HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985
C
its
401
}
k~
DENTOtJ DEVELOPMENT GUIDE
'j A POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR GROWTH
KF
x
a'
Prepared For: City Government and Citizens of Denton
Prepared By: 4ity of Denton Land Use Planning Committee '
l;
F
+k
DECEMBER, 1480
,A
APPROVED BY THE
ri. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
{ FEBRUARY 4, 1981
APPROVED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 17, 1981
c" UPDA'PED AND RE-ADOPTED
e AUGUST 3, 1944
SEPPEMBER 41 1984
Yq~
r~
l k~
i
I
I
I
CITY COUNCIL
RICHARD S'rOWARTO MAYOR
AAAK CHEd, MAYOR PRO-TE~4 F1
JUG ALFORD R~
CHARLES HUPRINS
s' LINNIE ,4CADAMS p~
J, ',4, RIJJLESPERGER
RAY SPEPHENS
i
CHRLB HAR'CUNUj CITY MANAGER '
CJUdCIL Ar:P18EAJ - uC1UdER, 1979 ,
I, AT STUDY'S INCEPCIJN
BILL NASd, MAYOR
BUJ 4rNSLEY
RAY STEPHENS f,
RICHARD STd,JA T r
ROLAND VELA
PLANNING A140 LUNING COMMISSION
BILL CLAI80H19E, CHAIdAAN
I R. B. ESCUEt DICE-CHAIRMAN
RUBY COLE
Gt !Y JJREN
RUdER'P LAPORTE
MUMS PEARS014
ANDY SIDJR
COAMISSiud s4EMBER8 - OC'I'UBER, 1979
i A'P SCUJY'S INCEP'CGJN
` I.INNIE MCAJAMS, CHAIRPERSON ~w
A06EAP LAPORt'F,
BILL BRADY
CAROLS BUSBY ,
vlARILYN UILCHRIS'C
RIC8AR0 fALIAFEHRu r
DUN RYAN
ANDY SIJJR
wa
j
1 t
1
?'r E( UFFICIo MEMBERS
s'"-
CHRI5 HAR'fllNG CITY MANAGER
RICK SVEdLA DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
BOB NELSON DIREC'fJR OF UTILITIES
JOHN KELLER SPATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY AND PUBLIC fRANSPORTATION
j A. J. SEELY REPRESENTATIVE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS
BRUCE GAINr;S REPRESENTATIVd OF DENTON HOUSING AUTHORITY
STEVE BRINKMAN DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
STANLEY PHAAES CHAIRAAW DENPON '80 LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSION
n0 ~
PRJJRAM S'fAFF
' JEFF MEYER DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
JOHN LAVRdTTA FORMER DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
STEVE FANNING COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ASSOCIATE ANJ PROJECT DIRECTOR
RICK BARNES SPECIAL PLANNING ASSOCIATE FOR PROJECT
CHARLIE elAi'KINS JEVELOPMEdf REVIEW PLANNER {
DAVIJ OLLISU14 PLANNING; ASSISTANT (INTERN) J
~i DENISE SPIVEY PLANNING ASSISTANT
E,4ILY COLLINS ,:((),;RAM SECRETARY
JACKId LAMAR PR,-)GRAN SECRETARY
{ SUSAN LIIGAND OcPAdM8NT SENIOR SECRET"Y
JANET COLE PdoGRAM SECRETARY
tt' REVISION STAFF (1984) I
T, JEFF MYER DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND COMi4UNII'Y DEVELOPMENT
STEVE FANNING COMPREHENSIVE PLANNER
DAVID ELLISJN SENIOR PLANNER j
DENISE SPIVEY JRJAN PLANNER
CECILE CARSON URBAN PLANNER
1'ARYOd PASfdR PLANNII40 TdCHNICIAN
1
G, s
tg
cj
'a
L
,.j i I
LAND JSF. PLANNING COMMIT'IEd
BETPY BAILEY LEAGUE OF WOMEN VoPdtts f
RuddR'f 0, BeNFIELD rERAS WUM&N'S UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATIUN
JIM SLANfON WEST UEN'2011
w
BILL dRIXIUS NJR'fHtJESf llENTUIJ ;
AUUUS'1' BROWN SJUPd UENTON pi
# JIMMY JALa BROWN CHAMddR RdPRESENPATIVE
NEV. M.R. CHEW, JR. EAST' DENTON tV !
MIKE CdOCdRAN EASE DEIJ'TUN
JESSE COFFdY DEVdLUPER INTEREST
BOB CROUCH UdVELJPdR INTEREST ~
DO'I`fY DUWLING DENT0tV HOUSING AU'PHORITY BOARD r
HARRY DOWN DEVELOPER IIJPERES'P'
BRIAN DUBIN SOUTdslES'f DENTON
TOM FOU'L'S UGVELOPER INTEREST
MARILYN GILCHRIS'f PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 1i
LARRY HARdERSUN CUdG CUMMITI'eF
CHARLES HOPKINS DEVELOPER INTEREST P
` RICdARU E. JOHNSfON SOUTH UENTON
GEORGE KRIEGER UTILITY BUARU t
ROBERT LAFOR'fE PLANNING AND LJNING COOMISSION r,.
RUY LEMASCER NURI'HEAS'P DENTON
LARRY LUCE NJAi'H TEXAS SfAfE UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATION t'
JO LUKER CJ30 CUA14ITTES
JANE t4ALUNE PARR dUARU
t LINNIE t4CADAMS PLANNING AiVU 'LUNIUG COMMISSION rr
M FLJYD D. MCDANIdL NORTHEAST DuN'PUN
BONII'A MINUR EAS'P DdN'COW yst
JAcdE MITCHELL Rd 1
SdAt2CH AND ECONOMIC UEVELUPMEIJ'f BOARD
I STEVE PLAYER NJRCd PEXAS STAVE UNIVERSITY S'fUJEN'C BoUY
GEUR;t; u[,UeSEN SOU1'd DENTON
j MARK ROUEN WEST JENPUN
RON C. RYLAWDER DEVELJddR iNTERdS'C
f LLOYD SAN80AN S0U2N4F8T DENTON
ANDY SIDOR PLANNING AIJD ZONING CUAMISS100
CHESTER SPARKS COUNTY COr;MISSiUNER
RAY SPE9HENS COUNCIL REPRESENPA'fIVE
j DICK STEWAR'P
CUUIJCIL REPRESEtV'CAPIVd v><
JILL THOMAS SCdUUL DISTRICT do"D ~r
GRACIE TUNNELL SUUCHWES'C DENPON
d, UWAIN VANCE NUR'CHWES'P JEIJ'fJN
WILL WAGERS WEEP JE.JPON I
j
ALVIN WHALEY DEVEtuPER INTERES:' k-.
t CAROL 0HEELER-LI5TOiJ NORI'dEAS'f DENTON
t WELDUN WILLINGHAM CLIENT COUNCIL, WEST TEXAS LEGAL SERVICEe
MIRE WORKMAN d0RCdWdS'P DENTON
"LAND USE PLANNING COMt4I'C'CEtI FRAM CAPPAINS
a..
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
THE DENfON DEVELOPMENT GUIDE
WAGE
PREFACE-THE EMERGENCE
rt
OF 'fHE llnVr:4UPMENT GUIDE vi
1. PLAN PURPOSE AND USE ,
II. THE CONCEPT PLAN (LONG RANGE FRAMEWORK FOR GROWTH) ,
5
III. DEVELOPMENT POLICIES , ,
. 13
s
A. Land Use Intensity Areas , , . 13
1. Major Activity Centers ,
2, Moderate Activity Centers . . . 13
) 17
3, Low Intensity Areas 21
B, Housing 1
C. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
32
D. Utilities .
E, Transportation . . . . . . . '
a~ , 38
F, Individualized Policies , , , ,
1. BY Development Area Characteristics ,
a. older Neighborhoods . . . , 48
b. Existing Developed Areas . 48
c, Hard to Develop Lots 48
J tra 48
Nei 2. dpecific Area Policies ,
. 49
a, North of Oak Street ,
9
to Land Use Bordering NTSU Area , , , , , , 449
c. NTSU & TWU Transportation Planning 50
d, Hobson Lane, Teasley 50
e, Carroll Boulevard .
. 51
f., Fort Worth and Dallas Drive ~
g. East Denton . . . . . 52
53
t h• Bell Avenue 53
i. Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant , 54
5
r
I W
W
IV
;t
a
fLI
I Pe
l
TABLE OF CONTENTS e.
(continued)
I PAGE 4
I ~
3, Specific Land Use Performance Policies/
Clarification Definitions d~
a. Apartment Policies . . . . . 54 rl'
0. High Density Housing . , . . . • . . . . 54
c. strict site Design for Project Within pa {
One Block of Existing Single Family
Dwelling . . . . . 55 S
d. Concentration Policies . . . . . . . . . 56
' e. Mobile Home Parks . . . . . . . . . . . 57
G, Land Management Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
1. Development Opportunity Area . . . . . . . . 58
2. Housing Cost and City Regulation . . . . . . 59
i r
i 3, Conservation . . . . . . • . . 60
4. Uroan ouesiyn . . . . 61
s,<
5. Citizens Input Into Land Use Decision . . , 62
6. Publics Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 p-~
i
LIST OF PLATS
1. Overall Concept Plan . . . . . . 12
i
2. Land Use Intensity Areas . . . . . . . . 23
3. Multi-Family Housing Locations 31 F
i
4. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources 36
5. Major Thoroughfare Plan . . . . . • . . 44
6. Mass Transit Concept Plan 6 4 46
04946
v
~ P
f
11 1
``[1 I
a1
` a Poe emergenoe of the Development Guide
q
,j As Denton entered the 80's the community was realizing an increasing
volume of questions concerning the way toe community is developing and
i
its impact on the quality of lifer
F'
cne City leaders instituted a community-oased, city-wide plan to answer
t the questions, One avenue for this future Denton study was the "Denton 1
801s" committee tnat IOOKed at the future of Denton, in such areas as
' cultural activities, education, health, puolic facilities, recreation,
environmental and beautification Issues. Coordinated with that effort, ~
the City Council initiated a more specific study on future land use
questions and commissioned the Lind Use Planning Committee. The
committee's task was to produce a Development Guide that could be used as
a policy guide for Denton's comprehensive plans and as a guide in the
day-to-day implementation of the Capital Improvement Program, Zoning,
suodivislons, etc.
i
Me format of t{te plan, determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission
and the City Council as the most useful, was a cornDination policy plan
{
1 and fixed design plan.
ry ~
i
'fne Planning Process ~
3
!i
PIN
TO produce too Development Guide, a 46 memoer City-wide planning
committee was establisned, rnis committee Jas composed of residents,
policymaKers, developers, civio leaders, and public officials. Persons
with specific expertise in community development and persons woo dere
uotn directly and Indirectly concerned with the future development of toe
City of Denton were selected as memoers of the committee.
i;
k~Ui r
S
ti
.
c
P'wo metnods for selecting representatives were used to form tile 46 memoer
committee. Agencies, organizations, and commissions already involved in
planning or development in the City were invited to send representatives
to participate in the 'worKsnops.~
i
The remaining memuers included homebuilders, developers, realtors,
bankers, landowners, and representatives from other civic groups. 'Phese tl
representatives were self-selected at an open meeting on December 17,
1979.
F- I
'Pne Planning dorksnups ny
Educational worK sessions, "Planning Workshops," were conducted by the
r
committee. The committee designed and evaluated issues and alternative i.
policies wnicn could encourage the desired development.
Ia.
The purpose of the first, second, and tnird workshops was to develop au
understanding at planning. Pne committee was familiarized witn some i
,I
planning terms, vocabulary, tneories and basic development facts about
uenton.
In the fourth and fiftn worKsnops, the inemuers of the Land Use Planning all
Committee identified the major proolems and issues concerning Denton. In
the sixth worxsnop, alternative development plans were prepared by
111 worksnop participants.
In addition, the technical staff conducted an independent evaluation of
the alternatives.
Tne Denton development Guide emerged from Lnese worKshops. :ne Guide is
updated yearly, and tnis report includes updates tnrougn September, 1984.
i
Vii
t
f ,
„
f~
v
14
Is P1.Ai4 PURPOSE AND USE
E~
f
c
:f
f
h
f
f
a~
5
r'1
Lt
j, ki
k,
PLAN PURPOSE AND Uz;&
rt A, Introduction
~2.
€i
r" Tne Denton Development Guide emphasizes the use of the document on a
I
daily oasis. Pne plan is intended to De an umbrella policy guide N'l
for the more detailed and functional plans of Utilities, Parks,
etc. This guide is considered the comprehensive Plan for Denton,
'texas.
I fnls document is divided into two main sections: The Concept Plan
and Development Policies. Tne Concept Plan represents the Long
r t q Range Framework cot Growth and could be compared to a constitution
t~ that sets the oase for future day-to-day decision. The Development
Policies 3oction presents policies that support the framework of tae
Concept Plan. Tne policies are intended to De used as a tool to aid
in day-to-.lad development decisions, particularly o
y3 y government
fk'a officials, out also D/ the community,
enese policies arc not intended to answer all guestiona, nor shout)
they. rno Juide's main purpose Is to create a foundation for the
1
M more detailed functional plans and studies necessary in day-to-day
decision making. In other words, the empnasis is In the use of the
Guide and not on the document itself. Pnis use Includes daily
discussion, deaate, refinement, redrafting or re-commitment to the
Ea policies in a consensus planning process. Only through this
continuous use can this guide serve its goals of
f
I'm
# i
1. Assistance to comprehensive deL'19iOh making in d consensus
' planning process
2. Providing a cnecx list of major issues for the purpose of
insuring that all issues are considered In decision making
s~
d, Encourage coordination, uniformity, and consistency in our
It~~ community development.
s
F~
~~1
T
I
l
w
B. Cne Use of the Guide
r
the Planning Process utilized in the preparation of this guide and
suggested in its day-to-day use is a citizen based consensus planning
process. The day-to-day use of this guide is intended to be flexible ~j
dependent upon:
1. The extent of uncertainty or controversy
2. The time constraint of a pending decision
1. Cne technical nature of the issue
For example, a question in the use of the guide that is only mildly j
SRI
debated and/or is of an urgent nature should be decided in a quick ti
manner by the responsible decision makers, Highly technical
questions could be supported oy professional studies with very
e.
littlep if any, need of consensus planning. However, the citizen
based consensus planning process should be used when an Issue is
highly deoatable and nas some time flexibility and/or is primarily
a communit., ialue judgr,ent. R°
i ~
In response so the spirit of this planning process, a formalized
i
j updating p,,oceduee for the guide was approved oy the Planning and
II Zoning Coirra,.ssion and City Council prior to the work of the Land
Use Planning Committee. This procedure is as follows;
f f
I
j UPDA'CE PAUCtiJURE
r 1. Update balky Along With Belated Decisions r'
f
(Zoning, C.P. Subdivisions, etc.)
I
staff oummary deports
fne staff report on all City Council/Planning and Loning
decision items snall clearly relate alterna',ive decisions
i~
wlto impact on appropriate policies in the plan.
~ I
1
l.~
a{ b. if a decision indicates a corresponding policy change is
r required in the plan, then:
Y~
1) the staff is required to draft a modified policy change
F.
and present it to the next regularly scheduled City
~ Council meeting for action or policy revision. In case
f; of zoning acr.ion, the required policy modification shall
~n accompany the approved ordinance.
i
2} The City Council will make final review of a potential
policy change and incorporate said change in the Land Use
11 I
Policy Guide.
,s
} c, Any Planning and Zoning Commissioner or City Council Member
m4l present a proposed policy change whether or not a pending
or recent Land Use decision has been made. The proposed
change is forwarded to the Planning and Zoning commission ter
tneil, review and recommendation to the City Council.
d. If a proposed policy change is determined by the City Council
to oe (1) a controversial decision, and (2) not an urgent
decision, then a spacial mini-cotmn£ttee, headed by planning
and Zoning Commission and City Council members, may be
_ commissioned, Phe committee study time will be structured to
1 me time constraints of the decision, me committee will be
charged with bringing back a recommendation to the full
Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council.
aI
ty
2. Yearly Policy Guide 8e-Adoption
a. In July the complete policy guide is placed on the Planning
F^ and zoning commission Agenda for recommended minor modifica-
i j}
tion or re-adoption. After study, the Planning and Zoning
{ Commission is required to foroard a recommendation to the
City Council at their seconC meeting in October.
1:a
i
s
w
i
i
b. The City Council dill accept the Planning and Zoning
commission recommendation or modify the policy guide and
adopt the guide as a policy document for the upcoming year.
3. General Policy for Major Update 1
a. This policy guide is to be updated approximately every five i
years to tan years. ~j
1{I 1) Update dependent upon:
a) Population Growth ad;
b1 Extent of amendments during preceding year:. (more ~.j
amendments--more need for general update) I
2) me process for updating the Guide will be determined +
? during its annual evaluation.
C. Conclusions
j The use of cnis guide in the context of the total community
development decision making process should tnerefore take five
q steps:
r
Step 1; A quick reference to the Concept Plan to insure overall
consistency witn the pending decision.
Step 2: deference the functional area of tnis guide (i.e. nousing, 1r
I thoroughfares, etc.) for any appropriate policy.
Stop 3: Reference specialized policy areas of this guide: f
a hm
* LoCat Ional
Special conditions such as current capacity of area
public facilities to support the proposed development
i
step 4: Reference otner related detail plansi tecnnical L
information and/or unique individualized characteristics
of the issue under study.
Stop 5: Assess the public controversy, the tecnnical nature and/or
time constraint of the issue under study and then take
appropriate planning/decision making action.
~ I,
k #
2
S
II. VE CONCEPT OLAN
'r
T' LUNG RANGE FRAMEWORK FOR GROW'T'H
r 't
i1
r
C NY
,n. .
t 1
r,
,
rl. 'rda coecePr PL.AN
A. Introduction
The Concept Plan outlines the basic Long-Range Framework. From this
frameworx, the Long-flange Goals and Objectives emerged. This founda-
tion forms the basis for the day-to-day development policies which
11 follow in the next sec
4,+ tiers. The Intent is to provide a context for ~
decision-making based on a unified long-range context that helps make
G today's decision solve today's problem, while at the same time, not
nx compounding problems for the future. z
S. Overall Goals and Objectives
4- a
me planning process, including the alternative land use designs and
the written and verbal responses, culminated into a concept Plan.
i
This concept Plan generates the specific goals and objectives. The
i
following summarizes the goals and objectives of the Concept Plan.
1. Long Range Development Concept Goals
Benton should become a self-sustaining city with a balanced 1
economic base, a choice of various housing styles and a variety
of retail, employment and leisure activities. All of these
should be centered around the principle or
providing economic
opportunities and services of a moderate-sized city while
a
maintaining the small-town atmosphere.
1
n.
I
r"
j
Tne goal is to provide our basic needs while minimizing our
ecological and social cost. This can oe accomplished by such
measures as;
it
a. Encouraging a Variety of Housing from high density to low WA f
density and ranchette witn an emphasis upon moderate to lad ►i ,
density.
psi
%
E t
L). Keeping all Transportation Systems in balance with land use.
C. Encouraging Green Belts, Open Space and Agriculture Lands
both witnin and adjacent to our City. 'w
d. Community Unit Concept developing communities within the City. rte,
e. Enco•acaginq Economics and Lifestyles tnat recognize a sense
of productivity and a period of conservation by empnasizing:
i) iransportation and Land Use systems that are efficient
and support a life line to goods, services, jobs, and 4.
)'ood supplies within close proximity to homes
{ z) These transportation systems should be energy efficient
i} and give equal consideration to such modes as foot,
bike/scooter, public and individual auto, and provide r
more housing closer to employment, retail and leisure
activities.
j f. Recognizing individuals And Families of differing lifestyles j'
' and needs: "protecting all by providing for all."
g. Minimize Ecological, public healtn, crime or fire prevention
loses by tnorough, on-going study of tnese issues by
professionals as well as the community as a whole.
h. Provide For On-Going Citizen Education and participation into
future decisf.ons.
-6-
k
,I ,
YT ~ ,
,
1
L
2. Long Range Development Concept Objectives
r~
rnis study was designed to emphasize the pnysical development
u,
factors towards the fulfillment of our general long-range
community goals. However, related social and environmental
gOd13
and activities were an integral part of the decision making
process that led toward defining the Long Range Growth Concept.
y, In this context, this Development Guide outlines detailed
r
y
' i policies that will tend to encourage a steady, moderate growth in
a development pattern characterized by high concentrations along
the freeway and at three specific major areas, T be policies will
also support otner major special purpose centers such as the
airport industrial park area, Lesser multi-purpose centers are
empnasiz>d in sub-city areas primarily intended to service the'te
areas.
The policies for the overall growth framework will center arounJ
,r
oasic onjeetives ofl I
Al. Protection of Exiating Development, particularly residential
development,
D. Encouraging Development where public facilities capacity is
i
already available and ecologically sensitive areas are not
# significantly impacted,
c. Providing and Aaintaining an Overall City Balance between:
r
i
1) Transportation and Land Use
A! The transportation land use concept map provides the
basic policy for this oalance insofar as regional and
local transit systems and individual automobile traffic
a;a
is concerned. (Integrating pedestrian, pike and/or
scooter traffic is intended by policy but details are
beyond the scope of this plan.)
IN,
i
I
{
21 Population and Utilities
I3 ~
Poe long range development concept suggests raising F.~
overall city densities only slightly over current levels
of 8,2 people per developed acre to average density of
5.5 people per acre. Translated to the 55 square mile
study area would mean a possible pnysical holding
capacity of 175,000 to 225,000 i{
people. This population
figure corresponds witn current long range utility
i
planning policies and projects, Based on current
development trends, the current basic utility structure I '
would accommodate growth into the 21st century rind 4+i
provide basic utility facilities for 100,000 people. Any
{ development beyond tnis figure would assume adequate ! y
energy resources and acceptable economic and ecological
costs in order to support lifestyles realized today.
C. Concept Elan .,ocationdl Policies
1, dighly I:oncentrated Activity Centers
IJi
J The Concept Plan suggests a balance growth for Denton with three
major center areas as focal points for a high level of 1
activity. Tnese intensely developed centers, in general, i
i include not only commercial and related activities but also
`s
residential development. The centers are located at the
'Triangle Mall area, the proposed North Loop 288/1-35 area and
the Airport area to the west. The plan also recognizes the
unique aspects of the original downtown area as a
II special-purpose, high-intensity emphasis center, i.
2, dignly Concentrated Industrial Development
'rho plan suggests industrial activities in large and
moderate-sized concentrations, with toe majority of the
joss in
ji _d-
i
{
three industrial areas; the Airport area, the North 1-35/Hwy 17/
~■1
i! Loop 288 area, and the Southeast. oenton Tr
t iangle Mall area
(generally north to Morse Road, bounded by Woodrow on the west
fv and Maynill/1-35 on the east.)
,
3, Moderate Size Suo-Centers
. .3
I A system of medium and small nodes of commercial and related ,a
activities along the freeway and at selected intersections of
projected new major tnorouynfares is suggested. However, this
development would use site planning, buffer zones of open spaces,
etc. to avoid creation of unsightly and inefficient strip-type
commercial areas.
4. Predominantly Low Density Residential Development
Low density residential developments are encouraged in the City.
5. High Densit/ Residential Development V
digher intensity residential uses, represented by nigh and medium
density development, were distributed in a number of locations with a
major emphasis to limn excessive concentration In any one place,
except for the major activity centers, Toe plan indicates that ;f
concentration of nigh-density nousing should oe encouraged in the
major activity center areas in order to lessen transportation conges-
tion, conserve energy, and offer diverse lifestyles for Oenton resi-
dents, The plan shows moderate sized concentrations of units
generally related to the freeways, greenoelts, major thoroughfares,
major and moderate activity centers, or as buffers to higher intensity
land use, Site planning, limited use of concrete parking areas,
provision of open apaces, parks, and buffering with greenoelts is
y encouraged with all moderate or nigh-density nousing to avoid creating
additional "concrete cities,"
'T
-9-
,
6. Pransportation i
'Pne plan indicates development patterns related to a transportation
tl
system with the automobile as a dominate form of movement, generally
in relation to the current freeway and major thoroughfare plan.
dowever, the plan recognizes an increasing role for mass transit and F
1 strongly encourages a local system as a priority item. As the we'I
concentrations of development approach the plan's holding capacity,
local and mass transit will be required to serve the plan's land use
t pattern.,
j ~
S'q
Also, through citizen questions and input, the committee recognizes
i.
the need for other modes of transportation to be integrated into an
overall, multi-mode transportation plan for the entire City. ways :o
provide for ;pedestrian and bike traffic must be studied and provido:i
If the Concept Plan is to realize its goals.
:j 7. Drainage and Open apace Preservation
{I L) i
1'ne plan preserves a majority of the floodplain areas and floodway;
as open space and maintains the natural creek channel for drainage
purposes. Pne plan further suggests a general theme to encourage
open space as an element of all urban design decisions.
j 8. Agriculture Land Preservation
~nl
l The committee recognized the need to preserve and encourage use of
agricultural lands both within and near the City of Denton. Further
I study of days these lands may De preserved, incentives for ;heir use
to produce agricultural products essential to feeding and clothing
the residents of Denton, and how preservation of such land might
alter or impart upon the final plan of this committee is needed
-lU-
i
•A
~3a
9. Concept Plan r4ap
~c~ I
L~ Phe following map represents a graphic presentation of the preceding
~r## locational Frarnework. The next section presents a more detailed set
of policies designed to help guide community development towards the
goals of tnic Concept Plan.
I 1YA' , IV
y
h _
r
-11-
M
;.i
t
t
"lr
OVERALL CONCEPT PLAN
_ I I~I'I'III II'I i /
~ I l l i l l l l l l~ l
1II IIIIIIII
II IIII VIIII
1 IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII ! •
I got jII! II VIII IIIIII .000006
• • • • • • ,
~I I I 1
~ ~ Ill~l~li I VIII I IIII !
00
• I T~I'14 II'1-.
If 111111111 ;tii J
04
11111111 y ~4:.
06
4 4~
•
00 Ili 41
it llllilllllll 111111111111 II I
'R.' • IIIIIII IIIIIII II M + •
kG I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ..4
I I! I , 2 ~
IIII11It 11l 1 I1 IIII, •
I IIIf •
If1I IIIf111111 1111111 11 f I O '
:nl 11111111l111I111I1f11111111f ~ •
fll111lll ll
IIII I I 1I 1 1 1 I I I '',1 !
• VIII II IIII IIIIII IIII I :I •
• .0 1111111 I11I111111111I I IIIIII II IL Il 1111 III I •f•l•l, ~
f
l; • 9''~: Q!' f 1 f 11 1 l l I I f I I 1 III III 1 1 f 1f
s • ~+"•I IIIIII III 11111l1111I IIII I IIIIIII II II II 111 1 •
;1 • P I f l l I ~ ICI 11 1 I I I
• I VIII II II I I11~1~ 1
1i1ililit
r I IIII I~ ~~t ' •
It • I I Ilfl 111111If1 \ ' IT`
e • • -
41114111~
•
ell 00
• 1
00
I C O~INTH
YLl
1 INTENSITY AREA (Ccrn,'nercial na-.;)
4S/HICH INTENSITY AREA IErpljy^e c,r t i I
QNCDERATE :N'PENS[TY AREA
I:1:d•_:at? .....r.l
LOW INTENSITY AREA IDlvers:r; c.1 c 7'I T,, ,~i~'
LL-
i
I
s
ei
5 F'
III, udVdI.UP14rN'C PUI.ICIcs h
Ya ~ ff
~l
h.
I.
al ~ a.
54
r;
la
9
owl
a a
tY it I, r
t
5a
I
I
1
T
~~kl, 111 /
i~
El
III. DOVELUPMEN'P POUCIES
jj A. Land Use Intensity Areas
'd
r
Ins intensity index policies are the priority policies of the Guide,
and the importance of the policies should be emphasized in all
planning activities.
Phe changing of an areas intensity index standard is considered a
' major decision of the city. Therefore incremental planning
activities and decision3 that will change the current or projected
intensity of an area should be tabled rime
r permitting, and a special '
t intensity study of that area should be referred to the Planning and
Zoning commission, incremental planning activities and/or decisiold,
FFF+++111
include but are not limited to, zoning, utility, drainage, transpor-
tation, and park planning can directly or indirectly change an area3 or 1
land use .intensity.
r
Phe Planning and Zoning study will focus on the intensity question,
i
addressing the need and impact of changing an areas intensity index
i, standard. A recommendation will be forwarded to City council for
final action.
s.
Special Note: It should also be understood there are numerous other policies
and factors that will ba considered in city planning decision
making.
f
1. t4ajor. Activity Centers
a* jne Purpose of Oesianatina Major Activity Areas
5z: Is to provide a policy commitment to a general location in
order to insure:
~td
N "R
Ap
s5'
Y13V
E
i
M T
1
1
1) Adequate public infrastructure of sewer, water, and F,!
transportation facilities to support these centers.
R" I
Witnout sucn a plan, public funds can oe ineffectively
PJ
utilized! for example, community streets, sewer lines,
j etc., in areas of town not supportive of the City's
desire for growtn. The Concept Plan suggests balanced
a~ growth oetween all quadrants of the City and for growth 9w
to be in balance witn existing infrastructure capacity.
ut ,
2) "flake a commitment to the business community that
activities in these areas will be a:;.pu ted by City
f Government while making a commitment to other residents
that their neighborhoods and local streets and facilities
will not be disrupted by an unplanned major activity f"
c,~ J
i. J
center in their neighborhood,
to Commarcial and Employment Emphasis e.,
The ,onsensus showed oy the land use alternatives inelicatar, „
I
the-major activity centers to be in the following areaa:
1) I-35EI dwy 771 dortn Loop 288 area
l) Golden Triangle Mall area to Aayhill Road
3) Airport "
4) original Downtown
I,
Tne plan indicates a consensus that the original downtown
should oe continued as a moderate-to-major center, out
possibly in a different or unique category with emphasis on
j governmental, banking, aild specialized retail type urban ,
1
center. Tnerefore, it is also given a major activity center
"
designation In order to estaolisn policy emphasis for this
purpose.
i
i '
" -J.4-
,I
1
LI l
Fir C. Diversity and High Density Residential
Land use diversity, including high-density housing, should oe
encouraged. This housing will be a puffer to lower intensity
adjacent areas but also provide transportation balance and
f energy conservation by having housing in close proximity to
s
joos and services.*
^rf t ' .
j d. S ecific Center characteristics
t ,
kA M, 11 Triangle Mall Area: Dominant Commercial Center a
k
' It is the intent of this plan that the Triangle Mall area
c
x ,>a have a slightly higher commercial emphasis in addition to
encouraging a substantial employment balance. As a {
txlj'i 111 guideline and indication of scale, this area is intended
'
s.
to serve at maximum development 600 acres of commercial
and industrial uses representing over 11,000 joos. J
k 1
l) I-35 and JOrtn Loop 26d; aalanced Center
i`
r Tnis center emphasizes more of a balance between
commercial and industrial uses. As a guideline Eor
maximum development, this area is intended to provide
over 300 acres of commercial and industrial development
?t representing over 5,000 jobs in the area, s:
I
*dU Cdi All policies are contingent on existing available infrastructure and
specific site design considerations, See Individualized policies section,
,
~i -l!j-
j PkI
1
r~
{
1
i Mr
t i
i
31 Airport Area: Dominant Ewployment Center '
Predominantly industrial land of approximately 1,400 77q~
M acres will result in a capacity of over 18,000 jobs in I
the area.
1
!f PI
41 Original Downtown a
sm
Tois plan recognizes the unique aspects of the original Fi
r downtown area as a special purpose high intensity center
for the City. This guide sii
ggests a continuing policy
for support of the downtown area. As part of a program
initiated by a Downtown Land Owners Association, the City
would support public actions and expenditures in an {
effort to upgrade and l
preserve the area. Incentives and
policies for encouraging realization of plans would be
encouraged, Innovative programs should be explored, su.a
as emphasis upon pedestrian traffic, use of golf i'
curt-like "trains" within the downtown area, while
auveloping perimeter parking and local public E
transportation collection points.
e. Low Density Neighborhood Protection
j
Low density residential areas on the fringe of these high
;j activity centers should oe protected by such measures as
intensity gradation (ouffering), strict site design
j requirements, transportation, land use balance, etc.
Furtner, traffic planning should insure tnat no local
residential streets are utilized for general circulation to
the centers. Development of neighborhood associations and ?f
? councils will further ensure neighborhood protection.
r
^16- i.:.
i
i ,
~ r.
G~
41~
11
2, Aoderate Activity Centers
_4 j
a. Purpose and Intent
I
The purpose of identifying moderate centers of activity
r~ parallels many of the purposes discussed earlier for large
centers, including .ualanced city wide growth. However, in
considering the criteria for current capacity and future 7
design capacities for transportation and utilities, the
main consideration is not just for adequate capacity to
accommodate existing and future development demands. This
policy for moderate-size centers includes an intent to limit
infrastructure to the planned limited size of these centers,
This policy helps insure the long-range land use balance
indicated by the concept plan.
r:
s~
o, Location
The general locations of these centers are shown on the map
located at the end of Section A (page 23).
c. Size/Intensity
Most of these centers should serve four neighborhoods (one
h' potential community unit) of from 51000 to 15,000 people,
i} The size of these centers should then be 3U acres to 250
acres with an intensity of 250 trips per day per gross
acreage, These centers can take on many mixes of, land use.
A prototype that encourages diversity and a mixture of land
uses could be towards the higher end of the acreage range
whereas a specialized confer, such as commercial, would need
to be towards the 3U acre size.
~i
-17-
f I
J
I
IVY.
For a example, a diversified center at full development would M
be:
M
30 Acres of service industry
20 Acres of Commercial
15U Acres of Public Lands (large parks,
buildings, etc.) schools, government
5U Acres of Higher Density s,
/Housing/Apartments ~
The above center would then be t ~M
he focal point of four low
density neighoorhoods. These
f ne£ynborhoods would be made up oc r~
i
single family, patio houses, duplex and limited townhouse/
apartment, all interspersed with opens
and bicycle ways, pace 4reenways, pedestrian
Cnis land use concept would serve well the
Physical elements needed to implement the community unit concept.
Most centers, if not as diversified, would be towards the smaller
s.'
scale of 30 to 5U acres for primarily commercial center.
i rI
dey factors for J
judging a proposed development
intensity are., for this size acrd ' I
li Compare first to existing infrastructure capacity
(i
size/intensity as the current development is always limited
to existing capacity.
ka
21 Compare the development to the ultimate capacity (band Jse
intensity Areas) of the center or defined study area. Note a
i proposed development should not utilize the total area
J intensity capacity unless the total area capacity policy
increased.
1
3) Give size bonus for diversity, i.e, housing, commercial, L'
officer puolle facilities, open space, and conversely limit
size for specialized development, i.
e., all commercial. It is
E ~
i
1
recommended by this policy that all such judgments oe made on
}S4
proposed development that will oe realized within five
h,
S years, if such development plans are not realized within
rive years, the area wouid then oe subject to reconsideration
1 (back zoning) to a smaller size (specialized center size). !
d. piversity
The policy recommends diversity in toe moderate size center
in order to encourage:
1 Intensity gradation (buffering)
* Energy conservation
' Transportation balance (Eliminate trips across town for
)~y day-today needs) ~I
!!*JI * A sense o£ 'my part of town' (a community unit concept)
x ' Joos close to housing
Tne doove mentioned policy (C-3) is one incentive to create a
more diverse center. Tnis policy suggests the size of, the
11 center can oe increased if the land uses are diverse,
However, it is the policy to grant such oonuses to actual
Jevelopments and not guarantee them for future contingent
phases.
e, digs-Jen9ity Housinu
It
The plan indicates some high-density housing in connection )
' with the moderate centers tinder the following limitations;
a~
Y
* Used for buffering
pfi * Used for diversity (see aoove)
At least one access by major or secondary arterial with
no access by low density residential street
~i
vi
h
III
1
r1
* Limit Concentration in One Place (750 units), see h3
Performance Policy definition
Good site design standards to protect adjacent single
family areas such as large setbacks, landscaped front
t' yards, screening fences, traffic to major streets only,
etc. (See site design criteria in Performance Policy
Definition section.)
f. Low Density Neighborhood Housing Protection
it is the policy of this plan that high intensity development
a
on the fringe and/or adjacent (within one block) of existing
tow density residential areas should brs
lirotected by such
~ieasures as intensity gradation (buffering), strict site
design control (setbacks, parking, landscaping, etc.) and
insure transportation land use balance (see policy in
transportation section). Further, traffic planning should
insure that no local residential streets are utilized for d'
general circulation to the high or moderate intensity !
i developments.
I f
g. Stri Commercial
1) Overall Policy Intent
It is the intent by encouraging centers of activities I,
that the plan discourage strip commercial, This will be
done by such means as;
* Limited curb cuts
r ~
f ` Requiring site plane for multi-ownership properties,
r parking, setbacks, etc,)
* Encouraging diversity down the corridor (commercial
nodes broken up by high density housing, offices, etc,)
-20-
~ i
+>i ' Discouraging unsightly and hazardous s
trip commercial
J by requiring sign restrictions, buffering by
greenbelts and/or landscaping L. site
Plans
o 3. Low Intensity Areas
a. Purpose and Intent
+ 4 r
All areas not designated high or moderate intensity areas are
considered low Intensity areas. The primary purpose of these areas is to insure the overall area land use transportation
z
balance by controlling the overall density and intensity (75
trips per day per gross acre), Further, these areas
v
represent our primary housing areas. Thus, these areas
4 r dnould emphasize residential use whereas the other intensity
I areas might emphasize commercial or employment areas.
f b. Loc__ation 1
The general location of these areas is shown on the map
1 .
located at the end of Section A (page 23).
SizeSlze/hnt.y
` ' ~ ksl
These areas are planned to correspond to an overall gross
density policy of 4.7 units/acre and overall intensity policy
maasured at 75 trips per day per gross acre.
F'
n
d. Diverslt /Net noorhgoJ Protection
0iversitied land use, low density residential, small
scattered sites of apartments (.less tnan 200 units),
neignbornood service, etc., is encouraged in all
S'~ ^21^
.
Hll
r
M
I
{
neighborhoods, but concentration is discouraged. (Sae
Performance Definition Section.)
hi
1) Strict site plan control within 11600 feet of existing
low density residential areas (development should
maintain character of area, architectural and
landscaping, see Performance Policy definitions). kk
~h
Rx~
2) Traffic planning insures the only access by secondary
arterial or larger (no access through local low density
t ,
streets).
►'1i
f .I
3) The overall density/intensity standard not violated.
f,
' (Land Use Intensity Areas), 4
k 1
4) Sufficient green space, recreational facilities and
i..
diversity of parks are provided,
5) Input Into planning by neighborhood associations and
1
councils is provided.
k~
e. Strip commercial
3 f,••
Any form of continuous strip commercial is strongly
j discouraged in/or backing up to low intensity areas. '
l
:11
6 ,
1
M.
-22-
t
li(
1
i
F
f
LAND USE INTENSITY AREAS (J
vial J
iR2 ~ . Q I Y
r
Ij • 1 , ~y ~ I +J'
VO A L E
. I y~
s
*21
t •
{
»k
Y
•
•j RYAN RD.r~ Ilk
y, •
•
li I~
s,i CA4 I c
YLE
j HlW INI NSIIY ARFA ti
(C:amercial & ETlorent t5:ptasis)
ADUWE UntNSIIY ARIA
r (Diversity Encouraged but LL--lted)
LOW C7[E',i'.SM APIA
(Diversity Encouraged but Ccncentr-tims
I ~ Discwr ed)
I
f ~
i
. r
Housing
V1
' The purpose of the following nousinq policies is to encourage housing
i'
types that respond to the differing economic and individual lifestyles
of Denton's citizens, protect existing and future neighbornood Integ-
rity and insure that our overall city-wide density policy is
preserved,
he f ~ 4
1. dousing Diversity
• t p~
frl~
It is the policy of this plan that housing diversity be strongly
N r. s~ encouraged in Denton as a whole, The policy of housing diversity
ttJ is closely related to housing size and housing density therefore,
the following specific policies in those areas should also be
referenced, In striving for the goal of housing diversity, trio
plan recommends that in judging development decisions, we;
f
d, rlOrK towards differing nousing types in such quantities
city-wide and sector-wide that correspond to Denton citizens'
financial constraints and desires for differing lifestyles,
t b. Diversified housing should be available in all sectors of the
t7 city, which also su
~ 3gests that one housing type should not be
concentrated in one sector of the city, 'rnis policy will
rr, tend to promote balanced diversity growth which provides
benefits of balanced land values, better utilization of
infrastructure, more energy efficiency, reduces traffic
congestion and provides more of a sense of community
in
differing areas n£ the town,
c• Diversified housing patterns should oe well planned to Insure
that all neighoorhood integrity is maintained, Examples of a
few such planning policies are;
ut
-'4-
a.t
r
.
1
r
" No type of nousing overly concentrated in one area >w
t Good site design transition between housing types and
density: buffers (greenbelts, housing intensity
` gradation, etc.)
i Transportation design where nigher density can be served
` without flowing through lower density transportation
I Facilities
Provisions for: 4
Multi-modes of transportation integrated within and ii
11 between neighborhoods and activity centers j
g.4 I
A
. Codes should pe expanded where necessary and strongly F.j
enforced if already on the books to insure quality of
smaller size housing.
2, Higher Density Housing ► '
Cam' '
a. Apartments: Geographic Distribution
r.
It is the overall policy of this plan that apartments be i'
dispersed throughout the City with limited areas of high
concentration in any one area (See the map on page 31).
h. Moderate Intensity Centers (See Index for location of the
policies)
of Low Intensity Areas
Individualized sites or small areas throughout the City would
be permitted only if it meets as a minirnum the following
conditions:
4.:
1) Only access by secondary arterial or greater (the intent lr
1 is to limit access through low-density housing areas) `r
(
2) Desirable to have access to pedestrian, bike/scooter and ,
public transportation
f r
-25-
j
f
}
r 3) To have strict site design review for all projects within
1,60U feet of existing single family dwellings. The
s
intent is to protect existing housing as a priority policy
by good f " transition, screening, open space, landscaped
front yards in character with neighborhood. (see
Performance Policy section)
~1 t
4) TO have access or be located adjacent to floodplains,
i
r
greenbelts or large open space. (The intent is for
nigher density to provide more of their recreation demand
~ and also this will help keep the density low for the overall area)
5
51 Not to exceed overall neighborhood density and intensity
standard (4.7 gross units per acre on average density and
75 trip:r/ day/acre on average intensity)
6) de sure tha: existing street and other public facilities
nave adequat±p Fafe capacity for all modes of t
,r
v transportation,
7) Apartment locations that buffer otner nigher intensity
i uses are desirable, t
33 8) Apartment units are not to be concentrated in one area. `
The policy limits any continuous cluster of apartments to
under 2UU units. Concentration defined as 112 mile
l;
separation. (see Performance Policy section)
'z
rf
a t
i~
4
}tl
-26-
r,
%
i
I r P
1
A i
3. Apartments, Recreation Facilities and Site Planning K
6
Since multi-Family densities put a greater strain on community ~q
recreation areas than do single family areas, and in many cases, RI
create some recreation and open space needs not typical of 1
single family, the intent of this policy is to encourage
1} apartment complexes to provide a defined amount of usable open
and community garden as well as recreation equipment and other
space such as swimming pools, playgrounds, parks, etc. In
~i addition, site plan review tends to insure neighborhood
protection. d.~ 1
Therefore, it is the policy of this guide to require Planned E
Development Ordinance control for larger complexes. Since the
p+.
policy could be prohibitive to small apartment complexes, it is
t.. `l
not suggested that it be applied in such cases, 1
id
A. dousing and tJeighbornood Preservation
The intent of these policies as well as numerous other policies hd
throughout this guide are intended to preserve our neighborhoods,
k the backbone of our community. This goal is reinforced uy the J
current unstaole economic conditions and dwindling resources
whtcn make such things as rising housing and energy coats a
{
i paramount federal, state, and local issue. Therefore, the
preservation of our existing housing stock becomes a priority and [
a major intent of these policies. Me specific policies in L
support of these issues are: f
Y1
a. Modify codes to encourage remodeling of nousing and
I
redevelopment of neighoorhoods by providing oonus in
regulation, taxes, and codes (See more related policies in
General i,and Jse Management Policies section)
„i
l
1{~
4
1
)j
D. The following general policies are suggested for all current
neighborhoods, but particularly older neighborhoods.
1) Code enforcement will have a priority in older
neighborhoods.
~ti 2) Neighborhood will be encouraged to interact with the
Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council, other
t pertinent boards, and City staff.
~ V
7
c. In review of zoning, subdivision, capital improvement programs
: and other similar decisions, older existing neighborhoods
will ue given priority to ensure the neighborhood and public {
that zoning stability will be maintained. Subdivisions and
,
housing redevelopment will be encouraged and public funds
will nave a priority to these areas over newly expanding
areas,
Review Criteria and Procedure to be followed;
1) If a the proposed action will cause the area to exceed
the Intensity index standard then the Planning and Zoning
and City Council will typically conduct a s
pecial study '
of the neighborhood to see if the intensity index standard
can be raised and still maintain the neighborhood and
city development integrity. This firer,. study will be for
t,
overall neighborhood intensity stud, and not to consider
the specifics of a proposed action. Also note raising a
neighbornood intensity standard does not automatically
t signal approval of a specific action,
-ld-
;r
d
Yn
2) If the development meets the neighborhood intensity index a,
standard (or as revised) then a detail site plan will be
required for development within 1,600 feet of the neigh-
borhood (or such distance that is judged to materially
affect the neighborhood).
s Other general review criteria/states:
a
I
a) Such things as upgrading or eliminating older
deteriorating structures will be considered a
Positive action, but not to the extent that it is 1
r
judged detrimental to the overall neighborhood, 1 9
W A major review criteria will oe to compare the
proposed use and location in the subject neighborhood
j.,
E to the same use in a similar location in a new neigh-
borhood. If it would oe allowed in or adjacent toh
new neighborhood it is probably acceptable to the
r older neighoorhood, if it would not be acceptable to
the newer neighborhood it will probably not be
acceptable to the older neignoorhood.
5. Spot. Apartments in older Neighborhoods
{i
I some older neighborhoods have been opened up to apartment
development and there are sore unique parcels that are unrealistic h
"c for further single family development. It it is determined that
single family preservar.ion is not totally preferable for the
neiynoornood (see above policy) and hiyner density housing is to
be allowed, then, it is the policy of this
k, guide that existing
single family still will nave a
priority for preservation.
Therefore, the intent of the following policies are for that
goal.
-29-
f
Neignoornoods that already have a moderate amount (us
wally .t
more than 1 complexes/block) of the current type of apartments
would oe allowed to continue without any new major
restrictions, However, neighborhoods should provide input
M
E' prior to decision on tnis point.
b. Neighborhoods that have only a very limited amount of spot
f apartment development (usually two or less complexes per
)
block) should have strict site design standards such as:
1) Landscaped front yard, setbacks equivalent in site and
i
character to the adjacent single family
r
z) No parking in front of the complex
#!F 3) Limited concentration on any one block (two per block as
k1
maximum guideline)
4) Side and rear yard solid screening fences.
! b ti
fry
4 ,
c. Neignborhoods should oe encouraged to develop plans for their
sectors which take into account the needs of the entire
city. Nis can oest be done by forming multi-neighborhood s
associations.
;.1
F~
t
v ~
2
-30- I
Lim
MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING LOCATION
111 :y •
M •
0 10
1• EL
000
61
AUi A LM •
•
r ~
s O
is Al
oe 1
00
A7 10
•RYAN RD.'
I ir7 • i,. '
00*0
^
Opp{NTHr~--
- YLE f -Y
ClJ1 CO;;(z;1'f4 ICN :'n er S:C rits)
1
C, Parks, and Natural Resources
~r The purpose of this section l.s to outline basic city-wide policies.
yi Like all other areas of this guide, these park policies are intended
to present only the basic policies which can be used to guide the +
more detailed master park planning by the Park Board of the City.
1. Parks and Recreation Master Plan
" a. Purpose and Intent
It is the policy of this guide that parks and recreation
facilities be provided in accordance with the currently '
adopted Master Park Plan (1974 Plan Reference Map on page 36)
and as modified for conformance to the development guide. i
t_
b. ParK Planning Policy +i
Make ample use of the Hickory Creek Ploodplain
Use as Natural Areas
1o ~ Use for Community Park Location
R
Provide Public Golf Course
In considering park planning priorities, the Land Use
Planning committee recommends the foliowing areas of emphasis
I
in types of parks and open space:
•s !
f
~i
s ,
{ F
_32- 5
i
TYPES OF PARKS AND UPEN iPACd
Percent of Ern hasis +
j t
ff Cate or ,
' 126 aistrict parks (up to 100 acrnsl
camping areas, large picnic areas, golf course,
38d Community Parks t
(up to 40 acres), ball fields, f
ten
etcnis courts, picnic areas, community centers,
~4eignoornood Parks (5 to lU acres) k.~r
1r .a r 158 Public natural o
/t ,r Pen space (varying sizes)
' T 0od
Private natural open space (public acquisition
scenic easements ?3
of
agricultural zoning, etc,)
100% 9i etc,} ~ t
'total amount of resource effort
. i,
TYPes OF PARK FACILIPIES
Percent of ::;a hasis
l2% r„
4 ( 216 Community Center it
loll Fields
p
D3a .
8acketball/Sxerclse F
( acilit,,_s
086 +
Vennis Courts
Picnic Areas L
~i i 166 f"a ! 1
Playgrounds for children;
+ 116
j 81keways/Pedestrian Trails
( Ilp 076
Environmental Corridors
`I 036
(
Equestrian/8ikin Fi
g Trails
3.56
j t+Olf Course
.56 ' +
Acquisition
036 of Scenic Easements
1D6 Boulevard and Special Flower-Planning Areas
Natural Open Space Areas
U3d
Improved 44aintenance of Our j exi,5ti
n9 10U6 b'acilities jw
total Amount of Resource effort
..33-
I ~
~r
..m
1
Y
iVaturdl ttesources
n
d, 4ajor F1oodUlains/Open space Corridors I
ly
,
44
, r Oajor floodplains are part of a natural drainage system. It
" is the intent of this policy guide that only limited
Portions
of the floodplains be utilized for urban development, and the l~
floodplains should basically be maintai
ned as natural drainage i
ways and open space corridors, Such drainage techniques as
e levees, cutoff channels and detention ponds should be
i
encouragea over extensive fill and major channelization, r
{
b, Agricultural 4ands
q
s a
dri+ne agricultural lands close by the urban centers may be an
increasing necessity In the face of the currently worsening
F ener.ly shortage. In addition, agricultural lands in close
i` proximity and as part of our urban setting are needed to rt
maintain our small-town western neritage. Theretore, the
4
following policies are recommended: {
h 1} Major prime agricultural lands in our study area should 1
be encouraged to remain In such use. Some ways to
accomplish this are:
a) Encourage our legislators to change the tax laws such
ti that strong economic gain can oe realized by i
maintaining one's land in agricultural use. :
lK ~
b) Consider the location of such land in infrastructure
' and community facility planning, ;
i'
-34_
F
21 Vest Pocket Farms
Encourage private and public small, one lot or bigger, t
i~,,, garden/rarminy throughout the city.
in
5
1
r
y
{ ~e1
(J E
i
1
i..
i
J
-35-
fk>rr 01
PARKS, RECREATION, & NATURAL. RESOURCES.
•
ri \
.
00
• ll O _ ~
• E
•
of A 16■
i., • 0
00
MAR,
;
o. -
f
`7 r
I , .
01
_ of
13 o
Sa ~ • TAM AD. •
11 • i •
1
rid ~•.•N.• •
00
•
94
1 }
.:QL
too #640
CO INTH t
1
EXISTING PARK FACILITIES
is 1. Nette Shultz b. Woodrow Lane :I. Nor.h Lakes
2, Evers 1. Mack 12. :'.ilam
3. McKenna Cooper Creek l3. BriarcliEf
4, Civic Center 9. Dania 14, phoeniX
5. Fred Moore 10. Joe SkiLes. 15. Bowline Iir PPn
}
p. Utilities (Sewer, Water, Electricity Land Solid 4aste)
K,
Tne purpose of this section is to outline development policies that
can be used as a guide for the more detailed master utility planning -
(wnicn is beyond the scope of this report).
1. Current Planning
0-10 Year Planning - In review of current development proposals,
r F~l capacity snould be available to accommodate the current proposed
development and also provide enough reserve for additional
development on the vacant land in the immediate study area. Such
minimum reserve allocation density is three units per acre and/or "
area zoning density.
2. Mid-Range Planning 1
10-20 Year Planning - Planning for our twenty-year planning
i M should accommodate growth of 100,000 people and provide a
0 balanced infrastruc•.ute system to serve the density locations as
presented in this development guide.
f' '1
J. Long-Range Planning I,
" fT Long-Range Utility Planning snould recognize the Concept Plan's
density policy In order that the next generation does not have to
1
oeaC the cost of correcting under planned facilities. In
±j addition, long-range utility planning should also be oased upon a
s:
thorough study of ootn economic needs for continued growtn hnd
the ecological impact rf expanding current basic utilities
capacity. rite citizenry should ue educated concerning the
14~ results of iucn studies prior to a deem:ion to incred`3e capacity
i of basic utility facilities.
-37-
S
yr, ~ ~
1
p~
i
l• 'Pransportation Plan Concept
fy,
r.
This plan suggests a land use
policy that is a modified corridor ,
~y concept, 'i'hat is, major intensit
1 r~ y land use in three major nodes
generally following the Interstate 35 corridor. The overall basic
transportation policy is to continue the empnasis
kK of Improving
transportatior capacity in this corridor as a continuing priority
for the City. Tnis includes auto, bike, scooter, pedestrian, and
local and regional mass transit.
! 3. Major Thoroughfare Long Range Plan
Tne thoroughfare long-range plan is si,own on the map on 1
page plan represents the long-range framework for today'syn,
incremental decisions that are discussed in the next section.
E me major street plan shows a road network for:
' a. Ma' or Arterial 'PPrri_marv;
M' I
/ 'rnese eteets transverse the City usually are streets witn 80
to 12u feet right-of-ways and a landscaped boulevard and
1 k Parkway are desirable, if economically feasible
1 Including
maintenance cost.
b. Maior Arterial (socondarr)
Pnese streets connect major sections of town and usually have
a rignt-of-way of 60 to 80 feet.
c, totlector streets
Cnese are not shown on the following major steot map but are
specified in a separate map that is updated yearly by the
~t -39-
E
t
v
j
I
1 I
4
i~
1 D. Utilities (Sewer, 4atert Slectricity, and Solid Waste).
+,y The purpose of this section is to outline development policies that
,1N
can be used as a guide for the more detailed master utility planning 1
(which is beyond the scope of this report).
> 1. current Planning
yi 0-10 Year Planning - In review of current development proposals,
capacity snould be available to accommodate the current proposed
development and also provide enough reserve for additional
r
i
development on the vacant land in the immediate study area. Such
1 ;(i' 666 minimum reserve allocation density is three units per acre and/or
area zoning density, ,
i
2. Mid-Range Planning
2
li
lU-2U Year Planning - Planning for our twenty-year p).anning s
(.~S should accommodate growth of 100,000 people and provide a
balanced infrastructure system to serve the density locations as
presented in this development guide.
3. Lonq-Range Planning
t Long-Range Utility Planning snould recognize the Concept Plan's
density policy in order that the next generation does not have to
1 tear the cost of correcting under planned faciLi'tes. In
" addition, long-range utility planning snould also ba cased upon a
thorough study of totn oconomic needs for continued ycowth and
the ecological impact of expanding current basic utilities
capacity, m e citizenry should us educated concerning the
results of such studies prior to a decision to increase capacity
,s
of aasic utility facilities.
yP, .
-37-
f
L 6MV
) pq
i
Transportation
1. Purpose and intent Ij
i
t at
'foe transportation system is the binding force that ties the lams t
use pattern together. Conflicts arise when the land use intensity I
and distribution does not matcn the transportation system. The
" major purpose of a long-range land use transportation plan is to gk!
insure that today's incremental decisions not only respond to
today's needs, out also contribute towards the long-range Land
Use/Transportation plan for the City, For example, if we feel
high intensity development is desirable at a particular location
in the distant future, we would not want to cut off a major
transportation route today that will be needed in the future f~,r
l that area, It is the intent of this guide that Dentin's Iran-3-
portation system should react to the community's plan and not
~II
j have transportation be reactive to unplanned growth. Tnerefor ,
the following transportation policies are structured in a o
1 two-tiered policy to accomplish this goal.
a. fomorruw's ,Deed; The Plan .
~ a
t Long-Range high intensity areas provided with
transportation lifelines
~f
o, ioday's Needs: '
capacity Today
' Individualized site design and transportation needs'
i
Today's decisions supportive or Long-Range Plan
1r
I l.,
i
t
P;
r
+
1 t
s
2. Transportation Plan Concept y
This Plan suggests a land use policy that is a modified corridor
concept, That i5, major intensity land use in three major n
• ~ J odes
generally following the Interstate 35 corridor, The overall basic
transportation
policy is to continue the empnasis of improving
transportation capacity in this corridor as a continuing Priority
y• i'nis includes auto, bike, scooter, pedestrian, and
local and regional mass transit,
4
3. Major Thoroughfare Long Range Plan
Tne thoroughfare long-range plan is snown on the map on page 46, i
fnis plan represents the long-range framework for today's
Incremental decisions that are discussed in the next section.
me major street plan shows a road network for:
a. t1a r Arterial (PrioASv)
t Tnese steets transverse the City usually are streets with 80 to 120 feet right-of-ways and a landscaped boulevard and
parkway are desirable, if economically feasible, including
maintenance cost,
' b. ~•lajor Aerial tyecondar~rl ~
r
c
Pnese streets connect major sections of town and usually have r,?
1g a right-of-+•ray of nU to 80 feet.
r E'n.
C. Collector Streets
,
p' Tnese are not shown on the following major sleet map but are
specified in a separate map that is updated yearly by the
3 -ly-
,yer ,
i ,
Planning and Zoning and modified as needed by subdivision f"
review of detailed site design. Collector street design IIII
should include consideration for all modes of individualf
transportation. These detailed collector street planning are j
subject to the following policy criteria;
1) At least one collector street per area between arterials f
r to collect neighborhood traffic to the major arterials. l
2) Collector street (or larger) required for higher
I?
intensity land uses such as apartments, i•:uustrial areas,
` and commercial areas.
3) as intensity increases, the nu¢her of collectors required
" increases. l
Collector streets should not oe allowed to be incrementally bl
linxed-up until a major arterial is created, This procedure ary'
i
is toe same as setting policy to change land use intensity,
E If such a land use intensity change is desirable, this plan
should first be changed to so indicate the activity center' J
prior to designating a new arterial on the thoroughfare plan.
M1 i
4. Current rnorougnfare Planning Policies
as street Capacity y.l
It is the policy of this guide that, all new developments be
required to provide adequate current street capacity serving
tne'r development's immediate area and adequate current iJ
f capacity of the nearest major artery serving the develop-
ment. Capacity criteria for this policy is defined as
i
follows: a
_4U_
r
Vtttj.
au Full street capacity is engineeringly
defined as the level of service at the
current traffic volume at the intersection
i of University Drive and Carroll Boulevard,
The Carroll/ University capacity is to be
portionally adjusted to lesser street
standards.
Exceptions to this policy would be if the City has the
opportunity to get a major industry In an area of town where
the streets are reaching capacity, In this case, the city
will consider mitigation measures such as public expenditures
for additional streets or mass transit or a determination to
allow the increased traffic congestions.
b. Land Use Intensity Pram
/ uortation aalance d
1) Purpose and Intent `
+i Me second determinate of Land Use/Transportation r
capacity is the overall area intensity balance. (see map
f on page 23,) This balance is based on a trip generation
&i { factor allocated to all acreage within the City, divided
i
between high, medium and low intensity areas, High
t intensity areas have no maximum limits. Guide tines for
moderate intensity areas are 250 trips per day per gross
t acre. Low intensity area 111
guidelines are 75 trips per day
per gross acre.
{
~a J
s1
r:4.
2) Application of the Policy
a
The policy is applied as follows;
N1
a) Determining Intensity;`
i) In a major -enter area, no long-range 1
calculations are appliedi however, short-term )
capacity calculation as defined in the preceding
1
` policy would be required. i
ii) In a moderate center area, the following
procedure would be followed; 1,~J
-1- Calculate the approximate area in acreage
from the concept plan map and adjust for ry
f extent of diversity.
-2- calculate the total area trips per day
standard (total acreage X 250 trips/dayw
1 total area standard).
-3- Estimate existing land use in acreage and
calculate trips generated.
-4- Estimate vacant land in area and calculate
v
minimum reserve allocated (minimum
development right). The Reserve allocation
is 404 of standard or 100 trips/day.
j -5- estimate unallocated transportation!!
capacity of area oy:
1 'Dotal trips per day capacity (Step 2).
Minus - rotal trips per day used (Step 3)
%
j Minus - Total trips per day reserve (Step iw
_ 4)
i Equal -Unallocated trips capaci,y.
I
iY
-42-
i
(
4s -6- calculate trip generation of proposed
development and compare results With Stop
t~
' 5. If less than the balance (Step 5),
sy
.t. , then proposed development is within Long-
Ranye transportation policy guideline.
~h t
if more than the balance, the next levels
of policy options are: (1) to reduce
development scale; (2) increase the center 4
i activity rating to a major center area:
(3) back zone vacant higher use land; (4)
differ consideration of back zoning until
actual development exceeds 250 trips/day
standard; (5) reduce minimum development
t
right standards (6) raise moderate center N,
standard.
if a major development is proposed in a low
intensity area, the same procedure, would be
followed except intensity standards would be:
* total area standard is 75 trips per day per
y gross acres. (Step 2)
•~a
k Minimum reserved allocated for all lands is ;F
30 :rips per day per gross acres.
(Corresponds to minimum development right of
3.0 units per acre.) j'
(See dousing Section for related overall
4,S neignborhood density policy.)
1 I
-43"
j
,
r F I
1 ~
MAJOR THROUGHFARE PLAN
~a
I
J;AN
-4 ~'►y
• wlwoso+ _ ~ + ~ p
I I •
t Ali • - z 4.
• , : ,
~ to • ~ I t
!
o
~ e •
• r O ~ • f
•
fi~p RYAN NO.
`S •
oT-
;3 ' ;
COWINTH
YLE - -
STREET OES IG?.A"CIO J STREET SPECIPICATI ;
MAJOR AR-cRI,U (Primary) Transverses City, 4 to 6 Lanes
1 80' to 120' R,O,W. 31vd :esir.3ble
?LIJOR ARTER:AL ( ,econdary) Connects r,a;or sections of town
60' to 30' R.O.'d„ 3 to 4 lanes
CoLlects neighborhood traffic to arterta:-
COLLEG:CR (Not sho'm) 0' r;> 60' R,O.W J Lanes
_
* 5, Mass Transit i
r P[A~
11 This plan by policy recognizes an increasingly important need for
y
mass transit, Any large concentrations of development will, at
.`1 some time, require mass transit if the land use transportation
balance is to be maintained. However, our problem is not totally
Ft `3.
' long range. Today our energy problems become more criCical by
' the day. therefore, the overall policy of this guide is to start
today on localized mass transit and to lay a long-range plan for
inter-regional mass transit networks for the future. The graphic
concept plan for this is presented in the map on the following
pages
t
1 _
a
I
A
-45-
M116M1
1
i
MASS TRANSIT CONCEPT PLAN
L\
1 C) . LIMITS or
MAJOR ARM
• of
I •
•
O I
J
41
1 • ,
• r~
10
1 00
*60000 00
I
*60 go*
/ _ r ~ COIIINTM
I k ARIiYL!
p MPJOR LOCAL STOPS .,7 1
r REGIONAL Park STOPS
(
mmm w REGIONAL MASS TRANSIT LINE
- - - LOCAL MASS TRANSIT LINE
„
6, Pedestrian and Bicycle
ll+ Since we spend more time in the walking transportation mode than I
any other, it is the intent of this policy that planning for this 1
need be an increasin
g priority in our transportation planning,
6pecifically, the following is recommended:
i
a. Long-Mange Plan
Where snould be a city-wide or at least sector-wide
pedestrian and bicycle transportation plan developed.
b. eoday's geed
Regardless of the above general plan, we should concentrate
on the following in our current planning:
1) as9uire sidewalks and bike
paths on collector streets in
all new subdivisions and starting a City program for all ~
older subdivisions.
1
Z) consider changing development ordinances to require
f
pedestrian and pike paths in all large commercial parking
iota,
3) Encourage all commercial centers to have at least one
safe access that is totally pedestrian-
s.
yy 4) As part of the implementation of the above Long-Range
Plan, consider limiting parking on one side of designated
streets for bicycle paths, For equity, this land would
be rotated to the other side ever; few years,
,
U
td -47-
l
r `M
F, Individualized Policies
I• By Development Area Characteristic
a. ulderl~yhborhoodn Dt
An underlying policy of this guide is the Increased
protection of older neighborhoods. Many Interrelated
Policies speak Co this oojective
~ , particularly a specific ~*I
section on housing, should oe referenced, These policies
,
encourage the development of neighborhood and village
' councils. o. r;xdstIrig Neinhoorhoods and Developed Areas 0J
i
i
As a policy of tnis yuido, areas already developed have r priority in Corms of; F.
I
* Zoning and subdivision protection
C.I,d., C,D.e.U, and other infrastructured and community
facilities project planning,
specific policy in terms of protection of existing single
family housing is found on numerous pages throughout Cnis
f guide.
Left Out Lot" co or Hard to Develo lots
It is the Intent of this guide to be flexible to unique
wJ
r'. situations such as left out lots. However, neither this
guide, nor the City, guarantees development of all idnda in1
r
the City to the nighea: use desired by the owna:, nut it does
pledge to work with indiVidualizod situations keeping in mind r
v
basic guide con
straints of:
-4d°.
E
i
l
1
r
li
l) Protecting existing adjacent housing areas,
particularly older housing.
2) Maintaining the overall neighborhood
density/intensity standards.
" Une solution to sucn lots is for neiynborhood
associations to explore a
pparent ways to secure
i i temporarily and/or acquire use of these lots for
meeting neighborhood and village recreational, k
park,
o- ggr green/open space and agricultural needs.
2, Specific Area Policies
a
a. Future Apartment Gonin North of Oak Street
a Limited conditions allow new zoning in neiyiibornoods for
i
medi,im density housing only and in all cases require ;
i, strict site design requirements. (Also see related
policies in housiny section under spot apartment zoning I
y and overall neignborhood density/intensity.} protection
of existing adjacent housing and overall area
density/intensity snouid be carefully considered before
permiL•tinq additional medium density housing,
b, Land Use Bordering the N,T.3 u am u•
it
c
s{ i'he N.P.9.U, roaster plan inoicates its nortn boundary to
be on west dickory and its east ooundary on Bernard. On
the perimator of loess boundaries, loses is great
j preasure for some university related commerciaL and
M
apartment used, fosse land use pressures have peen
=:x allowed to develop In areas that wero ureviousi/
lj
"qy-
7
1
I ~
1
a+
i •
1
ih
Pf 1
developed for single family use. It is the policy of
this guide to allow continuation of this type of
development out only under detail site plan review
requirements which should include neighborhood input.
Igo
c. N~T.d,U, and 'P,~q,u. i'ransportation planning
Tne Land Use Pia,nning Committee wants to point out that
N.l'.S,U. and rM.U. each have campus master plans ►+i .
F involving among other things, detailed traffic planning
1 in and around their respective campuses. These detailed
plans are beyond the scope of this guide, except in 6
regard to the total campus master plans as they may
impact on city-wide development concepts of this guide,
These aspects were considered by the Committee as a
whole, and the university representatives specifically,
wno Insured tney were in accord. e•
It is specifically rioted that-the Long Range Major
1
thoroughfare Plan does not show an arterial thoroughfare ~q f 1
P j through either campus, bUt indicates major arterials on 1
the perimeter of the main campus cores,
i
Traffic to the N.f.y,U, campus between areas nortn and
l
P
south of the campus will prlmarlly be carried via
Bonnie Brae and Carroll, but it is recognized another
Intermediate nortn/suth connection, probably in the
Avenue E corridor, needs to be considered in the future,
as the N,P,S,U, campuu plan is completed.
F
d, Hobson 4ane, 'Peasle and vest of I-35r Area
,
i
t
-iu-
i
c
y
f
It is the policy of this guide that the neighborhood
density/ intensity standard be closely monitored
especially in con- junction with commercial and
concentrated high density pressures coming from rho
r
I-35E corridor.
This plan does recognize limited
commercial type developments adjacent to 1-35E, but
speclElea commercial use circulation be self- contained
and not routed tnrough the interior neighborhoods as
this is a potential
problem due to the one-way service
h roads. Also, the Teasley and Hobson Lane area is not to ti
p~ have either a major or moderate activity center; but
6Fh71 only low intensity (predominately single family, very
limited neighborhood services) small Isolated
apartments/townhouses, etc,)
e. Carroll Houlevarc9
1) Strip Cominorcia.l Policy
i
Carroll Boulevard is Intended to be a major
north/south tnoroughway and maintaining thoroughway
L~ traffic flow is of high priorityt therefore, strip
fACt7 commercial of Carroll is strongly dlacouraged.
However, selected nodes such as the immediate
downtown area would be permitted. Other sections of
rr Carroll could support duplexes and small scale
ra multi-family and office under very limited
conditionst
Site design to protect adjacent single family requiring
sucn things as screening fences, large cetbac%s,
landscapod front yards, sign control, etc,
171
,
i~
q -til-
,
1
1
,
1
Mh
Site design to insure good off-street circulation and
parking and very limited curb cuts in order to p
tinn on Carroll tt
minimize traffic disruo
* Input tc~m adjacent neighborhoods prior to a decision.
i
2) worth Carroll Boulevard Extension
it is the policy recommendation of this plan tnat Carroll
Boulevard be maintained and improved as one of the major
north/south thoroughfares across the Cityo Fart of this 4{
` policy is to continue the 1974 thoroughfare plan policy
I that Vorth Carroll should eventually tie into Highway 77~
Ln the most traffic efficient route that is economically
and environmentally feasible. It is recognized that 4
i determining the final detail alignment of this connection
involves many complicated factors of traffic enginearind,
economic cos,, and neighborhood environmental protection. a,
Pherefore, it is further recommended that prior to suer,
connection, a more detailed professional impact study ue
{
conducted to analyze the alternative moans and impacts if
connection to Highway 17. e. 1
f, Fort Worth Drive and UailaL'!e"-Heavy Commercial strips
r
It is a policy recommendation that increased public activity
is needed to promote the improving of traffic flow and
upgrading of the appearances of business along these heavy
commercial strips. examples of some actions:
i,
f { 1) Encourage a Fort. Wortn Drive and a Dallas Drive Bustness
Association to develop overall plan fort
r,
* Signs
* Jutsido storage
* Building refurntaniny
* uEf-strsot parking '
-i2-
r9
:♦a
l) cased on su, mutually developed plans, public action
a such as;
4odify codes to accommodate unique, individualized or
1 group proposals
Utilize public funds to upgrade and beautify
' Infrastructure
Increase code enforcement in order to protect
investment of public and private owners in upgrading
effort
g• East Jenson
r
t'. ( Tnis close-in older neignborhood offers many advantages for,
residential development, This fact is recognized by the
recent past and continuing concentrated public expenditures
ii in the area from C,I.P, and C,ll,B.3, funds, In light of this
commitment, specific
policies are emphasized for the arear
1) i1he policy to protect older neighuornoods is given
apecinl emphasis in this area,
1
2) Industrial development adjacent to this neighborhood to
~ the south and east I.s Co be monitored closely, Among
other things, industrial development will be limited to
the area east of Woodrow Lane,
t
n. Bell Avenues Universi~L Go Sherman
It is the policy recommendation of this plan that Bell Avenue
be maintained and improved as one of the major north/south
thoroughfares across the ;y City,
Pdrt of this policy 1.nclude3
1 the eventual need to improve Boll Avenue oetween University
Drive and Sherman Drive in toe most traffic efficient route
ti that is economically and environmentally feasible, It is
-53-
1
I~
11 1f
r
i
I
WA
recognized that determining the final detail alignment and
width of this connection involves many complicated factors of
traffic engineering, economic cost, and neighborhood-
environmental proteceion. rnerefore) it Is further , I J
recommended that prior to such connection, a more Vetr,iled
i
professional Impact study be conducted to analyze the
iw !
+ alternative means and impacts of such improvements. 41j
i. Development Near the Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant A"
Wo additional residential development will be zoned wltnin
i 21500 feet of the WastewaLer Treatment Plant and that
residential development will be generally discouraged between fn
2,500 feet and 41000 feet from the Plant. The area within
2,500 feet of the 'Wastewater Treatment Plant will be utilized
for industrial purposes, preferably industries that could
utilize the effluent from the Plant as cooling water or otner
processes requiring lower quality water. r
r
3, Specific Land Use Performance Policies/Clarificatlon Definitions Ili
a, Apartment Policies
Tne policy for high density, medium density, and low density
41
apartments will be classified as follows:
w,
Units/Acre
Low Density U - 5
Audium Density G 12
dig.i Densir,y IJ - and above f.,
b. ACCe83 Required for ,liah Density ,iousing i"
In low intensity areasi
,
ij
-54-
's
Aign density requires the only access by secondary
arterial or greater,
f1 * tedium density concentrations requires at least one access
i4 by a collector street (not every individual unit).
1n moderate intensity areasi
* High density, expand current guide policy to reads 'at
fi least one access by ma3or or secondary arterial with no
access by low density residential street'
r
e
k " Medium density concentrations requires at least one access
by a collector street (not every individual unit).
e. Strict Site Oesign Review for All Projects 4itnin One Block
r of dxiating single Pamil Dwellings
If witnin 116UU feet of exiscing low density residential or
sucn additional distance as judged to be materially affecting
r;
the character of the neignborhood the following policies
apply for commercial/apartment development.
1) If adjacent residential areas nave landscaped front yard
r then the commercial/apartments would likewise nave
4 .
landscaped front yards.
t
21 [E adjacent to single story residential, than the
commercial/apartment would oe .jingle story or have large
,
I'a setbacks for transition to the neignoorhood. II
I
i t 3) Signs will have to be in scale witn the neiynborhood,
IllfaiiiJ wnion usually means attached to the building face.
-55-
Y
I
I
1 p
4) Parking lot design would need to consider access away from
residences, parking areas setbacks, permanently screened .
` from residence, and parking lot lights post- tioned away i
from residence.
5) Also, when practical, compatible architectural style would
be encouraged,
d. Clarification of Concentration Policies
1) Clarification of the policy on apartment concentration in
low and moderate intensity neighborhoods.
a
Concentration in low intensity areas be limited to
200 units, sN
1 ,
Concentration in moderate intensity areas be limited
to 750 units,
l
" Concentration must be separated from other high
frl
density housing by 1/2 mile or 50% of Intensity area
i length, which ever is less. This separation includes"
3 separation from adjacent intensity area high density"
housing, including moderate Intensity areas, adjacent
.
to low intensity areas, aw
2) Clarification of thu policy of small scattered sites of
retail, commercial, office, etc in low intensity areas.
k Concentration of office/retail etc, in low intensity
i areas he limited to 4 acres. rt`
j
f F'
-56-
V
I
I
I
~ 41
SP
I
Y4~
Concentration must be separated from other nigh
intensity retail, office or similar land uses by 1/2 t
mile or 508 of intensity area length, whichever is
„I less, This separation includes separation from
adjacent high intensity land use areas, including
moderate intensity areas, adjacent to low intensity
I/
areas. dowever, no separation is required in
conjunction with an apartment concentration (i.e.,
apartments (2U0 units) and retail (4 acres)) equal
hj) one concentration area to be separated from another, w
e, Location Policies for Mobile Home Parks
Low Intensity Areast
1) Me overall intensity standard not to be violated
2) do concentration more tnan 200 units
t, j) Access by a collector street or larger (if density less
k{
Chan 12 units/ad)
4) Strict site plan control within 1,6UU feet of existing
' single family residential
5) Sufficient green space, recreation facilities, etc.
provided
6) Input into planning by neighborhood
14
a
-57-
t~
i
)
Moderate intensity Areas;
11 The overall intens'ty standard not to be violated
` I
2) Limit concentration to 750 units 1
` 3) Access to collector street or Icrger (if density less
f than 12 units/ac) kf
4) Strict site planning within 116UJ feet of single family
residential
r rev ~ A
G. band Management Policies
1.
f ~ 0evelopmont Opportunity i'
Areas
r
Purpose and Intentr It is the purpose of these policies toi
encourage development in areas of favoraolo natural features and k`I'
wnere existing streets, utilities, schools, etc., have existing
unused capacity, Conversely, in areas wnere there are intrusions
1' 1
of ecologically sensitive areas or where major infrastructure
expmiditures are required, It is the intent of this policy to
encourage development in these areas only whon deficiencies aro
corrected and to iimlt public Ponds in these corrective measures,
By this poll,^y, it is tree goal that public fundloy of infrastruc-
J tore be more officientl; used by the utLlisation of, existing
facilities first before extensive funding on ne4 facilities, In
addition, it Is Intended to strongly consider mitigation measures
before development in ecologically sensitive areas, r;ince this
' i< I .
concept is somewnat new anJ since implementation +ndy require 1.
extensive detail ordinance review, tnis
y,aide does nut vuyyest a i
specific implerentation pulicy out _loos rocommend ita corisidera-
i
tion in continuing studies and works of the Planning and Zoning,
City Council and otner future study conrnittees. k
-5d- d
T
tt
a
a ~ 2, Housing Cost and City Regulations
0
Current trends In development standards have increasingly added
requirements to encourage higher quality housing but in so doing
t
have raised the cost of housing by distributing these costs to
the developer and in turn new homeowners.
The conclusion of this guide suggests Denton's current quality
and cost distribution is just about rl,ght, but could possibly be
u
loosened a little so long as it does not get to extensive. The
major objective is for moderate housing growth.
Selective assistance should oe provided
in certain areas to r
i4 encourage a limited amount of additional moderate income housim3.
.i
Dome examplos area
M
1 I,
r a. ,tauuce standards that are purely for aesthetics, etc., but
not any that will cause future increases in maintenance
F cock. une example is to allow, .,i limited areas, streets
witnout curb and gutter, where drainage is no problem,
u, Allowing more flexibility in house sitting on lot, by
requiring only a maximum percent, coverage and front yard
requirement and fire separation.
c, Provide more flexible lot width and depth requirements as
cal1
long as the minimum lot area is maintained,
1 d. Explore housing development concepts used in other counties
or in other parts of our country sucn as row or semi-detached
A houses sharing a large recreational and green space,
1 q
I
1 1
1
A
1r .
1
I
F '
r
.t
t
? 1. Conservation
1
1 a. energy t
Energy conservation in land use planning is a basic policy of
this x1
t guide. Many policies such as balanced growth of J
activity centers, housing diversity, housing close toI IE
. r t
employment and retail services, multi-modal transportation, 1 '
etc., all In part were recommended because of energy
' consideration.
In addition, other specific detail
r., implementation methods should be developed, me following
w, a
are two examples;
Ml
1 ,
ll All nousing, building, zoning codes, and otner
pertinent
ordinances should be reviewed and revised to be more
congruent with energy conservation and efficiency,
ll (asses of concrete in parking lots, etc., cause energy p
{ safety, and aesthetic 1
problems, Ordinances should be snl~
s developed which will reduce these problems in all future At
developments.
` b. Natural a_ l Resources q,i .
{ I
Promoting conservation of all our natural resources should
v j also be a part of planning for the future of Jenton,
Policies snould be developed which will encourage sucn
conservation, especially of water, electricity, and natural
t gas,
N~
Fi { r
i u~'lI
-bU-
L
1 c, Agricultural Lands, Open Spaces and Greenbelts
y To maintain a balanced, healthy community that is
self-sustaining, Cne conservation of our agricultural land,
1
open spaces, and greenbelts is important. Irax incentive,
coordination and cooperation with other governmental units,
and involvement of the private sector are all essential to
accomplish this gual, studies to better understand the needs
of a city in each of these areas and the coat-Uenefit ratios
are needed.
Also, establishment of cooperative relationships in the
governing bodies of the county, state, and nearby communities
should begin as soon as possible so that futuve growth avoids
f major conflicts and provides for balance oetween economic,
public, health, basic life support, and eco-system needs of
the entire area, Specifically, joint policies are needed to
'j provide agricultural land, greenbelts, etc,, all around
Denton and neighboring towns in order to preclude a solid
urban strip from Waco on the South, to Oklahoma City on the
~ North,
r.
pp
4, Jrban Jesign
i4any policies of this guide promote an increase of and awareness
of better urban design as a
policy for canton, fne inclusion of
6
this policy section is Intended to specifically emphasize and
oonsolidate this concept as a policy and also specifically }
k. recommend zoniny, subdivLuion and otner city ordinances be
changed towards a unified urban design for the City. Particular
concerns are sign regulation, screening outside storage,
Y
architecture, landscaping, scenic views,
green spaces, historical
preservation, and other similar urban design concepts.
-6i-
i
I '
Citizen Input Into Land Use Decisions ,
E
The Planning and boning Commission, City Council, Land Use
Planning Committee, and citizens wno responded to the concept
t
plan emphasized the need for a means of providing on-going E
1 neighoorhood improvement as well as input of all citizens into
111f { decisions made oy the various city departments, boards, or the
City Council as a whole, especially as regards land use issues, !
Also, the update procedure of this guide recognizes there are
future questions wnicn remain unanswered or issues which need t
additional study to 4
Y pr,ovidea framework for responsible land use
decisions (for example, a more detailea multi-mode integrated
transportation plan.) Those procedures emphasize citizen input
by self-selected cross-sectional type committees, One intent of
this type of committee is to strongly encourage such committee
representatives to be not only representative of their
part of ;
the City out also work on problems of all parts of the City and
not Jost on one specialized interest,.' J
In addition to such future formal city-wide study committees, it
is also recognized that continuing local neighborhood self-help
associations are important for the continued maintenance of
viable neignborhoods# However, individual neighborhood problems
i~
` are many times intertwined with adjacent neighborhoods and city
as a whole, Therefore, the community unit concept suggests as
one of Its basic ingreditnts the need to bind together diverse
sections of the community to share in common facilities and
i mutual problems. As a step towards such concepts and at the same
~T#
time address immediate local neighborhood needs, the following
process is presented for organizing neighborhood associations;
(
i
a. Neighborhoods define themselves and establish neighborhood
{ associations)
,
I 7 b. Neighborhoods cluster themselves into communities and
I
establish associations made up of representatives of the
r'
neighborhood groups. On a continuing basis, these
A associations oould address such things as;
} 1y3 1) Protection and maintenance of individual and community
V property
2) Crime and fire prevention
P
y 3) Assess needs for and plan for basic life-support servicas
within or adjacent to each neighborhood or community unit
(i.e. food, health, facilities schools, child care
cantata, housing diversity and density, etc.)
'.4) Assess needs for recreational, open space, agricultural,
e F"
y.
and park facilities A
n
5) Cooperative methods of conserving energy such as
garden
or food co-ops, car or van pooling, talent pools, etc.
' 6) lulti-mode transportation needs and facilities
(i'nle is not an exhaustive list of the functions of these
associations,)
'r.yeaa neighborhood associations would serve a need for r
t
neighborhood improvements, provide a means for ensuring
dialogue between neighborhoods and City decision makers, and
provide a vehicle for selection to future City cross-sectional '
study committees.
9 6, Public education
Jr
Because the committee supports the basic philosophy adopted by
the city Codnoil in calling for this study) i.e., study of th
r Issues and input by informed citizens into land use decisions is
important, it is recommended that support for continued study and
education of the public is reflected in budget and policy
decisions by the City Council.
-63-
Tne issues relating to informed land use decision making are
complex. Yne costs and benefit of different decisions are not ll
alwaYs easily identified. Pnerefore, staff time and supportive ~f
resources are needed to gather the data necessary to make
decisions congruent with the basic goals of this study, Also, J
fr 1
education of the citizenry is important so that decisions they
make on public issues are informed decisions, with knowledge of j
y
their long-range impact on the lifestyles they have become
accustomed to or desire to attain. j
I
t This continuing public education effort should be coordinated by
F one responsible entity sucn as the City, but should 1
also take k,-I r
advantage of local educational resources and work through sucn
groups as the Chamber of Commerce, and 4eague of women Voters,
neignoortwod or village councils, and local media.
' ( Lu
1
.I'
;
i
i
U494a
d`
i
Er4E
I,yS
~Jiy~y{I~a@I( I
r
I
ry
if ?
i
If
\.a r
s~
r t
1
r
t
1'x9.1 r