INFORMATION I 'rransportation page Road is a very narrow county and Traffics road in moderate to slightly poor condition. The north side of Page Road is included in a pending annexation process that is scheduled for final City Council action on January 3, 1984 , if the property in this request is i annexed, and the specific use permit is subsequently approved, approximately 1200 Feet of Page Road frontage will be subject to City of Denton perimeter street paving requirements. Speciti~.ally, 'dedication of appropriate right-ot- way, pavement improvements and curo and gutter installation can be required. Drainage improvements can also be required if annexation occurs, Mobile home parks generate approxi- mately 5,9 vehicle trips per day par dwelling (compared to approximately 10 trips per traditional single family dwelling). Based on the above standard, the proposal will generate approximately 1,162.3 vehicle trips per day (197 sites + 5,9 t.p.d.) at optimum developmen The concept plan for this developgment shows internal streets with 45' of width. Current mobile home park requirements are for 30' streets on the interior. Proposea mobile home park ordinance revi- sions would require streets with 28' of width for collectors and 24' Of wi.dLh for all other internal streets. All internal streets are private in mobile home parks, (Oaso O8-176) Page 3 SPECIAL INF08AATION (continued) Public lltilitiesi An 8" public walwar line will have tO be extended along Page Road to serve this development. The internal dis- tribution system will be connected j to the public 8" waterline via a single master meter, The City Coun- cil approved extension or a 10" sewer line to a Corinth lift station when an earlier request was made to allow this site in the E,r,J, to utilize Denton 's public utility sys- tem. All on site utilities will oe private. City of Denton re uire- ments for utilities apply with or without annexation, Fire: Fire hydrants will have to be placed along the proposed Page Road water- line at 600' Intervals, Electric; If annexed, City of Denton electric service will be available to the site. T P & L service is also available. Other Utilities: lelephone service is available to available. The status of gas ser- vice is unknown at this time. BACKGROUND t IW.J. Roddy, petitioner, owner and prospective developer of this ~proposed mobile nome park first contacted staff and inquired aoout requirements for mobile nome parks both inside and outside toe City of Denton approximately eighteen months ago. When first con- tacted, statt auvised Mr. Roddy that the City or Denton did haa-e a Mobile ►iome Park and 'travel Trailer Ordinance that would apply co any proposal inside toe City, as well as, certain zoning require- ments that would also be imposed for property in the City. (Case #S-176) page 4 BACKGROUND {continued) The petitioner was further advised of platting requirements for property both in the City and in the E,T.J, Finally, the peti- tioner was advised that development proposals in the E.T,J, are automatically referred to the City Council and Planning and Zon- ing Commission for study based on annexation policies when plat approval is sought. Mr. Roddy indicated that he would begin looking for a sits to develop and would submit the necessary technical information at some point in the future. After a few more general discussions, the subject site in the E,T.J, was se- lected. The City of Denton began annexation proceedings for an area that includes the subject property between September and October, 1983. The petitioner requested permission to extend and utilize Denton's public water and sewer facilities in the E,T,J, in June 1983. The utility request was approved by the Public Utility Board in July, 1983. The City Council approved the re- quest on August 2, 1983, Annexation proceedings began on October 4, 1983. A preliminary plat was submitted on November 2, 1983. During the plat review stage, Mr. Roddy was informed that a specific use permit would be necessary if the propert,, is annexed on January 3, 1984. When the petitioner realized that all plans to date could be for naught if proper zoning is not secured after annexation action, the decision was made to con- centrate on the specific use permit question before expending additional time and resources on engineering plans and platting. When questioned about the potential of removing certain sites from the pending annexation area on December 6, 1983, the majority of the City Council stressed support of the current area with no deletions. It appears that there is little chance that the 36.96 acra tract in question will be removed from the area scheduled for final annexation action on January 3, 1984; therefore, a specific use permit will be needed to develop a mobile home park at the site in question. ANALYSIS The concept plan of this proposal exhibits features which will conform to both existing and proposed City of Denton mobile home park requirements in the area of streets (45' width exceeds both standards) and lot size (5,000 sq. ft. typical). Typical park- ing layout and standard setbacks are not exhibited, but specific mobile home park ordinance requirements would govern these areas. Recreation area conforms with current and proposed ordi- nance requirements. A central storage area for boats and extra vehicles at a standard of a minimum of 160 square feet per (CUae+ #S-176) Page 5 AiJALYSIS (continued) mobile home space is not shown, but would also be by ordinance. A permanent screening device not less than five (5) feet in height is required on all sides of the park except where naturals barriers exist to form all or part of such a screen or where roadways exist to create a traffic hazard. Residents of mobile home packs receive City of Denton curb side sanitation service in a manner identical to conventional single family residential service, Technical requirements in both the existing and pro- posed Mobile Home Park and Travel frailer ordinance can be sat- isfied. Recent escalation in mobile home park requests in the city in the E.T.J, and in-between has forced the City Council, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and staff to evaluate this land use based on today's trends, and market economic and in- dustry conditions. Soon to be studied revisions to the existing Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Ordinance is one response to this issue. Recently, there has been some discussion on the staff level of recommending that specific mobile home park policies be incorporated into the Development Guide during the annual updating process. In terms of land use planning concepts and criteria, staff has suggested that mobile home parks and dwellings share characteristics common to both traditional single family and multi-family uses. 14obile/manufactured housing is considered a form of diversified housing. Diversified housing that respects existing character is encouraged in all areas of the City. Concentration is generally discouraged in any one area of town. Approximately twenty one (21) mobile home parks exist, or have approved zoning. in the City of Denton and its extra-teritorial ;jurisdiction (E.T.J.) of which approximately twelve (12) are located in the southern or eastern quadrant of the City and E.T.J. The Sherwood Mobile Home Community (90-100 sites) is in existence along the south side of Page Road within 1000-2500 feet west of the site in this request. There is little question that this proposal with a reasonable density of 5.33 units per acre (typical density is usually in the area of 6-7 units per acre) an,l numerous development standards will be superior to older parks. The condition of Page Road is a valid question and this project will obviously have some impact on traffic, but there is a great deal of undeveloped property in this area that could impact Page Road, if developed, regardless of the type of land use. Mobile home park uses generate less vehicle trips than traditional single family development according to national standards. Attractive single family housing is scattered throughout this general area; some unattractive land uses exist in this area, also. V 'Case #S-176) age 6 SUUMARX Technical requirements of the City of Denton Subdivision Regulations and Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Ordinance can be satisfied and the overall density of the proposed mobile home park is reasonable (5.3 units per acre). Page Road is a very narrow county road, but half of the road is included in a pending annexation and subject to perimeter street paving requirements. Once again) this is a development that began in the S.T.J. and was included in an annexation area after steps were taken to satisfy E.T.J. requirements for platting. The uncertainty of final zoning disposition after annexation is an obvious concern of the developer. Revision of the mobile home park ordinance is to be studied by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council on January 3, 1984. RECOMMENDATION In effect, there is no Planning and Zoning Commission recommen- dation for this item. The vote to approve S-176 with the conditions below was 3-2 at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of December 14, 1983. A majority vote of the City Council is needed to approve this request. 1. City of Denton Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Ordinance requirements in effect at the time of final City Council action shall apply to this development; ordinance requirements shall supersede any information or design shown on approved concept plan if any conflicts arise. 2. City of Denton preliminary and final plat (lot of record) approval is required before building permits may be issued; all normal standards apply unless expressly waived or varied by the Planning and Zoning Commission and/or City Council. 3. Perimeter street paving requirements along the entire Page Road frontage of the property shall be imposed when the platting process begins. 4. If site is not developed within four (4) years, the zoning will revert to its previous agricultural "A" zoning ` classification. I (Cases-17b) Page 7 ALTERNATIVES I 1, Approve petition with conditions, 1. Approve petition without oonditions, 3, Approve petition with additional conditions, 4, Deny petition, 5, Table for suture consideration, ATTACH►HLENTS i i t 1. Aerial 2, Concept plan ! 3, Propperty owner list 4, Reply form total 50 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes of uec,ember 14, 198- LIP ~1 ; ~ t ~'a•~~ ° i }I~ ~3rb'~TY r,A+► ~ ',~~hr,}~tl'~;' •l { hy,/.. ' a* ' + 1 r •t''ra ♦ a~tt AAA i • 1 1• 1• r~:: 164.t? r~ ''I t ly 17 C. 1 j ~~''Z +'~•['Ie ~"'x' Mfr , (1 Y1 l;p .d t, , 1, 4,. al •..•19 1~ w 1• • F'i., 4~M~t'..rw ~ ' • , it ♦ 1 ,1'.f g i' 1. l , 1`~~ +'l r,lA I' ' ~~~'~,•R~ • YI 1~~1,'1V\al S 1 td- ~ ~w 1 , 11~~~~~ Sti~i)'~ ~ ~ 4`1..`1,Y 1♦,jL7~y,~ ,.1\, ~ , ,,'L 11 tt`2~;. 1 L•L 44 3 Ig3'1,i~iy41 ' ~ r;si~„t~~~S~~1' ' . , i' y~ t . , . ~l 7~1."1•~' TY"' ! • ix as • + 70 1`I(~'~,\1,~ ~ j~ 'I ~'~VMI:~ w +1'Iw, c•! .tit 6 K, N 4 W _ . tr t \ -A It •1' . N-tA IM f a ^'~r ~~~11\i`t {J,~, • 1^({ ` ' ` ti 'Y' .r ` 1 V ,A 4, It 4.1 r It, 1-in It 04 t v It. • i ~ , ~ a j\. , s.'., • 77 aa!! ,.a~l!1'~ \ ,~yyt ♦1 ~I P.,~.~,~11 i ~ , . 1~•~"~•#'' r ~ , as ~ 4Ar„~ T 'f' 1"~y 7J~.~~ i l' a.~, 1~:'1 r, Lp {y,,,,l~ 4f1~` La a t. 1 1{J•l:~'~•/i ~'~'~.~'a fir' ~ ,'t , ' ~ , ~ ,t a ~ t' ~''',,C; t~'r'~'.. / ' ,1,~ V~r ~ l~. ,i ~N,~~~~~R ~ • a~k~ ~ ' ~R , ' ` \ • i t • 1. + ~ t 3 1 )!h~~ l h~v' I,l.,.. ♦ t.. - , Y 3 ......P..,.~,_,_.,rl d"~f_• 1 _.__.-__-1 3 ^ +ee s ~-..~.n_, f - - - i SOCK! t ~ . Koo$( 4 t ~ ~ I k S S __.-_._._....0__~.-.~ A^-----•• 1 5,.~_ _ ~ ~ eN~dr W.`H +fM i b `r. •.f . ~ f.. 9 r~ocx s wan gccacAnoMxancc ' L,+.e.N I PLO" +I I S , n«e, a, +rt, .er . r.rr It k6to 60 leolb 7 lLOCKi 1 , ` 7 ` ottoog Y11 •ii ir.. to PAGE ROAD MOfHtLE HOME PARK 1 ' ` UTILITY MAP ~ ~ , rr~ ac) r~ a~ d v~ s 1150V ~ ~3 o I 0 r ' r~ r r I In r ,Y G f 7sacs lliqs IL rr-i LIB G. I l a. r r r) TX h' H - < f 71 LJ S- P I C l l r ~ fC ~r r, l~''; 11 , PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FORMS CYTY COUNCIL S-176 IN OPpOS 11.0N E---- D~ IN FAVOR F-- None Received None Received A M nut s P annTng and Zoning Commission December 14, 1983 Page 7 Mr. Juren left the meeting. E. S-176. This is the petition of W. J. Roddyy requesting approval of a specific use permit for a mobile home park (197 lots with a typical size of 50' x 1001) on a 36496 Page of the (UNAPPROVED) I-re andradjacentyand5north ofeast This property is currently located within the City of Denton extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ); however, final action on a pending annexation which may include this property is scheduled for January 3, 1984 Denton City Council action. The Planning and Zoning Commission will make a recommendation that will onlybecoome applicable if II the property is not the 36.96 acre parcel is annexed. f annexed Planning and Zoning Commission action will have no bearing on the use of the land because the City of Denton has no control over land use and zoning outside of the city limits. Mr. Ellison explained that property is currently in the ETJ and is in an area proposed for annexation; final, annexation action is scheduled for January 3, 1984. He said that eight notices were mailed to property owners •4ithin 200 feet of the subject site who would also be annexed into the city; no reply forms were received in favor nor in opposition to the request. Brian Burke, engineer representing petitioner, stated plan is for a 197 unit mobile home rental park. He said they were planning'count;, type roads but it appears now that the property will be annexed so they will comply with mobile home ordinance requirements for streets. He fur- ther stated that Mr. Roddy will extend water and sewer lines whether property is annexed or not; that utility standards will be complied with, regardless. On question, he said they may go with county type roads if not annexed; they are not sure at this time. He said they are in TP&L service area. Carla Rayzor and Joyce Howe, adjacent property owners, stated nice homes exist in area and advised that sewage is being dumped into ditches. They are concerned about that; children fish in those ditches, also people come through the fence onto their property. Mr. Roddy advised that he recently purchased this prop- erty, that an old septic system was in place which he redid. He further advised that not all property belongs to him. 1 ~ Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission December 14, 1983 Page 8 Mr. Ellis n continued staff report statin that the oityy has no ppolicies addressing mobile homes, hat staff eval- uation is based on petitioner's desire or lack of desire to develop a mobile home park that meets or exceeds all City of Denton requirements, He continued that Mr. Roddy is proposing to extend Denton water and sewer to his site, he is not going tvo have a se tic system. Interior utili- ties will be priate and maintained by him. He said that developer will have to improve one half of Page Road for a distance of 1200 feet if property is annexed as perimeter street paving ordinance will apply. He further stated that Page Road will be impacted regardless of this devel- opment as there is alot of undeveloped property and staff feels that development will occur in this area. He said that mobile home parks generate approximately 5.9 vehicle trips per day as opposed to approximately 10 vehicle trips per day for standard single family residential; that a 197 unit park will generate approximately 1162 vehicle trips per day. He said that petitioner has submitted a site plan which meets both present and proposed mobile home ordinance and staff recommends approval with conditions. Chairman commented that if Commission votes to deny this request and property is not annexed ,a mobile home park can be developed on this property wthout meeting city rules and regulations; that if Commission votes to approve a specific use permit and property is not annexed, will still have a mobile home park. Mr. Watkins stated that staff has to assume the property will be annexed; otherwise, there is no need to go through this process. He suggested that Commission determine whether this is appropriate land use for this specific location. Mr.. Burke repeated that utilities will be extended, that this will be new construction, and that Page Road will be improved. In response to earlier comments, Mr. Ellison advised that mobile home ordinance requires a five foot solid screening fence. Chair declared public hearing closed. MM nut s ' p1ann1ng and zoning Commission December 14, 1963 Page 9 Mr, Claiborne commented that the City Council tabled th*- last request for a specific use permit for a mobile home park until the new mobile home ordinance is adopted. Hme said he felt this put Commission in a position as to whether it should act and suggested they might want to table this request until such time as Commission can meet with City Council, He asked where the majority of mobile home parks are located, Mr, Watkins answered they are mostly in southeast section; either in ET1 or within city limits, Mr. Claiborne questioned whether the Commisskco wants a concentration of mobile home parks and asked wh.st is the City Council's position. Mr, Pearson stated it was his feeling that the reason the mobile home parks are in that area is because of proximity to I-35 and the Dallas corridor. Mr. Watkins advised that staff did a survey of 9 or 10 mobile home parks in the city to determine vacancy rate and it was 2 percent. Mr. Claiborne moved to recommend approval of S-176 sub.,ect to the following conditions: 1. City of Denton Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Ordinance requirements in effect at the time of ft-t.~al City Council action shall apply to this development; ordinance requirements shall supercede any information or design shown on approved concept plan if any c.za- flicts arise. 2. City of Denton preliminary and final plat (lot of record) approval is required before building permits may be issued; all normal standards apply unless " - pressly waived or varied by the Planning and Zoning Commission and/or City Council. 3. Perimeter street paving requirements along the entire Page toad frontage of the property shall e impos" when the platting process begins. 4. If site is not developed within four (4) years, the zoning will revert to its previous agricultural "0 zoning classification. Seconded by Mr. Escue. Vote was called: Aye - Claiborne, Escue, Pearson Nay - Cole, LaForte Motion failed due to 1 ack of four affirmative votes. City of Denton city council Minutes Hestia? of January 1966 Page Six The Mayor closed the public hearing. R. The council held a public hearing on the petition 02 W. J. Roddy requesting approval of a specific use permit for a mobile hams park (197 lots With a typical size of $0, x 100, ) on rr 16.96 acre tract located approximately 3,600 feet east of the i-13:3: service road. This property is currently located within the City 0rf Denton ♦xtra-tsrritor~a jurisdiction (4"tJ)l however, final actl,im on a pending annexation wbidh may include this property is schedule.e for January 1, 1901 Dentoa City Council action. (6-176) The Mayor opened the public hearing. David Ellison, DoVelopmoat ReVisW Planner, reported that the P&Z ha,tl no formal recommendation. The proposed mobile home ordinance hat been discussed in the work session and this request not or excseda+e all of the r•quiramunts. The area was currently in the sxtral~- territorial )urisdiction. It the request were approved, the zoniatV ordinance Would be passed after annexation. Page Road was in poor to moderate condition and the traffic 10.08 would be inoreased. However, any development in this area wou.,.0 increase traffic. Currently there was no policy on locating mobito home parks in any specific quadrant of the City. Requests a,nn inquiries regarding new mobile home park developments had n,z•t decreased. The staff rsoommsnded approval as the petition did ma•et technical standards. There were / suggested conditions to tine petition approval. Council Member Barton expressed confusing over the proposed annexation also on the agenda and asked staff What the Council vier; being asked to approve at this time. Ellison responded this petition was a request for a specific rive permit. Chew motion, Barton second to table. City Attorney Taylor reported that no ordinance was before 2,he Council for official action, Mayor Stewart continued the public hearing. Mr, Brian Burke, consulting engineer for Mr. Roddy, stated that he had approached the Planning and Zoning commission with the plans :hd would modify these to meet any requirements if the property 'was annexed, Ms. Eileen Powell spoke in opposition stated she was as resident ef. the area and the citizens had tried to upgrade the neighborhaa.a. The residents did not need another mobile home park and Mr. Rawly had allowed raw sewerage to drain on the property In the area. ' Me. Joy Powell poke In opposition and presented photographs ,if drain pipes whit ran under the road and dumped raw sewerage u,t.o the land, Ms, Powell also presented photographs of Mr. Roddy- s current mobile home park in the area and stated that if he did a,ot take care of the park he now owned, she did not believe he wom.id take cars of a new park. Mr. Kevin McCormick spoke in opposition stating that he lived n-r.ar the area for the proposed mobile home park and asked the Council to look at the area from the viewpoint of proper land uso. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Mr. Roddy responded to the opposition by stating that the sewerrge was handled by a septic system when he had purchased the propuzty and he was not the only one in this area that had expefian~ed problems. The sewer problems had been corrected. city of Dent*A City Council Minutes 1 Meeting at January 3, 19$4 Page won Barton mobile motion, park OtdinanOO second WAS to table the approved, Natioa t oarUnil rted uainlppaouslya C. The Council held a public heating on the petition of Joe Belsw requesting an amendment to planned development (PA-50) to permit an apptoximately 20' x $0, handball/taoquetball recreational facility on a Site presently appproved for playground use, Planned development (PD-50) is the site of the Ramsgate multi-family development which begins at the northeast corner of Bernard and Lindsey streets. (Z-1620) The Mayor opened the public heating. Mr. Tom Jester, representing Joe BSIew, Stated his client WAS trying to build a recreational building of approximately 1200 square feet. This building would allow for ping pong tables, pool tables, tot qu a tb playground 1 badr beoaa includedteintathe aoriginal provistom development soningl only 10 children resided in the apartments and Mr. Belew Celt that a change to the recreational facility would ba more appropriate. Mayor Pro Tom Riddlesperger asked what had boon the objeotion, Mr. Jestet replied that he did not know. Council Member Stephens asked how such playground area would be left. Mr. Jester replied that he did not know. Council Member Stephens stated that the minutes of the Planning aad he substitution of the Zoning recreational facility for opsition to tind area. Mr. Robert Martin, architect for the apartments, spoke in favor of the petition stating that the developer had originally reduced th+ for sidewalks and X play e area~t of the 9 to to density would allow remain green space, acres No. Cindy Lott, property supervisor, spoke in favor of the petitioa , stating equipment the maaement did i,ot Intend to space would be design ted gfor this use Ygrouc d would Mr. ititGion stating resident heofbe ithe evedarthentracquetball o urt of p benefit the residents. He had voluntered to teaoh other recreational activities and the facility would give a meeting area track, health pruvided a n,Qight room apartments was very for the oriented r*aidsnts, The Mr. Monty Day, apartment resident, spoke in favor of the petition stating that he felt someone was worried about invading the grassy area at the Ramsgate, The recreational facility would keep :tee residents happy. Mr. Chris dattis, resident of the apartments, spoke in, favor of t~.e petition stating that he did not understand the opposition, be Ramsgate apartments had more grassy area than any other apartmects he had SAen Hand was not e felt the like North Texas Stitt recreatlonal University, facility. Mr. Terry Shepherd, apartment resident, spoke in favor of :e petition stating he felt the recreational facility would ~,e beneficial, No one spoke in opposition, The Mayor closed the public hearing, CITY OF DENTON MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM; Charlotte Allen, City Secretary DATE: June 14, 1984 SUBJECT: Agenda Item #11 This request for disposition was tabled by the Council on November 1, 1983 to bt; brought back when the Parks Master Plan was approved. I am including the back-up which was provided at the November meeting. a 4rot en ca 1385C/9 r 41 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS _ OFF!CE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY -P MEMORANDUM C.J. Taylor, Jr., Ctty Attorney Joe D. ,Morris, Assistant City Attorney Robert B, Hunter, Assistant Clty Attorney DATE: June 7, 1934 TO: David Ellison FROMI. Joe D. Vorris SGBJECT: Request for quitclaim of right of way on Carroll Boulevard N,r. Tom Jester, representing the Fred Moore Estate, Y,as requesta6 that. the city quitclaim any interest it may have in a strip of land approximately 35 feet by 155 feet bordering Carroll. Boulevard at e intersection of West Prairie Street. There has been some controversy about who has legal title to the strip of land. The question of legal title would be avoided if the Cicy determines that sucn strip of land is riot needed 'for CCityrpurl poses, and should be quitclaimed to the adjoining p onsidered this unoerstand that the City council had previously request but had delayed making a decision until the Parks Department had completed its master plan for future parks development. Since the master plan was reviewed and approved by the City Council this week, 1 am asking that you place this request on their agenda for consideration. I have attached t'ne necessary documents and contact descriptions. If you need additional information you may Torre Jester or this office. ~7f)E U. If0 PIS X C: i'oin J ster Attur:rey at Law L&o :X !6201 1 { 1. ELI) •IV Iii .r-tl hVi~L: I!i II'iL !.)LL r r T NC' ' DL ti i LN C0 UIlT 1 I L' XAS . l !iA 1 C:'" 1 l t. TFir,:: ~ nc` Gr l.. r', t Li i w~ . L. F, I f. ~L , . C'Ir 1, 11LryMAL i~l 7~ I 7 +u, - LL". ~U 11 l .T ' "vi' "ll0 'I'icA 7. CF ILEA D ild ALL iJ f' UI „ L a ID F RE ^ li DR CI\ Till 73% I I We CF I'IHI\C• I;IM , 1~... LF_~)l IJ _ n rf''A C E t.U~•1i~i-L~ 1' ,'ail.S.ii~~L' BIL. it n... C r, CLI L'I'I I 1 Lf ..'L' f ;ice I ~L 1L F L Y C 17 Z F, r-r,... t. ..I E U Y v._ t_ U *f I - NC );kE . n; E.~M^H/ l\L I- i~ r _ `.n T •i_'•r111•.~~i tr• '.'C ' UI Z i'. ^ • ,lar_ L`r•1;D I\E LT A L11... U` ..L I I1117. r\L PIW i Z toot ' i I EOC;11~ "a- 1 rr r i n LJ.. . F~IANG All iF\Ctr F'IPJ; KN', A. yr- N~ rr ' _ FE i t0 h)i\ II,. L) I,' I. 1:N; IIr, Oil IDECKEL~' NIL tlMES AN . ','.,V CiAI~~' ~.,~.'..v~ r• ~ i... L: r' L •':Li i ~'dLc Wu L'F ;..C.:.6 FL's, I L'' AIN, I F4Ldi, F lld; I\U I CL.NIJW H'E U i S V WE FEE TD AI N 31R ON F-1 t: > i IJC E t•l OR 7 k i ;.34 •C U. t'7 'r.. AI'D J. ul:rONDS LAEI r~ 1"IlvCL 1F CG 'r . JLl'i `s OF :,Q.b2 FEL.i TC' 1H.E f-'L'1NT 0. C(_4,-11,?1,IN,_ Li. 1247 ^t•'rEC O Lr:iJ1 - ....iu. v. .ar4i~~~,, •:1rLrlaJ~uR ICIi. C rJ. W.A.:i.::.r++sl ('~,ti~,{p iti r•1e ~ r#1~ - .a..r.•'~. yr SiJ u:.: r ~ . iYc57' PRAIR-Ij S7,eS; T ,.PO 049. /ic. iz c ! i YI •C V f f ` 1 :r 1 v ~ C i )4 nF I ~ _ • ~ 11 L r ,f , ' - _r 4',,,, :C,.j6C]CLl-'(<L i1[J~][,S~.M_L3I 1~ ' ,1,..sr.....'. ^I':r anti iraf ^.f s,~n .u -hI r r.~ns s''•r'nn a• s•,rn, 1' r rmrur.a 'r.'s j • a•~'1emf2 ~'7~'13 1! '•r ~IVI iurrh'1t ~ + AUCt+SA7~ SOIC 73rY 1": i>!:'°II O^S 'X r. a'' 1Y.~Y IY?~SYhf);V •YJ rqil. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET MEETING DATE: November 1, 1983 SUBJECT: Consider disposition of excess Carroll Boulevard right-of-way beginning at the southeast corner of West Prairie Street and Carroll Boulevard. (D-35) BACKGROUND: The City of Denton acquired right-of-way for widening and improvements to the above ref- erenced section of Carroll Boulevard in the mid 70's. Total right-of-way width for Carroll Boulevard is 140 feet. Initially, forty feet (401) of right-of-way existed in the form of Old Center Street. An additional 100 feet of right-of-way was acquired from adjoining landowners for the aforementioned improve- ments. Presently, Carroll Boulevard is a six (6) lane primary arterial with pavement width and median width totalling eighty feet (801). This disposition request was initiated when the property owner to the east requested a change in zoning from two family (2-F) to the office (0) classification in July, 1983. Field notes for the above request included property that staff feels is actually city property. After considerable discussion by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council the zoning change request was denied by the City Council with direction to the petitioners and prospec- tive developer to consider planned development (PD) zoning. A planned development (PD) site plan was submitted after City Council action was taken on the office zoning request. The site plan again included a 40 strip of prop- arty believed to be public right-of-way. The petitioners were told that a site plan and planned development (PD) request including public property cannot be accepted until the right-of-way disposition issue is resolved. (D»33i Page SUMMARY: The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this disposition request of its meeting of September 28, 1983. Staff recommended that the right-of-way be retained for the following reasons: 1) Future planning of ootential wideninit of garrgll aoulevgr_d_. ann ng an Zoning Lomas on members all generally agreed that there is a minimal chance that Carroll Boulevard will be widened in the future, but recommended that a minimum 20' strip be re- tained along the east line if the property is disposed of. 2) Provisions for open space, green belt or strip park along this section of Carroll Boulevard consistent with the middle section of Carroll Boulevard beginning near Panhandle Street and extending further north. Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the merits and demerits of retain- ing the right-of-way for the above purpose extensively. One member of the commission seemed to feel that open space and greenbelt considerations alone is justification for retaining the right-of-way. The majority of the commission did not appear to share this sentiment. 3) Retention of right-of-way provides the city with more absolute control of curb cuts along this section of Carroll Boulevard. Interest in office specifically, and other high intensity type land uses along Carroll Boulevard has heightened. Existing policies discourage strip retail/commercial uses and unrestricted curb cuts along Carroll and other major thoroughfares. If a portion of the property is disposed of, retention of a 20' strip would be one potential solution to the curb cut issue. t( r ) ~ ~ l~ages3 No official survey has been Zken of the subject prop arty, however, the engineering department has estimated that it 3s a 145 x 60 (8700 square feet) strip of land. The strip of property could possibly be developed independently if the following occurs: 1) Disposal of the entire parcel with existing two family (2-F) zoning would permit residential development (minimum lot size required for legally platted residential lot is 60, x 1001). 2) Re-zoning of the tract to a non-residential classification would permit develo ment on the parcel so long as a minimum ofpthirty feet (301) of street frontage is available. (Retaining a 20 foot strip would make resi- dential development more difficult under existing zoning but would not affect develop- ment potential if a non-residential classifi- cation is granted.) Property with independent development potential must be opened up for public bid, Property that is not independently developable only re wires negotiation between the city and adjacent landowners. ACTION REgUIRED: Determine development potential of property and approve, deny, or table disposition request with or without conditions. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the excess right-of-way be disposed of with the condition that a 20' strip be retained for public use by a vote of 6-14 The Park and Recreation Board has expressed a desire to be included in the official recom- mendation process when disposition requests affecting property with significant park, open space or beautification potential is being considered. Staff has been informed that the Parks and Recreation Department will provide the Council with information on their feelings. toward this request after considering the issue at its October 31, 1983 meeting. Since Planning and Zoning action was taken, the Citizen Traffic Safety Commission has also expressed a desire to comment on the curb cut issue, but their meeting will not occur before November 1, 1983. Page ALTERNATIVES: 1 Approve disposition with condition(s). 2 Approve disposition without condition(s). 3 Deny request. 4 Table for future consideration. ATTACHMENTS: 1} 2 Letter requesting disposition 3 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes of September 28, 1983 4) Development Review Committee minutes of September 20, 1983 5) Memorandum from Jerry Clark, Senior Civil Engineer David Ellison Development Review Planner I~ ~ w r sa' So 210' 32 s Iko a 1s H I 14~~'13 32 I1 e 15 '2 13 1 1 1 10 15 64' 64' 60' 116' 102,5' 425.A9 i WEST PRAIRIE 75 loo, 57- I 2 3 4 5.N ~ > 1 a w1., O e v~ 1 7S I 75 170' 7 6 40M ~p CL ~~0 eo i C' (+L IA .O V Ob ' 18 'w'' ~ 9 8 aez.oe' ~ 10 120' a . 3G~ 170' Q gS 0 C5 0 ~f* .off Q 14 13 12 r 11.1 11 12 o` o°so • g _ 12C °J 0 \G'n 75' i 75' _ P d 5a' y i a19.1' NIl e0 ° 130.66 62' 60' S1' 67' aS' ;ev°c < pc 'po i ~c C ff e ^ del.. (h ` • L) 0 ~ ` r C ' II ~I II September 9. 1983 Mr. David Ellison Planning and Community Development Department City pf Denton Municipal Building Denton, Texas 76201 Dear Mr. Ellison: T would appreciate your expdeiting the disposition of property on Prairie Street through whatever process is necessary for the City of Denton. We have obtained financing from the First State Bank to repay the City the amount which was paid by the City for this property. Respectfully, RECEIVED SEP 0 9 19 3 P & Z'Minutes September 28, 1983 Page 12 Brian Burke, engineer, stated he was retained to design the roads, storm drainage, sewer and water lines and that at his first , that tey,had gone nowosubdi- platting prooess vision requirements. The roads he worked the designs on, were on separate tracts of land from the school building tract. When he completed his design on the access roads he submitted his plans for approval. In response to a question from Mr. po4rsono Mr. Ellison deniedethesrequestrot ertthanlno bupilding permits wouldnbes issued. Mr. Clark stated there is no reason to shut down th+a project as the streets and sewer are being inspected as it goes. He said the plans were presented to engineer- ing 'piecemeal' but not in any manner whereby it could be reviewed by the Development Review Committee fully and under the normal procedures for review of all departments. Ms. Cole the asked recommendation was a rivate would Mr. Pearson asked for an answer to the same question posed by Ms. Cole. Mr. Ellison stated that probably the private developer would not have reached this stage of development. Basically wr^r the problem is here is a total viola- tion of procedures. Everything has been reviewed and is satisfactory at this time, however, it can be denied based on the fact that they have not followed the normal procedures. Ms. Cole moved for a recommendation to app*ove the preliminary and final plat of lot 1, block 1, D.I.S.D. Elementary School Addition with the recommendation that Motion procedures be Seconded in the future . Escue. correct by Carroll and 1. Consider disposition of excess Carroll Boulevard right- of-way at the northeast corner of West Prairie Street and Carroll Boulevard. (D-35) P 6 Z Minutes Sep-tdmber 28, 1983 Page 13 Mr. Ellison stated there has been additional input from the Parks and Recreation Department with regard to this disposition of property. He explained the reason for rbe delay has been due to the problem of -,urveying the sub_;fct property, which is needed to determine the amount of land area there is, the city would incur the cost of the survey up front. However, he stated that staff feels a need o retain all of the right-of-way for the following reasoc,s: 1) Future planning of widening Carroll Boulevard 2) Parks and Recreation feels there is a need for an cn en space greenway area on Carroll 3) To maintain control of curb cuts along Carroll Staff is recommending not to sell any of Carroll Boule card property. The property disposition at Carroll and Highland ('D-3:,) is approximately 8700 square feet and cannot be developed independently as is uZless re-zoned to a classificaticm that does not have a minimum lot width requirement - 11 is currently zoned 2-F. Mr. Fisher stated the city would need an easement from the new property owner if sold. Mr. Sidor said he felt he would go along with the Par'~:s and Recreation comments and the Development Review Committee recommendation to retain this property for future use as a greenway area. Mr. Juren stated if the greenway area is the only rear: consideration for retaining then he would go along wi.ih the disposal of the property. Mr. 'Pearson stated he felt Carroll Boulevard is a maj=r thoroughfare and there are tremendous economic forces to develop all the way down like University; Planning ar.r- Zoning can through a regulat-~ry process try to inhibit. thir, Mr. Ellison explained that staff bases their decisio-- on the Development Review Guide which has been approved '.,y the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council and Citizen Committee representatives. P 4 Z' Minutes September 28, 1983 Page 14 Mr. Irwin stated it is the city's practice to maintain a 20 foot, strip up and down Carroll, he thinks their reason being to limit curb cuts. He mentioned he does not know how the Parks and Recreation Department can maintain any additional parks area in the city than what they have at this time. He feels the 20 feet would be adequate for any city purposes along Carroll and also thinks a private owner would probably maintain a greenway area better than a city park could be maintained. Mr. Juren made a motion to recommend approval for disposition of D-33 and D-35 with a 20 foot right-of-way to be retained by the city along Carroll Boulevard. Seconded by Mr. Pearson. Vote was called Aye: 6 votes Nay: 1 vote (Mr. Sidor) Motion carri.pd. (6-1) J. New Business. No new business was presented. Meeting adjourned 7:30 p.m. II Cit Council Minutes Mewing of ,ovember 1, 1983 Page Five 2. Approval of a contract with RESOURCES, Inc. far purchase of Customer SerO ca training program. 3. S itoms, Inc• to contract provide rprogramCmeg with Priority the City of Denton on an as needed bests primarily in the area of systems programming bixt not limited to this area. upp with thto TRES the City of Corporation 4. provide Approval ammicontract r y on an praosgrneeded support basis in tq frees :f Payroll/Personnel System known as `EIS' and eit Utility Billing System known as "CIS". 5. The Council considered approval of disposition of excess Carroll Boulevard right of way between West Prairie and Highlacd Streets. (D-33) David Ellison, Development Review Planner, stated that there wars 2 requests before the C(,ina11 for excess right of way disposition. The first request was estimated to be .83 acre with the width a:-:id depth taken together. Mr. Dale Erwin had requested the dispositirn as this arse could be developed and was currently zoned fzx two-family housing. A condition for the disposition was that a 24 foot strip be retained behind the curb to allow for water lines rind to avoid curb outs, Carroll Boulevard was believed to have 140 f.e•et of right of way, some of which was from old Center Street and same from Carroll Boulevard. The Development Review Committee approv*d of the linear park planning which was being done by the Parka Bc.A.rd for areas such as this. The Parka board had requested to "fie involved in future dispositions which would affect this type of City pproperty which could be utilized as small, linear parks. This could be incorporated into the Development Review Committee procedur.eA. The Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval of ,:4e disposition. Dr. Robert LaForte, Chairperson of the Planning and ZonA-i& Commission, reported that ire regretted having to appear before the Council but he discgrsed with the Planning and Community Developmi at stafR. The staff felt that the City should hold this land but "e Planning and Zoning Commission thought it should be sold. Areas on Carroll Boulevard and Congress had been zoned commercial. 7h 0 Council would decide on what was best and the P&Z felt the property should be sold to place it back on the tax rolls. Mayor Stewart asked what Dr. LaForts's opinion was on curb cuts on Carroll Boulevard. LaForte responded that if the Council allowed Carroll Boulevard to develop commercially, curb cuts would have to be made. His opie:on was that these curb cuts should be held to a minimum. Mayor Stewart asked what the P&Z recommendation was on allowin:f a commercial strip on Carroll Boulevard. LaForte responded that a greater amount of activity in :::at direction had been experinnced during the last year. Ms. Linnie McAdams, member of the Parka Board, reported that the Board strongly urged the Council not to approve either of the wo disposition requests before them. Both of these areas had the potential to be utilized as a park or walking area. The Board Celt that beautification was a part of their responsibility. Carroll Boulevard was now a lovely drive and the Parks Board was workin;; ~n a master, plan for parks in the entire City. The Parks and Recreation Department was short of funds and could utilize 4iis property, instead of acquiring new property in the future. Ms. McAdams urged the Council not to dispose of the property before the master plan could be completed. City Council Minutes mooiin of Movombor 11 1989 Page S x Council Member Chew asked what type of park could be built on niche property, ear ark such as whichmwasenortheoftCongressncould be constructed on ntheipropertyAasino Council Member Chow stated that there was a problem in maintaini?ng the existing parks. McAdams stated that the Parks Board was very encouraged and excimed by the neighborhood participation which had been offered at Briarcliff park and believed this concept would work here. Council Member Chew stated that he could not see the logic of a p.►nrk located in an area which was mostly commercial. Mayor Pro Tom Riddlesperger stated that commerical businesses "tire surrounded by a park areas without a need for curb cun:t:. Riddlesperger also stated that he would like to see the Parks maetitt,r plan. Council Member Alford asked when the plan would be completed. Steve Brinkman, Director of Parks s.id Recreation, responded that ,the plan was one to two months away from Parks Board approval and wnhuld then be submitted to the Council. Council Member Hopkins stated that the Parks Board should bring, to Council cost information on the development of the park taking t'nto account the loss of money from the tax rolls and the excessive n;xme to maintain. Hopkins also stated that he believed some type of planned development on the property would be better. Mayor Pro Tam Riddlesperger stated that 20 feet would be kept for the park and disposition approved for the rlsmainder. Council Member Stephens stated that the disposition had been penuiing for some time and asked why the sudden interest by the Parks Boavii. McAdams responded that the items had just been referred to the Bouhrd. Council Member Barton asked if the Parks Board should be involvedi in zoning cases. Council Member Hopkins replied if believed they should if it was pertinent to cost. Hopkins also stated that the Council had approved a similar planned development previously. Mayor Pro Tam Riddlesperger stated that there was no great urgi~ricy and felt the Council should allow the Parka Board to complete t.he.ir master plan and see what could be done with City owned property. Council Member Hopkins stated that it was a worthwhile idea bun it would cost money and the Parks and Recreation Department was a.lvieady stretched thin. Council Member Stephens stated that a 20 foot strip could be kept for the park and the remainder could be sold. Riddlesperger motion, Barton second to table the disposition foe two months to allow the Parks Board to complete the master ,i,Ian. Alford, Riddle sperger Barton, and. Mayor Stewart "aye". Stepii.ens, Chew and Hopkins "nay'?. Motion to table passed 4 to 3. 6. The Council considered approval of disposition of a cnss Carroll Boulevard right of way at the southeast corner of West Prairie and Carroll Boulevard. (D-35) Riddlesparger motion, Alford second to table the disposition fc~r two months to allow the Parks Board to complete the master :;,Ian. Alford, Riddlesperger Barton, and Mayor Stewart "aye". Step bons, Chew and Hopkins "nay`?. Motion to table passed 4 to 3. R ClrYo! DENTON, rEXA3 MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 TELEPHONE (817 566.8200 M E M a R A N D U M DATE,. June 14, 1984 TO: G. Chris Hartung, City Manager FROM; Rick Svehla, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT Traffic and Pedestrian Modifications in the North Texas State University Campus Area Last month, Eorth Texas submitted to us a new report on campus improvements that they are pursuing. Three of their recommendations concern City streets and right-o£-way. As is our normal procedure, we referred all of these to the Traffic Safety Commission. The Traffic Safety Commission was scheduled to meet on Tuesday, June 12, 1984 so that the backup minutes could be prepared in time to be delivered with the Agenda packets before the Council meeting on June 19, 1984. After taking a poll, the meeting was cancelled due to lack of a quorum for the meeting on June 12, 1984. This is due in part to two vacancies on the Board and both colleges being on summer vacations. Staff is currently trying to schedule a meeting for Monday, June 18, 1984. I realize that the Council always wants minutes in their agenda backup material, however, staff felt that the Council would also want the Commission's input. Therefore, if there is a meeting on Monday, we will hand deliver the minutes Tuesday, June 19, by noon. As mentioned, North Texas' recommendations are the city's concern in three areas. The first of these is bike paths. North Texas is asking for a perimeter bike path to be established around the campus. The path would be on the west side of Welch from Hickory to Highland, on the north side of Highland from Welch to Avenue C and on the east side of Avenue C from Highland to Mulberry. It would continua along the south side of Mulberry from Avenue C to Avenue B, on the east side o Avenue 8 from Mulberry to Hickory, and on the south side of Hickory from Avenue B to Welch. North Texas is also suggesting; a bike path that loops off of Welch to the Studont Union and back, It would follow the south side of Prairie from Welch to Avenue A, along the west side of Avenue A from Prairie to Page Two Traffic and Pedestrian Modifications in the North 'T'exas State University Campus Area i i Chestnut, and on the north side of Chestnut from Avenue A to Welch. The only way this path could physically work on some of the existing streets would be to remove parking. This parking would have to be removed in order for the streets to continue to operate with the same number of lanes and under the same conditions as they do now. Some form of parking would have to be removed on Hickory from Avenue B to Welch, Prairie, Avenue A, and Chestnut. Some parking would also have to be removed on arts of Hi hlind and on Avenue C, as well as some parking on ulberry and Avenue B. On other sections of this loop there are already streets with no parking on them. Welch Street is an example of this. However, this street was built 44 feet wide to ultimately carry four lanes of traffic. If a bike lane is delineated along Welch, then we will no longer be able to operate Welch in a four-lane mode in the future. Staff tins reservations about building streets to specifications that will allow it to carry vehicular traffic and then allowing bicycles to use that street section. The best solution for a bike path is for the bikes to be physically separated from the traffic flow. In many areas, this type of solution would best be accomplished by having a bike path on campus property. The other solution would be to remove parking in the existing streets while still maintaining the same traffic lanes and access. If this were done, the staff would suggest that a physical barrier be erected between the vehicular traffic lanes and the bike lane. We have also indicated to North Texas that they would need to contact all the owners of businesses and shops in the area to ascertain their comments and view points. I have attached a memo that we received from Chief Dan Martin indicating the visits he and his staff made to shop owners in the area. on the whole, they appear to be quite favorable. In conclusion, staff would recommend that vehicular traffic movements and lamas remain the same in the areas suggested for bike lanes by North Texas. If bike lanes are established we would suggest that the best solution would be for them to be built on campus property. If this is not feasible for North Texas, then the staff would recommend that appropriate parking spaces be removed on streets where it is appropriate and that physical barriers separating the bike paths and the vehicular travel lanes be erected. We would obviously suggest that since this is a request of North Texas, that cost of delineating and separating the types of transportation be borne by North Texas, Page Three Traffic and Pedestrian Modifications in the North Texas State University Campus Area The second area of concern is crosswalks within the campus area. Currently within the campus area there are 15 marked crosswalks. North Texas is suggesting adding three more crosswalks within the campus, one at the intersection of Avenue D and Chestnut, one at the intersection of Avenue B anti Mulberry, and one in front of Crumley Hall on Highland. Star;. has always been opposed to mid-block crossings and since the crossing at Crumley is mid-block, we would suggest that it nor: be made. The crosswalk suggested at Chestnut and Avenue D ir. front of the HPER Building is shown to be made at an angle.. Staff is concerned about site distances in the area and whether it could be marked appropriately. Finally, the crosswalk a: Avenue B and Mulberry appears to be located at an intersectioc7, and seems to be a normal place for marking. We have suggested to North Texas that if theqq would like the City to install these, that they bear the full cost of tho, installation. We believe that the North Texas recommendation,t- are also asking for all of the other crosswalks within thee campus to be upgraded in marking, signing, and installation o': flashers. We conservatively estimate the cost per crossing t:, be approximately $1,500.00 each including the flashers. 've would recommend that North Texas pay for the three ne w crosswalk installations. If our understanding is correct ar.'; they want flashers at all the other crosswalks, we wouLcI suggest that they also provide reimbursement for the,=e installations. Finally, we would suggest that if North Texas wants these Crosswalks maintained within the campus, that J-e reach some kind of maintenance agreement with them to provide continued maintenance each year. The final area that would affect the City is in the area f parking meters, North Texas is suggesting installing meters -"n the south side of Chestnut between Avenue A and Welch, on t'.-~e north side of Prairie between Avenue A and Welch, in front -,f Kendall Hall and in front of Crumley Hall on Highland and the north side of Highland between Avenue D and Avenue Staff has no problem with meters being installed in these areas, however, staff would suggest that North Texas mainta.;) these meters and pay for the price of installation. In tur-,, they would also recoup the benefit of this revenue. Page Four Traffic and Pedestrian Modifications in the North Texas State University Campus Area If Council agrees with these recommendations and requests, they should instruct the Attorney to draw up the appropriate ordinances for No Parking and the metered parking. If the crosswalks are approved, we would suggest bringing back to you a formal agreement for the maintenance of these crossings within the campus, If you or the Council have further questions we will be at the meeting to discuss them with you, RUT- Assistant City Manager jd 1847M CITY OF DENTON MEMORANDUM TOt The Mayor and Members of the City Council FROMt Bill Angelo, Assistant to the Director of Public Works DATEt June 19, 1984 SUBJECTt AIRPORT MASTER PLAN STUDY GRANT The United States Department of Transportation through the Federal Aviation Administration Airport Planning Grant program has indicated that funds will be available to conduct a new Master Plan Study of the Denton Municipal Airport. These funds, totalling approximately$$44 000, will require City participation In the amount of approximately . An update of the Airport Master Plan is needed. Growth andldevelopment can be expected at the Denton Airport in the near future, abolt lease property on which to build hangars and to locate businesses continue to bo received by the Airport. Grant requests to extend the ove the andnterfuPrtlaher Studyrwas conductedrina1973nandliswverytmech out•ofThe date. With your approval we would like to proceed, following F.A.A. program guidelines, in mailing out requests to consultant companies for their proposals in conducting such a study. A consultentt sseleecttiioncoommittee will then be formed to review the proposals. be poposals wll be forwarded to the Airport Advisory Board for their recommendation to the Council, Once a consultant has been tentatively selected, the P.A.A. will review and approve the proposal and then allocate funds for the project. It is estimated that the study will require approximately six months to complete. From time to time during that period the consultant will be required to report to the Airport board, or the Council. if you wish, on its findings and progress, AIRPORT MASTER PLAN STUDY GRANT June 19, 1984 Page 'l STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS A new Master Plan study is very necessary to an orderly and planned growth of the Airport. Errors made now in the early stages of develop- ment will be with r.s for some time to come, it is the staff's feeling that funds allocated for this important study would be money well spent, Respectfully submitted, Bill Angelo BA/sc I I MINUTES CITY OF DENTON AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD JUNE 6, 1984 A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OF THE CITY OF DENTON AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 6, 1984, AT 12100 NOON, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM OF THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING. MEMBERS PRESFNTi Arno, Garland, Glick, Hayward, Keith MEMBERS ABSENTi Carrell, Smith OTHERS PRESRN`rt David Severen and Randy Severen of North Texas Ultra Lights; Bill Smith and Otho Henderson of Maverick Aircraft; Jon Weist of the Denton Record Chronicle; Bill Angelo, Clint Lynch and Bruce Cardwell of the City Staff 1. The Board considered the Airport 1984.85 Budget, Mr, Keith ques- tioned the priority ranking of the Unicom Radio and the fencing material, suggested that the mower be deleted from the budget, and suggested that interest from the Airport Improvement Fund be used to finance the engineering studies, asphalt repairs and fencing materials. Mr. Angelo pointed out the the City Airport radio operated by Maverick Aircraft is almost 20 years old and that it must be replaced, Mr, Glick agreed that it was money well spent, Mr, Angelo also stated that the mower was needed at the airport, especially with the changes in the Airport mowing requirements expected in the future. Mr. Arno suggested that the Airport Improvement Fund be left alone and not be nickeled and dimed by various small programs. A motion was made and seconded to recom- mend that the Budget be approved as written, 2. The Board considered the City of Denton Confederate Air Force Airshow Agreement. A motion was made and seconded to recommend to the City Council that the CAF Airshow Agreement be accepted as written, The motion carried unanimously. 3. Mr. Otho Henderson and Mr, Bill Smith were asked to provide the Board with information on the Maverick Aircraft/Confederate Air Force Agreement for the airshow, Mr. Smith stated that because tb.,e matter was still. being negotiated, tie did not want to go into details, but that he saw no problems and felt that a final. agree- ment would be reached soon. Mr, Smith also pointed out that Maverick would be issuing a license to the CAF for the use of their facilities and that because this was not a sub-lease, it would not require City approval, MINUTES AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD June 6, 1984 Page 2 4. The Board considered the application with the F.A.A. for an Airport Master Plan Study Grant. A motion was made and seconded to recom- mend to the City Council that a new Master Plan Study be conducted and that the staff should proceed in applying with the F.A.A. for such a grant. The motion carried unanimously. With no further business, the Huard adjourned at 105 P.M. I CLk11HCA1L OF AUMLNIIGIi r THIS IS TO CIPTIPY thal Iho ralcrophoogrvphc oppoofinq on this Nilno•llIIlo SMNr►~ wllh CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET a_~1911cmd and CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET art lndlnp 'with I OF DE accurato and complolo roproduclions of the rocordr at (Company and Dopy) CITY NTON CITY SECRETARY ooc dolivond In the roputor towf►o of w,~ 6uolnocs far phologrophlnp, M Is lurthor corllnod that 1h' rnlcr9pholoorpphic procorcoo wet* 04e01"061*o4 In a marmot and an Alm which n+oolo with nlulroMOnlc of Ihp National luraou of Standards for porrnanonl mlcropholograp41c copy, ' ,wc1 ljowol Y(CmMOl00Y AY(4OU PI.ACt') r 6t n ti&Q tsPAf ~Rb 514to AfllflfllAA Yf+Y>.e 7AM10