HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-15-1986
C76 A) d,9
City ofJ~~N40
Ci~cy C.oun
~a-
' A(;ENVA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
July 15, 1966
Work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
July 15, 198b, at 5:30 p,w, in the Civil Defense Room of the
Municipal Building at which the following items will be
considered:
5:30 P. M.
1. Executive Session:
A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17
V.A.T.S. (see item #2)
1. Receive a report and discuss the status of the lease
agreement and litigation between the City of Denton
and Maverick Aircraft, Inc.
6:15 p.m.
3. Receive an interim report from the Economic ,p-
ment Task !Force.
4, Receive a report on the proposed vicious cat acd dog
ordinance.
5. Discussion of request of the 'Pommy Corporation for
annexation of approximately 23.6420 acres of land
being part of the Gideon Walker Survey, Abstract 1330,
and beginning adjacent and north of Edwards Road
approximately 1/2 mile east of ,layhill Road and 1/2
mile west of Swisher Road for the purpose of
determining whether to begin the annexation process.
(A-41)
Kegular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
July 15, 1986, 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.
11 Prosentation of awards for beautification effort to
the City to Mr. Tom Irby in the residential category
and Mr. Monte Mason, Jack Schmitz and Son Funeral
Home, in the commercial category.
2. Appearance by Mr, Don Whitmore regarding the City of
Denton utility billing system.
3. Consider approval of a request by Mr. and Mrs. William
A. Elliott to waive a pro rata fee.
'Y City of Denton City Council Agenda
July 15, 1986
Page Two
4. Public rrearings
A. Z-1809. Petition of Rd Green and Rick Moore
requesting a change in zoning from the
agricultural CA) district to the two family (2F)
classification on a 7,366 acre tract located on
the south side of Past 1cKinney Street (FM 426)
approximately 1,200 feet east of Woodrow Lane.
The property is more particularly described as a
tract in the T.Ivj, Downing Survey, Abstract 346.
If the request is approved, the property may be
utilized for any purpose permitted in the two
family district by the City of Denton Zoning
Ordinance. (The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends approval,)
1. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving
a change in zoning on a 7,366 acre tract
located on the south side of Bast McKinney
Street (FM 426) approximately 1,200 feet
east of Woodrow Lane.
B. Z-1812. Petition of Holbert-Wyatt Volkswagen,
. Inc. -requesting a change in zoning from the
agricultural (A) to the commercial (C) district
on 6.114 acres located on 1-35 South, south of
Pockrus Road and south of the m.K,f,T, Railroad.
The property is more fully described in the
Gideon Walker Survey, Abstract 1330. If
approved, the property may be utilized for any
purpose permitted in the commercial district of
the City of Denton Zoning Ordinance. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission has no
recommendation.)
C. Z-1814. Petition of Dr. Bill Cudd requesting a
change in zoning from the single family (SF-10)
district to the planned development (PD)
classification on an 18.24 acre tract located at
the northeast corner of U.S, Highway 380 and Old
North Road. The property is further described as
a tract in the Caswell Carter Survey, Abstract
275, and the R. B, Longbottom Survey, Abstract
775, If the planned development is ed, it
will permit the development of an Tice offpark,
(The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
denial.)
D. V-30, Petition of Don N Bryant requesting a
v rTance of provisions of the City of Denton
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations
requiring sidewalk, paving, curb and gutter, and
drainage improvements for perimeter streets
adjacent to proposed subdivisions. Two 3.0 acre
1ii..
City of Denton City Council Agenda
July 15, 1986
Page Three
• lots located adjacent and west of Hickory Hill
Road between Gibbons Road and FM 1830 are
proposed. The property is located in the City of.
Denton's area of extraterritorial jurisdiction
(ETJ) and single family development is
anticipated. (The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends denial.)
5. 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.
Listed below are bids and purchaso orders to be
approved for payment under the Ordinance section of the
agenda. Detailed back-up information is attached to the
ordinances (Agenda items 6.A, 6.B, 6.C). This listing is
provided on the Consent Agenda to allow Council Members to
discuss any item prior to approval of the ordinance,
A. Bids and Purchase Orders:
1. Bid N 9628 - McKinney Street sanitary sewer
2. Bid N 9629 - Truck tractor used
3. Bid N 9634 - Used refuse truck
4. Sid N 9636 - Capacitors
5. Bid N 9637 - 500 MCNI power cable
6. Purchase Order N 73901 to Mr. Richard
NICAlpin, Murphy and Rochester, in the amount
of $150080.22
7. Purchase Order N 74205 to North Texas
Savings and Loan in the amount of $14,439.08
B, Plats and Replats:
1, Approval of final replat of Freeway Park
Addition, Lot 4B9 Block A. (The Planning
and Zoning Commission recommends approval,)
2. Approval of preliminary plat of the Hannah
Estates Addition, Phase IV, Block 1. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.)
3. Approval of preliminary plat of the Sun
Country Addition, Lot 1, block 1. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.)
City of Denton City Council. Agenda
July 15, 1986
Page Four
C. Change Order:
1. Change Order to Calvert Paving Company for
the Yellowstone drainage project in the
amount of $..4,495.uU (Bid 0 9575, Purchase
Order # 72432 in the original amount of
$666,886.42)
6. Ordinances:
A., Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting
competitive bids and providing for the award of
contracts for the purchase of materials,
equipment, supplies or services.
B. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting
competitive bids and providing for the award of
contracts for public works or improvements,
C. Consider adoption of an ordinance providing for
the expenditure of funds for emergency purchases
of materials, equipment, supplies or services in
accordance with the provisions of state law
exempting such purchases from requirements of
competitive bids.
D. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a
specific use permit for a day care center in a
single family (SF-7) zoned area located east of
Audra Lane and north of Paisley Street and more
fully described as lot 22, block B, Lee Meadows
Addition, Section I. (5-190)
E. Consider adoption of an ordinance and service
plan annexing approximately 66.42 acres situated
in the Moreau Forrest Survey, Abstract 417, and
beginning adjacent and east of Geesling Road,
south of U.S. Highway 380 East, and west of
Trinity Road. (A-36) (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends approval.)
P. Consider adoption of an ordinance setting a date,
time and place for public hearings concerning the
proposed annexation of approximately 132.64 acres
of land being part of the G. Walker. Survey,
Abstract No, 13300 and part of the W. Durham
Survey, Abstract No. 300, and beginning at a
point approximately one mile south of FM 426
(East McKinney) and 1 112 miles th of I--35E.
0 (A-37)
G, Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of
Denton, Texas, providing for angle parking on the
narth side ogg W lnut Street from Elm to Locust
Street; prohibit ng parking on the south side of
City of Denton City Council Agenda
July 15, 1986
Page Five
Walnut Street from Elm to Locust Street;
providing for 30 minute parking on the west side
of Locust Street from Walnut to Mulberry. (The
Citizens Traffic Safety Support Commission
recommends approval.)
H. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending
Article 11 of Chapter 4 of the Code of Ordinances
of the City of Denton, Texas; by amending the
procedures relating to vicious cats and dogs;
providing for the impoundment thereof; providing
for the destruction thereof upon notice and
hearing; providing for a penalty in the maximum
amount of $200.00 for violations thereof; and
providing for a severability clause.
I. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a
contract a contract between the City of Denton,
Texas and W. l,. Willis consulting engineers to
provide engineering services for airport
improvements. (The Airport Advisory Board
recommendsa approval.)
7, Resolutions:
A. Consider approval of a resolution in support of
H,R. 1400 to reauthorize General Revenue Sharing,
B. Consider approval of a resolution authorizing the
appointment of a citizens committee on Capital
Improvements Projects and establishing a charge
to the committee.
8. Consider appointment of a Deputy City Secretary.
91 Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
10. New Business:
This item provides a section for Council Members to
suggest items for future agendas.
Work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
July 15, 1986, in the Civil Defense Room of the Municipal
Building at which the following items will be considered:
1. Receive a report on the proposal for the Denton Health
Department,
2. Receive a report and consider further action on the
holding and disposition of animals received at the
City of Denton Animal Control Center from non - city
residents,
City of Denton City Council Agenda
. July 15, 1986
Page Six
3. Receive a report on the proposed smoke detector
ordinance.
4. Receive a report on zoning requests in the Hickory
Creek area.
S. Executive Session;
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(g),
Art 6252-17 V.A.T.S. (see item H6
6. Review and continuation of the selection process for
the Municipal Judge.
7. official Action on Executive Session Items:
A. Legal Matters
B. Real Estate
C. Personnel/Board Appointments
c r; R 'r 1 Y 1 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,
on the day of , 1986 at ! r o'clock
(a, m.) ~p.m-.
1
CITY SECRETARY
22800
AGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
July 15, lctl6
Work Session of the "ty of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
July 15, 1986, at 5:30 p,w, in the Civil Defense Room of the
Municipal Building at which the following items will be
considered:
3130 p.m.
1, Executive Session:
A, Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17
V,A.T,S, (see item #2)
1. Receive a report and discuss the status the lease
agreement and litigation between the City of Denton
and Maverick Aircraft, Inc.
6:15 p,m,
3. Receive an interim report from the Economic Develop-
ment Task Foroe.
4. Receive s report on the proposed vicious cat and dog
ordinance.
5. Discussion of request of the 'Pommy Ct,,•poration for
anneyation of approximately 23.6420 acres of land
being part of the Gideon Walker Survey, Abstract 1330,
and beginning adjacent and north of Edwards Road
approximately 1/2 mile east of. Mayhill Road and 1/2
mile west of Swisher Road for the purpose of
determining whether to begin the annexation process,
(A-41)
Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
July 15, 19860 at 700 p.m, in the Council Chambers of tine
Municipal Building at which the following items will be
consideredi
7:00 p.m,
10 presentation of awards for beautification effort to
the City to Mro Tbm Irby in the residential category
and Mr. Monte Mason, Jack Schmitz and Son Funeral
Home, in the commercial category.
2. Appearance by Mr, Don Whitmore regarding the City of
Denton utility billing system.
3, Consider approval of a request by Mro and Mrs. William
A, Elliott to waive a pro irate fee.
City of Denton City Council Agenda
July 1S, 1986
Page Two
4. Public hearings:
A. Z-1809. Petition of Ed Green and Rick Moore
requesting a change in zoning from the
agricultural (A) district to the two family (2F)
classification on a 7.366 acre tract located on
the south side of East McKinney Street (FM 426)
approximately 1,200 feet east of Woodrow Lane.
The property is more particularly described as a
tract in the T.M. Downing Survey, Abstract 346,
If the request is approved, the property may be
utilized for any purpose permitted in the two
family district by the City of Denton Zoning
Urdinance. (The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends approval.)
11 Consider adoption of an ordinance approving
a change in zoning on a 7.366 acre tract
located on the south side of Bast McKinney
Street (FM 426) approximately 1,200 feet
east of Woodrow Lane.
B. Z-1812, Petition of Holbert-Wyatt Volkswagen,
Inc* Trequesting a change in zoning from the
agricultural (A) to the commercial (C) district
on 6.114 acres located on I-35 South, south of
Pockrus Road and south of the M.K.QT. Railroad.
The property Is more fully described In the
Gideon Walker Survey, Abstract 1330. If
approved, the property may, be utilized for any
purpose permitted in the commercial district of
the City of Denton Zoning Ordinance. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission has no
recommendation.)
C. Z-1814. Petition of Dr. Bill Cudd requesting a
change in zoning from the single family (SF-10)
district to the planned development (PD)
classification on an 18.24 acre tract located at
the northeast corner of U.S. Highway 380 and Old
North Road. The pproperty is further described as
a tract in the Caswell Carter Survey, Abstract
275, and the R. B. Longbottom Survey, Abstract
7754 If the planned development is approved, it
will permit the development of an office park.
(The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
denial.)
Do V-30. Petition of Don M. Bryant requesting a
variance of provisions of the City of Denton
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations
requiring sidewalk, paving, curb and gutter, and
drainage improvements for perimeter streets
adjacent to proposed subdivisions. Two 3.0 acre
City of Denton City Council Agenda
July 15, 1986
Page Three
lots located adjacent and crest of Hickory Hill
koad betweon Gibbons Road and PM 1830 are
proposed. The property is located in the City of
Denton's area of extraterritorial jurisdiction
(hTJ) and single family development is
anticipated. (The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends denial.)
5. Consent Agenda:
Each of these items is recommended b?, 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.
Listed below are bids and purchase orders to be
approved for payment under the Ordinance section of the
agenda. Detailed back-up information is attached to the
ordinances (Agenda items 6,A, 6.8, 6.C), This listing is
provided on the Consent Agenda to allow Council Members to
discuss any item prior to approval of the ordinance.
A. Bids and Purchase Orders;
1. Hid M 9628 - McKinney Street sanitary sewer
2. Bid 0 9629 - Truck tractor used
31 Bid # 9634 - Used refuse truck
4. Bid 0 9636 - Capacitors
51 Bid N 9637 - 500 MCM power cable
6. Purchase Order 0 73901 to Mr. Richard
McAI in, Mugphy and Rochester, in the amount
of $15,080.2',
7, Purchase Order 0 74205 to North Texas
Savings and Loan in the amount of $14,439.08
B, Plats and Replats:
1. Approval of rinal replat of Freeway Park
Addition, Lot 0, Block A. (The Planning
and Zoning Commission recommends approval.)
21 Approval of preliminary Vat of the Hannah
Bstates Addition, Phase IV, Block 1. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.)
31 Approval of preliminary plat of the Sun
Country Addition, Lot 1, Block 1. (The
Planning and Zoning commission recommends
approval.)
City of Menton City Council Agenda
July 15, 1986
Page Pour
C. Change Order:
11 Change Order to Calvert Paving Company for
the Yellowstone drainage project in the
amount of $14,495,00 (Bid N 9575, Purchase
Order N 72432 in the original amount of
$666,886.42)
Ordinances:
A. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting
competitive bids and providing for the award of
contracts for the purchase of materials,
equipment, supplies or services.
B. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting
competitive bids and providing for the award of
contracts for public works or improvements.
C. Consider adoption of an ordinance providing for
the expenditure of funds for emergency purchases
of materials, equipment, supplies or services in
accordance with the provisions of state law
exempting such purchases from requirenonts of
competitive bids.
D, Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a
specific use permit for a day care center in a
single family (SP-7) zoned area located east of
Audra Lane and north of Paisley Street and more
fully described as lot 22, block B, Lee Meadows
Addition, Section I. (5-190)
B. Consider adoption of an ordinance and service
plan annexing approximately 66.42 acres situated
in the Moreau Forrest Survey, Abstract 417, and
beginning adjacent and east of Geeslin& Road,
south of U.S, highway 380 Bast, and west of
Trinity Road. (A-36) (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends approval.)
P. Consider adoption of an ordinance setting a date,
time and place for public hearings concerning the
proposed annexation of approximate )y 132.64 acres
of land being part of the G. Walker Survey,
Abstract No. 1330, and part of the W. Durham
Survey, Abstract No. 3005 and beginning at a
point approximately one mile south of PM 426
(Bast McKinney) and 1 1/2 miles north of I-35B.
(A-37)
G. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of
Denton, Texasff, providing for angle parking on the
Street side hibitrnnut Street from Elm to ~ocust
g parking on the south side of
City of Denton City Council Agenda
July 15, 1986
Page Five
Walnut Street from Elm to Locust Street;
providing for 30 minute parking on the west side
of Locust Street from Walnut to Mulberry. (The
Citizens Traffic Safety Support Commission
recommends approval.)
H. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending
Article 11 of Chapter 4 of the Code of Ordinances
of the City of Denton, Texas; by amending the
procedure3 relating to vicious cats and dogs;
providing for tLe impoundment thereof; providing
for the destruction thereof upon notice and
hearing; providing for a penalty in the maximim
amount of $200.00 for violac►ons thereof; and
providing for a severability clause.
I. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a
contract a contract between the City of Denton,
Texas and W. P. Willis consulting engineers to
provide engineering services for airport
improvements. (The Airport Advisory Board
recommend3a approvst.)
7, Resolutions:
A. Consider approval of a resolution in support of
H,R, 1400 to reauthorize General Revenue Sharing,
B. Consider pproval of a resolution authorizing the
appointment of a citizens committee on Capttc.l
Improvements Projects and establishing a charge
to the committee.
81 Consider appointment of a Deputy City Secretary,
91 Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
10, New Business:
This item provides a section for Council Members to
suggest items for future agendas.
Work Session of Luu City of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
July 15, 1986, in the Civil Defense Room of the Municipal
Building at which the following items will be considered:
16 Receive a report on the proposal for the Denton Health
Department,
21 Receive a report and coi:sider further action on the
holding and disposition of animals received at the
City of Denton Animal Cot 'rol Center from non-city
residents.
City of Denton City Council Agenda
July 15, 1986
Page Six
3, Receive P report on the proposed smoke detector
ordinance.
4. Receive a report on zoning requests in the Hickory
Creek area.
5. Executive Session:
C. Personnel/Board Apppointments Under Sec. 2(g),
Art 62S2-17 V.A.T.S. (see item #6
6, Review and continuation of the selection process for
the Municipal ,Judge.
7, official Action on Executive Session Items:
A. Legal Matters
B. Real Estate
C. Personnel/Board Appointments
C h R T I N 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,
on the day of , 1986 at. o'clock
CITY ,SECRETARY
2280C
11
DATE:7/15/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City marager
SUBJECT: Economic Development Study Committee Status Report
RECOMMENDATION: Recieve report from Jack Miller, Chairman of
Chamber Economic Development Team. Dic:uss the status of the
committee's activities.
SUMMARY: After many months of int*pse work aimed at a strategy
or mproving the City's ability to attract and retain industry,
a status report will be presented and preliminary recommendations
discussed.
BACKGROUND:(Above)
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED,: There is no direct
impact on any City program or department at this time.
FISCAL IMPACT. None
Respectfully submitted;
I-~G y M
Lloyd Harre , City Mana
'I 4
prepared ~
a N"Itryan C. Stuar
T P e Administrative Assistant
i
ve
7-%
a t McKean
Ti eA sistant City Manager
C1rYa1 OENr0N, TtXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING j DENTON, TEXAS 70201 / TELEPHONE (817) 500.8307
Office of the City Manager
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Betty McKean, Assistan~, City Manager
DATE: July 8, 1986
SUBJECT: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY COMMITTEE STATUS REPORT
The economic development study committee has culminated many
months of intense work aimed at a strategy for improving the
City's ability to attract and retain industry.
On July 159 19869 Jack Miller, Chairman of the Chamber Economic
Development Team, Chuck Carpenter, and Jerry Cott will be
present at the 5:30 p.m, work session to discuss the status of
the committee's activities and to present its preliminary
recommendations.
Attached for your consideration is a copy of the report
supplied by Jerry Cott, The report reviews both positive and
negetive aspects of attracting industrial development to
Denton, a specific proposal to establish an Economic
Development de artment under the supervision of the Chamber,
and a five S) year hudget projection for the Economic
Development department. Please let me know if I can provide
you with any further information.
ett can
Assistant City Manager
bcs
2968M
r
A
July 1, 1986
Enclosed Is a summary report from our Chamber of Commerce Economic
Development Committee Task Force that has been studying the current Economic
Dove'--ment climate for our city.
This summary report is sent to you In advance of an oral presentation we will make
to outline our findings and understand your pcsitlon on whether the community
should proceed to finance and implement our recommendation. Your Input and that
of other of your fellow citlzens will be presented to the Chamber Board at our
September retreat. The Board will then decide a course of action.
At all times, the operating credo of our study has been that Economic Development
and diversity must accompany population growth both to broaden the tax base and
provide Jobs for our citizens. This economic and Industrial expansion should be
accomplished In such a way that we retain our unique community spirit and
identity.
We look forward to a frank exchange of views with you.
Respectfully submitted,
Gilbert Bernstein
Charles W. Carpenter
Jerome M. Cott
Mary Evelyn Blagg Huey
Alfred Hurley
John Lawhon
Robert McGee
Betty McKean
Jack Miller
Charldean Newell
J MC:la
Enc.
3505 Teasley LaWE ;nton, Texas 76205/Barn: 817.565.0313/Office: 817.855-0354/House: 817.365.1417
BRIEF SUMMARY OF WORK AND FINDINGS OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMLNT TASK FORCE
Chamber, City, DISO, both unlver:tttles, private sector represented on Task
Force.
Objective to complement Chamber Economic Development Team by gathering
and analyzing data on economic state of affairs and recommending course of
action for community-wide economic development effort.
Strateglc planning approach used. Analyzed strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities, threats. Must be continued on a permanent basis.
POSITIVE FINDINGSt
• Continued substantial opportunity for employment and world's most diversified
producing and consuming opportunities in United States;
• Industrial relocation and business expansion In Texas and Metroplex in spite of
state's current economic outlook;
Accommodation of population growth In Denton with continuing local spirit of
"can-do" and community unity manifested by both long-time residents and
newcomers;
Competitive with any similar size city In Metroplex on taxes, land costs, utility
rages, public services, etc.; further study needed to assess competitiveness with
rest of state and nation;
• En - diversity of Industry In Metroplex resulting in varied opportunities In
Denton;
Superior quality of life to most communitles, but danger of becoming "bedroom
community" because of desirability of living in Denton.
NEGATIVE FINDINGSt
• Likely deterioration of quality of life if decline In tax revenues protracted)
Undesirable economic climate In state coupled with unfavorable naflonal
publicity about failures of traditional natural resource-based econo;ny and
uncertainties of future tax strategies and public revenues, resulting In
problematic budgeting for Industries;
Extremely competitive national environment for recruitment of new industry,
resulting In need for proactive approachl
Local economy affected by state downturn with mosi obvious signs the budget
cutbacks at the universities and restricted 1987 city budget based on forecast of
declining revenues, resulting In need for quick stabilization of community
revenue stream;
• Major disadvantages caused by Denton's not being a part of Dallas/Fort Worth
Commercial Transportation Zone, resulting in deterrence to potential employers
who rely on trucking, higher shipping costs for current industries, and higher
costs for goods to cItlzens;
Small inventory of existing building in Denton coupled with large Inventory In
Metroplex, resulting In deterrent effect for Industries seeking "Instant access."
GENERAL CONCLUSION:
Need for Denton to remain master of Its own destiny In order to prevent city's
becoming a bedroom community, to maintain existing quality of life, and to
determine future rate and type of growth by establishing proactive marketing
program through the establishment of an Office of Economic Development.
DE,VTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSALS
Based on the findings of the Economic Development study, the study team
recommends that a fulltlme Economic Development pro ram be Instituted for the
City of Denton, with the following guidelines and suggestions:
1. Establish a Department of Economic Development, headed by the Director of
Economic Development who will report to the President of the Denton
Chamber of Commerce.
The purpose of the Economic Development Department will be to develop and
carry out a fulltlme proactive Economic Development program for the City of
Denton to Identify and attract appropriate new employers to Denton and to
cultivate existing employers,
2. The Economic Development program operating funds will come from the
following sources:
City of Denton/Denton Electric Utilities - one-third of funds
Private sector - two-thirds of funds
The Denton Chamber of Commerce will be responsible for raising the funds
from the private sector,
3. The Economic Development Department will be set up as a separate
department In the Denton Chamber of Commerce and will operate within the
policies and procedures of the Chamber (in the same manner as the Visitors
and Convention Bureau).
4. Separate and distinct financial and program records will be maintained for the
Economic Development Department,
3. Monthly financial and program reports for the Economic Development
Department will be presented to the Chamber Executive Committee and Board
of Directors.
Quarterly reports that include the sources and expenditures of funds, major
projects, number of Industrial prospects who visited Denton, industrial
prospects locating In Denton, etc., will be presented to other appropriate
entities (l,e, Denton City Council, Utilities Board, major private sector
contributors, etc.),
b. The Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Team will act as an
advisory committee to the Director of Economic Development and the
Economic Development program and will continue to function In all other
respects as In the past, *he Team members will be representative of the
diverse interests of the community.
7. An operating agreement for the Economic Development Department will be
drawn up (which could be patterned after those In effect in other chambers of
commerce) and approrc +y the Chamber Executive Committee and Board of
Directors and any other proprlate entities.
-WN
Page 2
8. The Initial operating budget will be prepared by the Chamber President, in
conjuctlon with the City of Denton Assistant City Manager, and approved by
the Economic Development Team, Executive Committee and Board of
Directors. Future budgets will be prepared by the Director of Economic
Development, in conjunction with the Economic Development Team, and
approved by the President, Executive Committee and Board of Directors.
The Director of Economic Development, In conjunction with the Economic
Development Team and the President, will annually prepare goals, objectives
and operating plans for the Economic Development program. These will be
approved by the Executive Committee and Board of Directors and
disseminated to other appropriate entitles.
Functions of the Economic Development Department and Director of Economic
Development:
1. Identify "target" Industries and organizations and develop and carry out
marketing campaigns to attract new Industry to Denton.
2. Advise and counsel the Economic Development Team, President, Executive
Committee, Board of Directors and other Interested parties on matters
relating to Economic Development.
3. Draw on available resources to help establish and carry out the Economic
Development program, such as NTSU, TWU, NCTCOG, NT Commission, Lone
Star Gas, TP&L, Santa Fe RR, MKT RR, etc.
4. Maintain complete and up-to-date records for use by all local concerned
parties (i.e. City of Denton, developers builders, real estate representatives,
Chamber members and committees, etc).
5. Maintain complete and up-to-date Information on Denton for use by
prospective Industries.
6. Participate In area and state Economic Development activities.
7. Coordinate efforts of volunteer and other community resource persons when
prospects visit our community.
8. Act as liaison between the Chamber of Commerce and other community
orgganizations such as City of Denton, County of Denton, area utilities,
universitltes, etc.
i
PROPOSED ANNUAL BUDGETS
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE
1. PERSONAL SERVICES 198 1988 -1489 1990 1991
* 1rector 34,800 389280 42,110 46o120 500930
* Office Staff 140580 16,040 17 640
* FICA 2,490 3,230 60000 8,000 9,500
* Worker's Compensation 60 63 100 200 350
* Health/Life Insuranct 975 10070 20000 2,800 3 600
* Auto Allowance 3,000 3.000 4&0 5,400
$ 41,325 $ 45,643 $ 68,990 $ 780160 $ 87,440
Il. PROGRAM do SERVICES
f. Research do Development 50000 $ 7,000 $ 79000 $ 100000 $ 10,000
2. Solicitation do Travel Expenses 8,000 10,000 120000 13,200 14,400
3. Advertising 10,000 12,000 180000 24,000 26,400
4. Telephone Service 3,600 4,200 40600 59400 6,000
5. Dues do Publications 1,200 1,200 10800 11800 21400
6. Personal Expense Reimbursement 19800 2,400 3,000 3,600 4x800
7. Special Services 100000 10000
8. Professional Development 800 1,200 11800 1,800 2,400
$ 400400 $ 390000 $ 48,200 $ 59,800 $ 66,400
Ill. SUPPLIES do OPERATIONS
51fire Supplies $ 20700 $ 10800 $ f '800 $ 2,400 $ 2,400
* Postage
2,200 20400 3,600 40800 3,400
* Audit 500 500 750 750 730
$ 3,400 $ 4,700 $ 60150 $ 7,930 $ 80350
IV. FIXED ASSP.TS
* Building qulpment $ 1,320 $ 500 $ 300 $ 750 $ 750
* Furniture & Fixtures 2,7.50 500 500 730 750
* Computer - 14000 2,000 2.009 51000
$ 4.070 $ 13400 $ 3,000 $ 3.500 $ 60500
SUB-TOTALt $ 91,193 $ 102,343 $ 126,340 $149,410 $ 168,890 = $638,180
BUDGET CONTINGENCY (1096): 91120 10,235 12,6.33 14,940 16490 = 63,120
TOTAL: $ 100,315 $1120380 $ 1330975 $ 164,330
$ 183,780 = $7020000
1987
PROPOSED ANNUAL BUDGET
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE
PERSONAL SERVICES
Annual jalary, payroll taxes for fulltlme Staff Director to head Economic
Development Office.
Basic Health Insurance and Term Life Policy furnished through Texas Chamber
of Commerce Executive Association Trust.
Monthly Allowance sufficient to cover car payment and Insurance, Mileage
for documented business use of personal car outside of
reimbursed city 11mit
s
paid through PROGRAM & SERVICES,
It. PROGRAM & SERVICES
1 - 6. The basic thrust of the Marketing Program will be to research those
rms that are ooth compatible with our community and most likely to expand
or relocate.
After Identifying our targets, we will then pursue each with basically a letter
writing, telephone, and personal visit campaign.
Supplemental to the paragraphs above will be the annual update of present
factbooks and resource material which we assume will continue to be supplied
gratis by present sources.
Part of the Marketing Program will be participation In certain trade shows,
regional Chamber Industrial tours, and appropriate media advertising.
Telephone equipment Is presently available to be transferred to this
Department for a $33 installation fee. We estimate $1,343 Initial year service
charges and $2,000 long distance charges.
7. Special Services. Concerning the City's application to the Texas Railroad
commission for inclusion In the Dallas/Fort Worth Commercial Trade Zone,
we recommend that the City Manager's office be charges; with achieving this
goal with the Chamber playing simply a supportive financial and operational
role,
S. Cover fees and tutitions for profess!onal association and training at
varlous seminars and conferences.
Ill. SUPPLIES do OPERATIONS
Basic office supplies, print stationery and envelopes, and large miscellaneous
printing projects. Chamber presently has Xerox 1043 copier that can handle
limited dally usage. Costs should level off after initial start up expenses.
Limited dally First Class Postage provided by Chamber's operations budgetl
$2,200 to be used for specific bulk mailings.
Page 2
Office to cover. Its share of annual audit performed on all Chamber books
($300).
IY, FIXED ASSETS
Chamber to provide all utilities and rent-free office space for ED Director,
will re-carpet and completely refurbish space in December 1986. Suggest new
typewriter and adding machine for secretary. Word Processing capabilities
available through Convention do Visitors Bureau computer system In 1987.
Executive desk, shelves, executive chair, filing cabinet (is drawer), office
chairs, reception table all needed to furnish office. Secretarial and other
support furniture already In place, May require minimal expenses annually
over next four years,
Special Computer and Software for exclusive use of ED Office to come on line
In 1988.
•
1496E
NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE li OF CHAPTER 4 OF THE CODE OF
• P
ORDINANCES OF THE CTY OF O BY ROCEDURES RELATING TOI VICIOUS CATSNANDTDOGS, PROM ING ENDINGFOR TTHE
HE
IMPOUNDMENT THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE DESTRUCTION THEREOF UPON
NOTICE AND HEARING; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM
' AMOUNT OF $200.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF{ PROVIDING FOR A
fir; 'f
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSt
SECTION I.
t That Article If of Chapter 4 of the Code c,f ordinances is
amended to read as followss
ARTICLE It. VICIOUS CATS AND DOGS
Sec. 4.41. Procedure and Hearing
(a) Filing of COO, Is,i__nt. Any person coopplaining of any
tat or og whicwhile at large, fn violation of
section 4.7 of this chapter, has bitten or attacked
a human being, may file a sworn complaint with the
animal control center. The complaint shall be filed
within ten days of the incident complained of and
shall contain the following information:
(1) the name, address, and telephone number of the
complainant and any other witnesses to the
incident, if known;
(1) the date, time, and location of the incident;
(3) a description of the cat or dog complained of;
(4) the name, address, and telephone number of the
owner of the cat or dog complained of, it
( known; and,
(S) a statement that the cat or dog complained of
1 while at large, in violation of Section 4.7 of
thinds chapter, attacked or bit a human being;
(6) other facts and circumstances of the incident
Including evidence of any required medical
treatment resulting from the attack or bit
complained of.
(b) Nearing Sett Notice Give g, After the complaint is
proper y e , e complaint shall be reported to
the city manager, or his designated representatives
who shall set a time and place for a hearing. The
owner of the cat or dog complained of shall be
given notice of the hearing by personal service or
certified nail, return receipt requested, at least
1
ten (10) days rlor to the hearing date. The
notice shall inc ude a copy of the complaint and a
copy of this article. After the notice Is
delivered to the owner, the animal control officer
shall take custody of and ',mpound the cat or dog
complained of, pending the outcome of the hearing.
(c) Hearing Held. The city manager, or his designee,
shall sppo n't a hearing officer to receive evidence
at the hearing to determine whether the animal
complained of should be destroyed. The hearing
officer shall conduct the hearing in accordance
w(th procedures to insure an orderly proceedin
All persons wishing to give evidence shall ~e
sworn, and may be questioned by the hearing
officer, the complainant and the owner of the cat
or dog complained of, or their representatives.
The hearing officer may receive and consider all
relevant evidence on the Issue of whether the
animal complained of would constitute a danger to
the health, safety and welfare of the community if'
not destroyed, including, but not limited to, the
followings
(1) the seriousness of the attack or biting and the
attendant required medical treatment, if any
(2) any prior incidents or attacks or biting by the
cat or dog complained of;
(3) the seriousness of the attack or biting~
complained of, considered in conjunction with
any prior Incidents of the cat or do being at
large, in violation of section 4-~ of this
chapter, so as to indicate the potential danger
the cat or dog may pose to the community in the
future If not destroyed; and,
(4) whether the attack or biting was the result of
some provocation or circumstance that is, or Is
not, likely to reoccur in the future.
(d) Declaim and Or de- Within a reasonable time after
e cone us o o the hearing, the hearing officer
shall enter, in writing, his or her findings of
fact and an order. If the hearing officer finds
that the animal complained oft
(1) attacked or bit a human beingi
(2) the attack or biting occurred while the animal
was at large, in violation of section 4-7 of
this chapterl and
(3) the snimal would constitute a danger to the
health, safety, and welfare of the community,
F If not destroyed;
r
the hearing officer shall order the animal
destroyed' If animal is ordered destroyed, the
owner shall be liable for any daily handling fees
for vich der the animal was impounded, In
accordance with this chapter. If the cat or
PAGE 2
,
r
dog is not ordered destroyed, it shall be returned to
' the owner upon payment of all impoundment or other
fees, The hearing officer shall give notice of the
findings and order to the owner by personal service or
certified mall, return receipt requested, within five
• days of entry of the order. If the order provides for
destruction of the cat or dog, the animal shall not be
destroyed until time for review of the order has exV red
without the filing of an appeal as provided for herein.
(e) Aggea~l. If the owner does not seek review of an
order to destroy the animal, by filing suit in a
court of competent jurisdiction and giving notice
of such fllin in writing, to the hearing officer
within five days of the delivery of the order
of destruction to tho owner, the cat or dog shall
be destroyed, Upon verification that a suit was
filed, the hearing officer shall suspend the order
to destroy, pending the outcome of the appeal,
unless the owner fails to timely claim the animal
as provided for herein, In the event the order to
destroy is suspended, the owner shall be given
forty-eight (48) hours notice to claim the animal
and hold it pending the outcome of the appeal.
Failure to claim the animal within forty-eight (48)
hours of such notice will result In the execution
of the order to destroy.
Sac, 4-42, Fallure to Release Dog
A person commits an offense if the person who possesses a
cat or dog that has been charged by sworn affidavit as
provided in section 4.4.1 of this chapter, knowingly refuses
or fails to release the dog to an animal control officer
upon demand.
SECTION It.
That any person violating any of the provisions of this
ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding
Two Hundred Dollars (;200,00); and each day and every day that
the provisions of this ordinance sre violated shall constitute a
separate and distinct offense, This penalty is in addition to
and cumulative of, any other remedies as may be available at law
and equity.
BC.111,
That if any section, subsection, pare raph, sentence, clause,
phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any
person or circumstance is held invalid V, any court of competent
jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of
tho City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares It would have enacted
such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
SECTION IV,
j That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen .(14)
days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is
hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be
published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official
newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of
the date of its passage,
PAGE 3
71
PASSED AND APPROVED this the dry of , 2986.
RAY STEPHEN3
CITY OF DENTdN, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ACLUN CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON,,TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY Of DENTON, TEXAS
i
BY: CD. ~M rr2M
r
f
PAGE 4
ggFfmlr .-9- , -n y.j 'a.'c Z °,r ,°F•°r°M' 7
DATE: 7/15/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT PORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Discussion of the request of the Tommy Corporation for annexation of
approximately 23.6420 acres of land being part of the Gideon Walker
Survey, Abstract No. 1330, and beginning adjacent and north of
Edwards Road approximately .5 mile east of Mayhili Road and approxi-
mately .5 mile west of Swisher Road for the purpose of determining
whether to begin the annexation process (A-41)
RECOMMENDATION:
A Planning end Zoning Commission recommendation wil; be forwarded at
a later date if the City Council instructs Staff to begin the
annexation process.
SUMMARY:
The Tommy Corporation states in its application that it is requesting
annexation for the purpose of developing the property in accordance
with the City of Denton's standards. A petition for single family
(SF-7) zoning has been submitted in conjunction with this annexation
request,
The site is not within a flood plain area. Edwards Road is an
unimproved road that is subject perimeter street paving standards
(17 feet of curb and gutter and improvements to City of Denton
specifications along the entire frontage of the property to be
develcped) regardless of whether the tract is annexed or not if
development occurs. An existing 12" water line at the Mayhill Road
and Edwards Road intersection must be extended 4,100 feet east to
serve this parcel,, City of Denton and TP&L electrical service is
available. The Parks and Recreation Department and Fire Department
have no objections to the proposed annexation.
SACKfJRGUND:
A 60.8 acre tract of land adjoining this parcel to the west was
annexed and zoned planned development (PD) for mixed residential
land use in January, 1986. The Tommy Corporation requested
annexation and zoning for the adjoining tract.
City Caunail Report (A-11)
July 15, 1986
Page 2
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
There are no dwelling unite, businesses, or population existing
within the area of proposed annexation. The Petitioneru have
indicated that a water supply district lies within the boundaries of
the area proposed for annexation.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Undetermined.
Respectfully submitted:
Lloyd rrell
Prepared by: City eager
David Ellison
Senior Planner
App., ved
Jeff Mey
Director of Planning
and Development
1627a
J1ti
.
- _ED sxer , ~d • ~
A-41
, ~ ~ 111;1\ . • +rr.r...r.u . r.. • r ~5 i
f
,~,MJfN ~ f
~ -N-
YI N*^
` `,I IIpwrr • a~ • r ti~.U~ • W~~ ~
7a
i
II
1I \
1 V le
1
niI ~r~ ' ~ I~•' III, ~ 1, '•I''W~ 1 ~ ~ ~f I
~I ,ri• i, l~ i ~ ~ r ~ t I ~~V ,.rr~ 'i !
N~7:
to a/~ . I . C, t ~
a,j.~4i. i A ,~r`I 7y(, :1.: t ! ~ ~ Pr S•R.'•:~ R,'•,~ 'f ~ f
~:VVVN••"I°'.~ISi' , '~1~~ 1f~i`~.I , I~ ,
lio
61 s I. I •'+I 11~ I ~ 1, + r. ; ~ ;r, }rr J•.• f,' ~~~I IIIE ('r rl / ~
.IMF ;liv ' y •y . , • / + ! f ; At~,41'
44
(ly
1" lh~ `~~-r1G r ~ I •.I ~ { 1,1 q ~y~..: 4....1~\ I t~I~ ~~~r f1 f
v 9.
I I I ' 11 \\ii
r ! e ' ~ ~.l d •I`«~ ~ }~~j f,`
1;,, 'I l ( 'r , it r' ~1 ~ ;I },~.~,'O~F~~~i~~'flf
f~f~ ' ' I~~~~~''LY _.:.....i,~~ ..~',~•~;I 1 , 1, E ~ ~ 'J gym' Lf ~ ~ \~~A~ ~I~I~~~~~,~ }
I, li 5r -r• f-~-~-fe•~, ~ ~ : ' ! ' ( ~ ~\•111 / ,
, ~I , I , j , x r li. 1 +I I i I I ,~J1 S'.L. R. ~}I~ ~~'I ll I 1 . } ,
' i(~}fir' vli~ ~ ~ " j; ~ 1 ''-~I'~•; i~', '1}~4 slt., ~f ff ~JII,
.j ,P~I~ + u '1~... T,E,r'., r ~•~y,, ,I, fl• II '~~lE Y~l, }r~fl} ~ 1 }i'~;!Vi ~
i'`i {~a 11 : Ike ~ ~tr;,.~. i r`~`' `~1~ ~M~' , ~ ~ ~ ,
, 7~•1 ;iSf .l 1, ~ ~ ~i I~' ~ r . ~f. r r
r} IiI ,A i~ lid
nr' '!I~• S~~'!'ri\'~ I:r~r-• ~•~,`i`li,~~'•~•.Sr~-J...':S~:r„ `V....~%~1••I!-..... ~Z1 4 ` A, 7' ~ 0'
~awn►aaN sa j
LOCAMON MAP & SITE
FrCM A1V1MMATION
Tommy Co;%p
NMIROPLKX
A;Lk tN43"NIUMNO
CORPORATION
,w oOM.oo~ aat Worm a~+ar ,sva. +NN
NI-NM MfAOt~N•iN
i1.
~ ' July is, 1986
CITY COliNC I.. REPORT F
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: LLOYD V, HARRELL, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Preapntation of Beautification Awards
RECO INDATION:
The Denton Beautification Committee wishes to award tor. Tom Irby
recognition for his property improvement of landscaping his home at
1418 Amherst.
mr. Irby was nominated for the award by the Beautification committee
and selected by a panel of judges.
BACKGROUND: Mr. Tom Irby, 1418 Amherst, has spent many hours nerfectinc
a variety of plant material at his horse. This personal "effort is
certainly a credit to the surrounding neighborhood and the City as a
whole. Through his efforts he has made a positive influence on others
and has contributed to the beautification of the City.
DEPARTMENTS ASOUPS AFFECT AFFECTED;
BEAL IMPACT:
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
LLOYD HARRELL--
CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY:
A Robert K. Tickner
TITLE Superintendent of. Parks
APP :
NAME
TITLE
DATE:
CITY COUNQ L RE2981FORMAT July/Irl 1986
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: LLOYD V, HARRELL► CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Presentation of Beautification Awards
RECOMMENDATION:
The Denton Beautification Committee wishes to award Jack Schmitz and
Son Funeral Rome, 820 North Elm, reuognition for significant improvement
through landscaping.
SU( MARY
Mr. Monte Mason and Mr. Dean Mulky have made significant improvements
in the area of North Elm Street at the Jack Schmitz and Son Funeral
Home. The landscaping adds greatly to the aesthetics of the facility
and has continued to be maintained since installation.
BCK ROUND;
This facility was nominated by the Beautification Committee and selected
by a panel of judges.
EROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
FISCAL IMPACT;
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
LLOYD HARRELL G~-
CITY MANAGER
?
PREPatYI
NAME
Hobert K. Tickner
TITLE Superintendent of Par)cs
APP ED'
AM•
TITLE
July 15, 1986
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT:
Consider Waiving of Pro Rata Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION
The Utility Staff does not recommend the waiving of pro rata charges
as per City Ordinance Appendix A, Article 4.09.
SUMMARY/BACKGROUND
At the customer's request, we are placing this item on the agenda
for City Council review.
Based on a telephone call from Marilyn Elliott to a City Utility
Department employee, the Elliotts paid for a water tap and meter.
During the installation of the water tap, it was discovered by the
City employee that the property was subject to pro rata
reimbursement. The City employee has given a full report of the
situation as he remembers it, The Director of Utilities and the
City Manager have responded to the Elliott's with an offer for them
to pay out the pro rata fee on a time basis. The Elliott's are not
satisfied with this solution and request City Council review.
The Utility Department has requested a legal opinion from the City
Attorney and will present this information to the City Council at
the neeting,
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED
Utility Department, City Officials, citizens of the community, Legal
.Department.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City installed this 8" water line in February 1985 at a total
cost of $640195,40. The fro rata charge to the Elliotts would be
60% of the first 100 feet times cost of an 8" line ($21.50 ■
1290.00 plu 10% of the next 50 feet times cost of an 8" line
$21.50) • 1107.50. TOTAL $1597.50 (See Attached Appendix A,
Article 4.09)6
Y
Prepared by: Respectfully,
av a; X st. Director Lloyd rre city anag
Water/Wastewater Divisions Y A,
APPROVED-
R.
of Utilities
Attachment I: Ltr 6/30/86 from Elliotts to Bob Nelson
11: Ltr 6/20/86 to Elliotts From City Mgr.
III: Memo 6/9/86 to City Mgr. from R.E. Nelson
IV: Memo 6/4/86 to R.B. Nelson from David Ham re Pro Rata
V Ltr 5/26/86 from Elliotts to Mayor Stephens
VI Art. 111, 4.09 -Appendix A City Code of Ordinances
4404U:2
i
JUL 2198
ATTACHMENT I
3924 Redstone Road
Denton, Texas 76201
June 30, 1986
Mr. Bob Nelson "f!
Director of Utilities
City of Denton Municipal Building
Denton, Texas 76201
Dear Mr. Nelsons
Thank you for your recent telephone call and letter. Your
suggestion that we pay out the pro rata fee on the Mayhi11 water
tap and meter is appreciated. However, we would still have to
pay an amount in excess of $1,300 which, to be fair, should not
be our expense.
We understand that your p )sition as an employee of the City of
Denton may restrict your personal desire to offer more
assistance. We would like to request, therefore, that our letter
and this matter be presented to the City Council members as a
special agenda item. Perhaps the Council can propose a
solution that seems more equitable to both the City and to us.
Again, we are not opposed to a compromise.
We hope that you will help us by forwarding our request to the
Council. We are grateful to you for your investigation into this
matter, your efforts to assist, and your sympathy and unfailing
courtesy to us.
Sincerely yours,
illiam A, (Bu ) 811 ott
Marilyn M.~ lliott
cat Mayor Ray Stephens
Dr. Jim Alexander
Mrs. Jane Hopkins
Mr. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
i
a
Fl-
ATTACHME14T 2
(CONTD)
I
I • w11, L 1409 4. ~
M-9~C1[~YnJ EGt1o~'
1.
7ef47MENr
,f~fNtER RD, 7+L4 ~,J'
00,
PROJECT LOW
~ SY
ATTACHMENT II
CIT1►o1 DEW"t rEX" MUNICIPAL SUI:,DING/ DENTON; TEXAS 16201 TELEPHONE (811) S664M
Office of the City N&1q*
June 200 1986
Mr, and Mrs. William A. Elliott
3924 Redstone Road
Denton, Texas 96201
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Elliott:
Mayor Ray Stephens has requested that I respond to your letter
of May 260 1986, protesting the payment of the
pro rata fee
associated with your connection to the Mayhill Road water line.
The City of Denton has thoroughly investigated this matter and
in'- that regard, I have attached a memorandum from Mr. Scott
Lebsack, Engineering Technician to Mr. R. E. Nelson, Director
of Utilities. In this memorandum, Mr. Lebsack outlines his
action regarding this matter. In addition, Mr. Nelson has
provided a memorandum to me outlining his observations
concerning the situation.
As you can see by reviewing the material, the problem seems to
be one of a break down in communications. Obviously, you were
not given complete information during your initial conversation
with the City staff, and for that we are most apologetic.
However, we have attempted to learn from this situation and
have revised our procedure so that we will be better able to
avoid such an event in the future.
Concerning the pro rata fee, it is impossible for us to legally
waive the payment of this particular fee. All of the other
residents similarly situated along Mayhill Road are responsib:e
for like payment and thus we cannot treat you differently. On
the other hand, we pledge to be as understanding and coopera-
tive as possible in establishing a payment plan regarding the
pro rata fee which will not cause you an extraordinary burden.
Therefore, I have instructed Mr. Nelson to visit with you about
setting eip a payment schedule which will allow the water meter
to be installed and for you to begin receiving City water. The
City will try to be as understanding as possible in setting up
a payment schedule which will not cause you an unnecessary
financial burden.
Awk,
ATTACHMENT 2I ' (CONTD)
Letter to 811iott re Fro Rata
June 19, 1986
Page Tvo
" I do believe that Mr. Lebsack is truly sorry for the
inconvenience which he has caused. In addition, as you can see
from his memorandum, he did go to extraordinary lengths in
attempting to provide you with the water service to which he
felt you were entitled.
I
would encourage you to contact Mr. Lebsack if you continue to
have
waterline esiAs he mentionedo the wdrawing has beenntlocal dland
is available for your viewing in the event such is desired.
Again, let as apologize for the communication problem regarding
the pro rata fee. I solicit your understanding in realizing
that legally we are unable to waive the fee and treat you
differently than other citizens in the community. On the other
hand, we pledge to work with you to the best of our ability to
mitigate the impact of this decision. In this regard, Mr.
Nelson will be contacting you in the near future.
Thank you again for your very comprehensive letter and
understanding concerning this matter.
Very my yours,
Lloyd V. Harrell
City Manager
ca
cc: Mayor Ray Stephens
Council Member Jim Alexander
Council Member Jane Hopkins
John McGrane Director of finance
Bob Nelson, birector of Utilities
Dave Han, Assistant Director of Water/Wastewater
Utilities
2246C
ATTACHMENT TTI
CM of DEWW, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 / TELEPHONE (817) 566.8200
MEMORANDUM
TO: LLOYD HARRELL, CITY MANAGER
FROM: R. E. Nelson, Director of Utilities
DATE: June 9, 1986
RE: WE. Elliott, 1250 S. Mayhill Rd.
Pro Rata Fee
w w w r r w r r~ r w w w r w w r r r w w r w r r r r w w w r w w w r w r r w r w r r r w r r r O w r w w w w w w w w r r r r w w w r w
Attached is a memo from Scott Lebsack who handles our customer
inquiries for new serv;e-es and our pro rata activities.
Mr. and Mrs. Elliott have expressed that they called and checked
with Mr. Lebsack in December 1985 or January 1984 regarding
availability and cost of receiving water service at 1250 S. Mayhill
Road. Scott expressed he recalls someone calling regarding water
service along Mayhill Road, but apparently there was a lack of
understanding or communication of the exact location of the service
requirement. Scott was fully aware of the pro rata requirements
along Mayhill Road which he would, of course, have advised the
Elliotts nad there been a complete understanding of the location.
It is unfortunate that there was a breakdown of communication, and I
have requested that we get a formal procedure in such
communications, so that the issue of pro rata or any of the other
pertinent variables are properly addressed.
The subject pro rata water line was installed by the Solid Waste
Department in 1985 to provide water to the land fill, All pro rata
collected for the line must be returned to the Solid Waste
Department in accordance with City ordinance and contracts.
Tho City Attorney advises tht an error or omission on the part of a
City employee (although it does not necessarily appear to be an
error or ommission on our employeets part, but rather an incomplete
communication regarding exact location) does not waive the City's
responsibility to uphold City ordinances. In light of this, I
recommend that I work with Mr, and Mrs. Elliot and receive a down
payment on the pro rata for the line, authorize the meter to be
4000U:91
ATTACHMENT III 7CONT0)
Page 2
June 9, 1986
installed, and submit the invoicing to the Finance Department for
processing by the Accounts Receivable Divisions. We trust then
that, considering the Elliott's good credit standing, payment would
be forthcoming and the City would not be violating state law of
lending credit of public funds.
Respectfully,
R. 6. Nelson, P.B.
Director of Utilities
gcr
cc: Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney
John McGrane, Director of Financo
David Ham, Asst. Director of Wtr/WW Utilities
i
40DOU:g2
ATTACHWI;WT LV
i
CITY Of DE44TON
lfYfLlTiSs .~t E N 0 R A N a U N
rwrrrrr ~.Yywr~.r.r.~.~r~rw.~..~rrrA.rt~.~wr.D+Ura.rrw.r~w.rrrr4ww~~.~~rrr w.~r.~rrrr~rrr
TOs R. E. Melson, Director of Utilities
r"s Scott Lebsack, Engineering Technician iI
THRUs C. David Ham, Assistant Director of Utilities
DATSs June 4, 1986
SUBJECT, Pro rata Fee, William Elliott
1250 South Mayhill Road
In response to a letter written by Mr. i Mrs. William Elliott of 1250
South Mayhill Road, Denton, to Mayor Stephens, this additional
information should be considered.
My duties as Senior Engineering Aide included speaking with many
citizens daily on obtaining water and sewer services. The procedure
that I use is outlined following this letter and is discussed as the
Elliot's mentioned on the first page of their letter. In my memory, I
am unable to recall speaking with either of the Elliot's about a tap at
1250 South Mayhill Road. I do recall spea'~inq with someone concerning a
tap in the two or three hundred block of South Mayhill, but not in the
vicinity of their property. The action i took in the communications
followed the outline of Obtaining Utility Services which is provided.
There is a possibility there may have been an error in communicating the
proper location.
As the Elliot's mentioned, I was cwlled on approximately ^ebruary 17,
1986, and asked when they were going to get their tip and meter. After
checking my records, I realized I did not have their work order, and
that they had been waiting approximately three weeks. I was told that
they were being cut off their well water and needed water immediately.
I mentioned that I would personally go after their work order and I
would give their fob first priority because of the delay in receiving
the work order. I said that I hoped we could do it tomorrow, and I
would try my best to do so.
That afternoon, I went to the metering substation office and received a
printed copy of their work order. I knew I would have to obtain a
permit from the County because the work was on Mayhill Road. This takes
approximately two weeks if sent by mail to the commissioner, so I
completed the permit, and stated on it that this was for an emergency
water service. I knew that there would be later discussions with the
commissioner because I was going to inform the crew to complete the tap
before receiving any response from the commissioner. This was handled
in this manner to provide water service as quickly as possible and not
create any further inconvenience.
ATTACHMENT 1V (contd)
i
r , The next morning i asked the field foreman to give this job priority and
compute it today if possible. He made preparations to complete the
Elliot's work. The crew and myself arrived at their residence at
approximately 9:00 a.m., on lebruary 18, 1986, and, upon seeing the
location. x told the foreman it was pro rata. No one was home and I
asked the foreman to complete the tap and set the meter asaemblage, but
to withhold the meter until I discussed pro rata with the 'Elliot's. The
job was completed in three to four hours and the crew was gone before
the Elliot's returned home. At that time, I copied the appropriate
maps, attached them to the permit, and hand delivered them to the county
Commissioner's office,
i told Hill Brown what I had done and he suggested that i should have
waited because they might decide they would want their money back when
they found out about the pro rata. This would have caused us to do work
without payment. I hoped there would be no problems when I discussed
the pro rata, but felt I might have to refund their tap fee if they
protested the pro rata charge.
Due to the delay in receiving the work order, and the urgency which was
stressed in this instance, I had the work completed prior to pro rata
discussions.
Shortly after this date, 1 spoke with Mrs. Elliott concerning the pro
rata. she brought in a plat and I calculated the cost on a note sheet
and gave it to her. She said she did not feel she owed the pro rata
payment because she was not told prior to receiving her tap. I stated
that we provided the tap to expedite matters, and we discussed pro rata
soon after work completion. Mrs. Elliott asked to see , drawing of the
Denton Landfill Waterline and r was unable to locate the drawing while
she was at my offi^e. We set an appointment for her to return the same
afternoon, and at this t'me r would provide the drawing for her viewing
and get the invoice typed. She did not return for her afternoon
appointment and I was unsuccessful several times to reach her by
telephone. I have kept this drawing available in the event she dropped
by unexpectedly for another talk.
I have provided a copy of the acceptance letter which shows completion
of the line in February, 1985. I walked this line at that time and was
aware of its pro rata nature. Also enclosed is a copy of the material
sent to the commissioner to obtain emergency water service for the
residence.
Currently, I am in the process of designing and inputing the pro rata
information on the computer. I expect this to make the pro rata
-i.nalysis much simpler and eliminate any potential problems. There will
no longer be any work ownpleted prior to pro rata discussions, and of
course, all citizens will continue to be told if their property is in
the vicinity of pro rata lines and that a visual inspection will need to
be made. These visual inspections will be handled by myself, as I have
the most familiarity with pro rata and expect that I can prevent this
type problem from reoccurring in the future.
,~f CZ~-- . ax:-.
Scott I.ebsack - C ~-r---
C. David Ham
Engin"ring Technician 11 Asst. Director of Utilities
. ATTACHMENT 1V,(contd)
OBTAINING UTILITY SERVICE
i
11 Determine tap sire and location
2. 'CW*q'k cost sheet
a) Is it a flat rate or is it to be billed?
b) is it paved or unpaved?
3. Check pro rata book and determine if pro rats is applicable
It a situation is close to a pro rats line, I will at that time ask the
customer to bring in a plat, determine the cost, and make a visual
inspection.
If service is new construction or replattinq, the customer is referred
to an engineer.
r..
1 IT
ATTACHM$NT IV (CONTO
NOTICE of PIPE Lint INTAU ATION
!_ebruarv 18. 1986 ,
TO TW COUNTY COMMISSIONER PRECIRK''T 1 of DENTON
ATTENTION COlMISSiOMM Ruth Tansty
The City of Denton Water and Sewer Field Services Division respectfully
request persission to install a water service
line to provide said service for William Elliott
at 12So Southh Kayhill Road
The City of Denton will properly bed and backfill the pipe line, as well
as repair the riding surface of the road affected by the excavation
necessary to provide emergency water service to the
described structure.
The location and description of this line are more adequately described
in four copies of map and drawings herewith.
Construction of this line will begin on or rfter February 18, 1986
Water i Sewer Field Service Division
r ~.+w
AWe,
ATTACHMENT IV (CONTD)
Cff yo/DENT", TEXAJ MUNICIPAL BUILDING DENTON, TEXAS 76201: TELEPHONE (S11) 566,8200
February 25, 1985
Dickerson Construction Co., Inc
Box 181
Celina, Texas 75009
Dear Lewis:
The water line improvements for the Denton Landfill have been
inspects an approved by City o Denton nggineering
personnel. Plans ate from City of Denton dated Auxust 4, 1984.
As-built drawings and a maintenance bond have been received and
approved. Project value: $64,195.40
The improvements are hereby accepted with City of Denton
maintenance beginning February 22, 1986.
If you have any questions, please call.
Sincerely,
age McDaniel IM rown
Senior Engineering/Tech Inspection Superintendent water b Sewer
la
#0201E
r
ATTACHMENT V
3924 Redstone Road
Denton, Texas 76201
(362-1696 or 397-2119)
`
May 26, 1956 - ~
V
Mayor Stay bt ens 3
City of on
619 Ri crest Circle
Den , Texas 76201
r'Dear Rays
We appeal to you as our newly elected mayor and as a
friend to help solve our dilemma with the City of Denton,
grateful for whatever assistance you may be able to give.
We are writing this same letter to Councilmembers Jane Hopkins
and Jim Alexander with the same trust and hope.
Last September we began negotiations to buy a house at 1250 South
Mayhill Road. That the property belonged to relatives is
immaterial, but I mention it so that you will be fully informed.
The property included a third share in a private deep well, co-
owned by two adjacent property owners, also relatives. one of
the two preferred that we not share the well and offered to pay
the fee to tap into City water since an exisiting line ran in
front of the house. We agreed that if she would pay the
connection fee and the sellers would pay to have the lines to
the house installed, we would relinquish any claim on the private
well.
In December or early January , I called the City of Denton to
learn what needed to be done to receive City water. I called
several times before I finally reached Scott Lebsec who, I was
told, could tell me about the costs and possibilities for tapping
into City water lines. Mr. Lebsec asked the location of the
property, whether the street was paved or not, and then said the
price of the tap and meter depended on the size line we wanted,
$475.00 for three-quarter inch line; $525.00 for one-inch line.
He also said that we must arrange for our own plumbing from the
tap to the house. He then said that we should pay for the size
line we wanted and the meter at the cashier's office in the
Municipal Building, that a work order would be sent to his
department# and that tap and meter would be installed in two or
three weeks. I asked if that was all we had to do and he said
yes, it was.
can January 31, we closed on the house. My aunt had paid for the
meter and tap (we have a receipt), and the plumbing costs for
lines to the house were put into escrow by the sellers, the
plumbing to be done and paid for after the City of Denton had
installed the tap and meter. Three weeks later the line had not
1
Ae1 #VWM7 zI
ATTACHMENT V (CANTO
been installed. When we called Mr. Lebsec, he said he had not
received the work order, that "someone fouled up," but that the
work would be done within a week. Several days later, the line
was installed, but no meter set. Mr. Lebsec then informed us
that they could not set the meter until we paid the pro rata fee.
This was the first we'd heard about a pro rata fee. We asked
what fae he meant, and how much it would be. He said we had to
bring a plat of our property to his office so that he could
figure the amount of the fee, which was based on frontage feet.
I took the plat in* Mr. Lebsec figured the fee, and said that the
additional charge would be in excess of $1$00.
When I protested that he had never mentioned pro rata fees in
any of our prior conversations, and that the great difference in
cost would most certainly have affected both our negotiations to
purchase the house and our agreement with my aunt, he had no
explanation other than that certain lines were pro rata lines and
that t,' a City was entitled to collect per frontage foot for such
lines. I asked how we were to know which lines were pro rata
lines and he answered that we were to come to his office and look
at the plats of existing water lines in the City. i reminded him
that he had not told me to do that, nor warned me that some lines
were pro rata and that our fees would be so based, but had said
that all we had to do was pay a tap and meter fee at the
cashier's window, based on the size line we wanted installed.
Mr. Lebsec gave no explanation, reason, nor excuse for his
failure to fully inform us and would only say that we had to pay the
additional amount in order to get a meter. I then asked to see
the map he referred to as showing the pro rata line on Mayhill,
but he could not find it. He and several other employees
searched fruitlessly for maps while I waited for almost an hour.
Finally I could wait no longer and returned to work.
We have not pursued this matter any further wi'6,i Mr. Letaec. He
seems either uninformed or uninformative, and it's difficult not
to get impatient with him. He misinformed us about the cost of
the line, but can offer nothing more than that we must pay the
additional pro rata fee. We bought the house believing that we
could get City water, $525.00 has been invested, the sellers have
no obligation to pay the additional amount, my aunt has paid in
good faith what she believed and what we were told was the amount
needed to connect to City water, and we do not have the
additional $1000 to pay. Furthermore, we are both morally and
legally obligated to stop receiving water from the private well.
is there anything that can be done? We would be willing to
compromise on the fee, but feel that because we were so blatantly
misinformed as to the cost of tapping into City water, we should
not be obligated to pay the entire additional amount, The City
has our moneyt we have no City water--we feel as if we are f ixed
quite firmly between the rock and a hard place.
2
MONO
4 Cis ♦ -
e (ATTACHMENT V (CONTD)
We will appreciate any action, discussion, or suggestions on your
part. We believe in your sincere desire to address the problems
of the city hnd its citizens, and hope that you can understand
and agree that although our problem is small in the grand scheme
of things, it is quite major to us. Thank you for your
attention.
Sincerely yours,
V U1.L'%~ I)A U[4.47
Marilyn Elliott
William A. (Buck) Elliott
ccs Jane Hopkins
Dr. Jim Alexander
Mr. Lloyd Harrall, City Manager
3
f ATtACHMENT VT
A+t IM US APMWM A AOL 118, 4AS
(1) Special exemption to the above atandad may be made by
the planning and zoning eemmiseion aldr reconnassada•
tion by the public utilities board. (AW, note the p Aky in
subsection (A) at this article.)
` NeM-AH wow ..d woft i Uft elaWw6 an appuwhla is the dtir llsft w
} as asteeirr"ial JW.iinsoa.
Art. 4A8, >Ilafendms of water and sewer au dwo
(A) Axseneloaa Required, ro Saw New Subdivisions and Other
D^wkpnwmft
(1) Required c*nsionsr All developments shall be required to
extend across the dill width of the development lot (defined
by plat or lot of record) in each an alignment that it can be
extended to the next property In accordance with the mac
ter sewer and water plane for the city, Properties already
served by water and sewer shall not be required to install
additiowl. facilities unless:
(a) The current slues an not of adequate capacity to m ve
the proposed devdopawnt, it, which can the devel•
opsr will be required to install adequate facilities.
(b) The current lines an not of adequate capacity to serve
the zoning of a property that has been redoned to a
more intense use since the time of the original utility
installation.
(2) Extensions to new construction: All extensions over six
hundred (800) feet to new construction require prior cep,
proval by the planning and zoning commission slur rec•
ommendation by the public utilities board,
(3) Extensions to existing dwelltn s: The director of utilities
may approve an extension of water and sewer mains to an
enduring dwelli>rtg if the extension Is lees than fix hundred
(800) feet, provided funds are available and as allocated in
the capital improvement plan.
(B) Cost Policies for Rxkna(ons to New Subdivisions a red Other
New Developments:
(1) Development mains and facilities: Developers* shall pay
the actual cost of all water and sewer main extensions, lift
stations or other necessary facilities required to serve their
•NoM-luludn IvAividwla, rubdivi4n and owner of multifamily dwellivoc
BYpp No. 4e Pilo
v ,
Aet M 4.09 D8241" COCK AR. III, 4.0
development, in accordanoe with the city's master utility
plan and the provisions of this Code. A developer may
appeal a determination of the required facilities to the
planning and inning oommlasion alter a recommendation
is made by the public utilities board.
(2) Ovsrsised mains: The city may participate in anv cost of
oversized water and sewer mains, subject to fund avail.
ability and 4proval by the city council. "Ovawised mains"
are deflned as water mains over eight (8) inches and sewer
mains over ten (10) inches, which are required by the city
for future system expansion and are not required by the
proposed development.
(3) No rata reimbursement due developer. Where water or
sewer main extensions, lift stations, force mains or other
necessary water or sewer facilities are installed by a de•
veloper, the developer shall be entitled to reimbursement
of the cost of such facilities from pro rata charges paid by
person; connecting to or matting use of such facilittes to
serve their property, in accordance with the provisions of
this article. In no case, however, shall developer receive
reimbursement in excess of the coot of the facilities.
(4) City right to approve oversiud construction contracts where
city fiends are involved, The city shall approve all oversized
utility contracts for such construction of utilities prior to
their execution by the developer. In the event the city
cannot justify the costa involved in any such oontrsct whom
city funds or prorate repayment is involved, the city shall
have the option and right to submit the project for sealed
bids, and the developer shall pay his proportionate share of
the acceptable low bid.
(5) No rata cost charges for tapping mains extended by city;
The City of Denson may elect to extend a main where
conditions exist which cause a hardship due to lack of
water or sanitary sewer service. Iii such cases the main
shall come under the same pro rata provisions, and any
taps of these lines shall be paid for the same as if such
main were extended by a developer, except the taps made
by the "bpecial extensions to individual single-family resi-
dence" as described below. There shall be no time limit.
Sum No. 49 1118
Aet. W, 4.09 APPfiHM A Aft M. 4.0e
tion for reimbursement to the city for lines extended under
the provisions of thin seetaon and the mentioned special
extension section described below.
(C) Extension to Existinj Subdivisions, Where extension an
Mw,...~ made to a subdivision lot, the lot owner shall pay a proportionate
shan to extend the main across the front j( his property or on
whichever side the City of Denton Ut'litise Department deems to
be most appropriate. The proportionate share for the owner and
the city shall be as stated below.
(D) Re:mburstment Pblicies for Extension Coeur
(1) Any developer who bean tht cost of oK-site water or sami-
tary sewer main extensions to a development, as provided
above, shall be entitled to reimbursement of the pro rata
cost paid to the city, as provided below, for each user who
extends a service line ttom the main within twenty (20)
years from the data the main is finally inspected and ac-
cepted by the city.
(2) The provisions of this section shall not apply to service
lines or main extensions r-,nstructed ac the expense of the
City of Denton under the terms of thla section.
(3) reimbursement payments shall be made by the city to the
person who paid the cost of the main, or his assignee, and
no other person shall be entitled to payment under the
terms of this section.
(4) The reimbursement shall be payable within thirty (30)
days of its receipt by the city.
(b) The developer shall enter into an agreement with the city
before any reim6ursememt may be made, which agreement
shall be made prior to acceptance of the main by the city.
Such agreement shall state the oat of the main, terms of
payment and the maximum amount of reiribursement.
(E) Pro Rata Coat Charges For Tapping Mains Extended Dy
Developer or City.,
(1) Every person or developer applying for a tap of any water
or sanitary sewer main which has been constructed under
the terms of the above developer extension section or the
Supp, No. 4t 1118.1
1
ow, I wM
Art III, 4,00 D`MN CODir Are, IM 4.01
city extension section Shall pay for the requested taps at
the following rates:
(a) Where a water or seiner main is located on a city
street or county road and abuts and is accessible to
separate platted tracts, the pro rata charge Shill be
Sixty (80) per cent of the average current per-foot cost
of such main.
(b) When a water or sewer main is located on a state or
fedieral highway and abuts and is accessible to esp.
rate platted tracts, the pro rats charge shall be one
V. hundred (100) per cent of the average current per-foot
cost of such main.
(c) Where a water or sewer main is located in a proper
eesemsnt across an owner's property and where sucl
easement does not abut a street or is not in any other
way directly accessible to any separately owned tract,
the pro rats charge shell be one hundred per cent of
the average current per-foot coat of such main,
Pro rata charge shall be based on the average current
cost of similar projects with pipe of the same size up to
eight (8) inches inside diameter water pipe and ten
(10) inches diameter sewer pipe. All pro rata charges
shall be charged on a per•t}ont•foot basis.
(2) The pro rate charges provided by this section shall be in
addition to the usual tapping fee and to any other charges
required by the clty.
(3) The intent and purpose of this section is to provide an
equitable charge for water and sanitary sewer connections
as a proportionate distribution of the cos: of water and
sanitary sewer main extensions to serve property within
the jurisdiction of the city. In cases where a property or a
tract of land is so situated or shaped that the above front.
foot charge creates an inequitable basis compared to other
tracts of land of similar overall size, the public utilities
board rhall deter•uine the proper charge in accord with the
intent and purpose of this section., and such determined
charge may be lesser or greater than that by the front-foot
basis. If more lots are to be served by the main than abut or
contain it, then the charge shall be greater, as determined
gupp, No. 41
1118,2
i
ArL I K 40 AlRWM A A rL A uD
by the vested public utilities person shall acquire any
v right under the terms a provisions of" action,
nor shall the City of Denton incur or assume any liability
or obligation to expend or encumber tax or utility funds.
No utility funds shall be spent or encumbered union thuds
are available for such purpose, as determined .'.y the public
utilities board.
(4) The pro rata charges shall be determined and established
at least annually by the public utilities board based upon
the average cost of recent similar water and sewer line
installations,
(F) Special Extensions to Individual Single-Family Residences:
(1) Waore an extension of water or sanitary sewer main is
made by the city in order to serve a single-family resi-
dence, the owner may contract with the city to pay a pro
portionate share of such a main as follows:
(a) Extension to lots with less than one hundred (100) feet
fronting or abutting the main:
1. Main in city street or *moment (side or front of
lot) shall pay sixty (60) per ant of the average
current cost per toot; or,
2. Mdn extended through adjoining lot shall pay
one hundred (100) per cent of the average current
cost per foot.
(b) Extension to lots with more than one hundred (100)
foot fronting or abutting the main:
1. Main in city street, easement or county road shall
pay average current cast per foot as follows:
Sixty (60) per cent of the first one hundred (100)
feet;
Ten (10) per cent of the next two hundred (700)
fief;
Zero (0) per cant over three hundred (300) feet.
2. Main extended through aafoining lot shall pay
average current cost per foot as follows:
One hundred (100) per cent of the first one hun-
dred (100) feet;
8upp. No. 4a 1116.3
_ ..t ~ pne,:sfsue: aP 'Pa,r t . a.,. c
Ash. tla, 4,M DOf &M COOG Art tli,14M
Zbn (10) per ant d the nest two bwWred MM
-4 feet;
Zero (0) pee ant over three bundmd (30M fiat.
(c) No owner for wbkh a connecUm is made pusuant to
"section shall be entitled to mat for spy
tUturo connections, and all llftre taps and connee.
lions made by the owner shall be pw for as p+cwidsd
in the previous section unkm the extension agreement
shall state otherwise.
(d) Owners of traeta with over one hundred (100) foot of
hontage, as described in subsection ft above, who
may at a later date subdivide their tract, shall be
required to pay pro rata for the subdivided hlraatage
equal to Any (60) per cent of the average current coat
per (w)t, cost to be determined as o (the date of the tap
request.
(G) Water Service for Singl&Family Res/dentlal Lots fYom Sub.
standard Lines,; Payment of Pro Rata Charges in Lieu'of lnstallar
Lion of New Water Line&
(1) Wham an exisdx4 water line is determined substandard
because it does not provide adequate water capacity to
serve the proposed development d a lot hr a single-family
residential unit in accordance with the provisions of this
Code, the per requesting approve of the development
may, if such lot is within three hundred (3oo) feet of an
existing Me hydrant, in lieu of install'ing additionai water
line facilities to sdo*wtoly serve the lot, lay to the city a
pro rata char`s in ate amovint that would have been charged
for tapping a water lint 4 sufficient capacity extended to
the lot by the city in acordance with, this article.
(2) Upon approval d the developm"t, payment of the pro
rata charges said payment of any other applicable tapping,
MOW installation or service fees, the person may connect
to the existing substandard water line.
(H) Reimbursement for Lift Stations or Force Mains:
(1) Any developer who bears the cost of lift stations or force
mains to serve a development shell be entitled to reim-
bursement for such costs from pro rata connection or use
$upp. No. 48 1116.4
i
I
..r....wrrWr
Are. OL 14,09 AppllMM A Are. UL li 4.00
r charges paid to the city, in accordance with this article, by
any person who males use of such lift stations or force
41 mains within twenty (20) years of the date such facilities
are accepted by the city.
(2) The maximum reimbursable cost paid to a developer by
the city from pro rata charges collected Aram persons con•
netting to the facilities constructed by a developer shall be
based upon the cost of providing capacity for the facilities
in excess of t~ a capacity required or reserved by the devel-
oper to meet the requirements of the developer's property,
for which the facilities were installed, determined as fo!1aMs:
Cosh
Reimbursement = Capacity' x ECAP'
3 Total cost of facility,
' Total capacity, in gallons per minute (gpm) of the facility.
' Capacity, in gallons per minute (gpm), in excess of capac•
ity reserved or required by developer's property.
(3) Reimbursement costa shall be payable to developer within
thirty (30) days of receipt of pro rata charges collected by
the city.
(4) Prior to the beginning of construction of any facilities for
which reimbursement is provided for herein, a developer
who is eligible for reimbursement shall enter into a pro
rata reimbursement agreement with the city. The agree.
ment shall specify and describe the location and type of
facilities, the estimated cost thereof, provide for the de-
termination of actual reimbursable cost, and contain such
other provisions necessary to comply with th.a provisions of
this article and all other applicable ordinances, specifica-
tions or requirements of the city.
(1) Pro rata Cost Charges for Use of Sanitary Seiner Lif' Sta-
tions or Force Mains Installed By Developers;
(1) Every person who connects to, or makes use of, a sanitary
sewer lift station or force main, the cost of which was
incurred by a developer and for which a pro rata reim•
Sum No. 48
1116.4, i
Art. CL 14.09 DZ h"M CODs; Art nL 14M
bursement agreement has been entered into between the
city and such developer, shall, as a condition to such con-
nection or use, or continued use, pay to the city a pro rata
cwt charge based upon the use of the excess capacity of the
facility, determined ss follows:
Avg. Daily Flow' x 1.6' x N' x Rath
1440'
' Average daily flow-The projected average daily sewage
_ flow from each building, structure or particular land use.
Fnr single-family residential buildings the projected av
erage daily sewage flow of 312.6 gallons per day (gpd)
shall be used (based upon 2.6 persons per building times
126 gpd). For other lane uses, the projected average daily
sewago flows shall be based upon the UA Envire:;men-
tal Protection Agency's, or its successor agency, most
recent listing of average sewerage flows for various land
uses or facilities, or any other national or state listing of
such sewage flows recognized in the utility industry, as
determined appropriate by the director of utilities.
' 1.8-Ratio of peak flow to average daily flow.
' N-Number of buildings, structures, units or particular
land uses on which the projected average daily sewage
flows are based.
' Rate-The gellon ,Per minute (gpm) cost of providing the
sewage capacity used, determined as follows:
Totai C gat of Facility
Total ^Ascity (gpm)
' 1440-The minutes in a 24-hour day.
(2) The intent of this section (1) is to provide for an equitable
pro rata charge to persons making use of lift stations or
force n,.3ins constructed under the provisions of this arti.
cle, based upon the average daily projected sewage flows
and peak sewage flows of particular buildings, structures
and land uses.
Supp, No. 49
1116.4.2
,
Art. ULf 4.0 A"B"M A Mt )1,14.10
In caeca where the pro rata dWP calculated in accord.
&fk' with thin section m would not be equitable because
the actual average daily sewage flow or peak flow bom a
particular buildins, ObVdure or land twi is much greater
or smaller than the normal prcjectsd av arage daily now or
peak flow on which such pro rata charge is based, the
dired* of utilities may, based upon evidence d wch greater
or smaller actual daily sewage flow or peak flow, require a
payment of a greater or smaller pro rata charge as a condi•
tion to the connection to, use of, or continued use of a lift
station or force main which is subject to a pro rata reim•
bursement agreement. In such caste, the director of utili-
ties shall give written notice to such person requirt' to
make such pro rata payment of the basis for the actual pro
rata charge, and such person may, within thirty (30) days
thereafter, appeal such determination to the public utili-
ties board. The board shall, within a reasonable time there-
after, mike a determination of the actual pro rata charge
to be assessed and paid.
(Ord. No, 85-40,111, 2.18.86; Ord, No. 86.168, 13, 9-1746)
Mtor'a nob-%Ssctlon 3 of Ord. No, 86.188, adopted Sept. 17, 1966, amended
App. A, Art. III, Ch. IV, Art. 4.09 by adding two (2) new paragraphs designated
(a) and (H). Inasmuch ae Art, 4.09 already contained provisions designated as
paragraph (CH, the editor has redesignated this naw mat+rrisl as porsg~aphs (H)
end (1).
4+ f~"'!ardF~r,Z, ',t^'°>:. 4+a,`: i' ..x :is n •r rf£sY
174.
DATE$ 07/15/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJSCTt PUBLIC NEARING FOR Z-1809 AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and zoning commission considered this item at its
meeting of June 11, 1986 and voted to recommend approval of z-1809
by a vote of 4-3.
SUMMARYt
This is a request for a change in zoning from the agricultural (A)
district to the two-family (2F) classification on a 7.356 acre tract
located an the south aide of E. McKinney Street (P.M. 426)
approximately 1,300 feet east of Woodrow Lane.
BACKGROUND:
The property is located in a low intensity area that is over the
standard by approximately 14%: however, the proposed land use is
compatible with existing land use in the area and provides a good
transition from the multi-°amily developmer.c to the west to the
single family zoned area to the east.
PRGGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Not applicable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact on the general fund.
Respectfully submitted:
Lloyd rte 1
Prepared by: City onager
D eni sey
Urban Planner
App v .
Jeff May
Director of Planning
and Development
1830g/2
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
To: Denton City Council
Case No.: Z-1809 Meeting Date: July 15, 1986
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Ed Green and Rick Moore
157 FM 1830
Argyle, Texas 76226
Status of Applicant: Owneta
Requested Actionr change in zoning from the
agricultural (A) district to the
two-family (2-F) classification.
Location and Size: A 7.366 acre tract located on the
south side of East McKinney Street
(FM 426) approximately 1,300 feet
east of Woodrow Lane.
Surrounding Land Use
and Zoning: North - Park; SF-7
South - Vacant; LI
East - Vacant; At SF-7
West - Park, multi-family; At MF-1
Denton Development Guide: Low intensity area
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Transportation: Property has frontage on East
McKinney Street (FM 426), a primary
major arterial, A sidewalk will be
required along ti-,e south lido of East
McKinney Street in accordance with
the City of Denton Subdivision and
Land Development Regulations,
r~
(Case 2-1809)
Page Two
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Utilities: The developer must extend a 10"
sanitary sewer line from an existing
12" line east along the property
frontage in an easement, south to
serve proposed cul-de-sac and east
along an easement parallel to East
McKinney Street. Developer must bore
under McKinney Street, connect to
existing 8" water line and extend 8'
line across property frontage.
Electric, gas, and telephone ser:,ice
are available to this property.
Drainage: Off-site drainage improvements will
be needed to get water to the
existing drainage channel to the west
of this property. Drainage should
flow to the south of this tract and
then west to the channel.
ANALYSIS
This property is located in a low intensity area that is over
the standard by approximately 14%; however, the proposed land
use is compatible with existing single family (SF-7) and
multi-family (MF-1) land use in the area. The proposed land use
is also an acceptable transition frou; the multi-family
development to the west to the single family (SF-7) zoned area
to the east.
Many duplexes developed today are similar to single family
detached structures insofar as architecture and esthetics are
concerned. Many duplexes are platted for sale and individtal
occupancy. The character of duplex or two-family housing in
today's market has far more in cv,nmon with single fr,mily lane:
uses than multi-family and this development could effectively
blend into the arcd.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at its
meeting of June 11, 1986 and voted to recommend approval of
z-1809 by a vote of 4-3.,
(case Z-1805)
Page Three
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve petition
2. Deny petition
ATTACHMENTS
1 Location Map
2. Mailing List
3. Reply Norm Totals
4. Minutes of Planning and Zoning commission meeting of
June 11, 1986
1403s
_ SF-7
~ F•I _ x
t_.... _ I PD-64' , 4
PD-61
r
CD i =
r CL
.Z
17
PD-73
r PLC -
PD- 9 l ! I - - - - -
_ PD•60
A
J - _
_ j - _ _ . - - - I--r
47
- - S- 172#I: .
. t
w
a SF-7 *-A ko
WR ; a
! MF•~ I f
4 Ott,.
! MF-I
I f
j ~
U -
r
I
! i
_S !
• _ ✓ 1
/ • ! w
PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FORMS
CITY COUNCIL
Z-1809
IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION UNDECIDED
Paul M. Haywood, Jr. None Received
420 South Carroll
Denton, TX
i
M
♦ psi
YO jr
V
Ly~yil 1 M h 4 r ♦
ow"
T,o,
i-
~ ~ oQ. ~ was
77
T
1
P 4 Z Minutes
June 11, 1996
Page S
REBUTTAL: Mr. Strange stated that they were quality type
eve opers He thanked the neighbors for coring to the
meeting ana addressing their co corns. He said that they
have by contract sold the land to the school district but
they will only receive funds as they do various stages of
public lmprovements. He said that as the Loop is built
there x111 be traffic regardless of this development. He
said that they have a retail section at the intersection
and the multi-family sits in back of the retail. He said
that there are trees that block the two story sultl-family
project and give peopple an opportunity for peace, quiet,
and quality of life In northeast Denton in a multi-family
area. He said that the Ski-7 lots will be buffered from
the Oak Bend area by trees and only 10 lots will back up
to the Uak Bend area, He said that these 10 lots are not
visible to the Usk bond area, He said that these SF-7
units will be deed restricted to no less than 1000 square
feet, He said that he has met with the neighbors and
attempted to compromise with them. He said at this time
there is no market for larger lots. He said that they
intend to build a quality development around the school
and added that tney do not create slums. He said with
this development they are preserving trees and quality of
life. He said that the development pprovides diversity of
housing and meets the Uevelopment Guide policies,
Air. Holt stated that he shared the concern for the trees
with the people present. He said that the developer should
build the large lots in the area with the trees and the
smaller lots in the area without the trees.
Mr. Strange stated that if there was a market for that
type of development ne would certainly do so.
Chair declared public hearing closed.
LECISIUNS Mr, Claiborne stated that the residents close
t'o the 'proposed multi-family had a valid argument and the
residents in the Usk. Bend area had a good argument in
regards to the 6F'-7,
air, Holt said that there is no question that if mere is a
need for apartments that they should be built. fie said
that the two new schools that are proposed to be built in
Denton will be filled Immediately without any kind of de-
velopment. He said that Evers school had a 4U': turnover
and the reason is because of the apartments. tie said that
he had no objection to SF-7 but that this is not the 1,13ce
for SF-7, He said that his objection is with the apart-
ments and their effect on the scnool system and the
density,
Ms. Brock stated that she wished she knew who ,could ulti-
mately develop the property. Sne said that she would like
to see tree preservation and larger tots because the Uak
Bend area needs to be preserved, She said tnat she uoesn't
think this is the place for apartments,
Mr. Juren moved to recommend denial of laua. Seconded by
Ms. Cole and unanimously carried l7-u),
C. ZIS09. Petition of Ed Green and Kick 'Moore requesting
a cfiange in zonin from the agricultural (A) district to
the two family (Zf) classification on a 7,~bo acre tract
located on the south side of cast McKinney Street (01 4[01
approximately 1,ZUU feet east of Woodrow Lane, The prop-
erty is more particularly described as a tract in the i'.M.
ONIONS
~T
P 8 Z Minutes
June 11, 1986
Page 6
Downing Survey, Abstract 346. If the request is approved,
the property may be utilized for any purpose permitted In
the two (Racily district by the City of Denton Zoning
Ordinance.
Six notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet;
one reply form was received in favor, no reply forms were
received in opposition.
PETITIONER: Orion Burke, representing Burke Engineerin ,
stated t this proposal has approximately 3b two-family
lots with a cul-de-sac street off McKinney Street, He
said that the owners propose to extend a water line from
McKinney Street through the project. He said that they
will be tieing into an existing sanitary sewer line west
of the project with one sewer line running down the middle
of the street and draining to the southwest. He said that
the proposal has rear access to each lot. He said that he
thinks there is a need in this area for duplexes and the
request is consistent with the land uses in the area,
Ms. Cole asked how far the project is from Woodrow Lane.
Ms. Carson said 1,316 feet.
Mr. Holt asked about the rear access. Mr. Burke said that
the rear access to the lots is internal,
Mr. Claiborne asked for the width of Mack Park, Mr. Moore
said 495 feet in width and 1,3UO feet in depth,
Rick Moore, co-owner of the property, stated that the (iu-
plexes will be owner occupled if possible, He said that
he felt the location of the park ad)acent to the property
would add to the subdivision.
IN FAVOR: None present,
OPPOSED: Alice Hillard who lives on Woodrow Lane stated
that there is no need for more apai;ment houses. She said
that this area should be commercia'. She said that 3ne
has put up with construction for It months. She said that
If there is going to be more traffic on Woodrow, it should
be improved with slgnalization and paving,
STAFF R1PURT: Ms. Spivey stated that this property is lo-
cated in a low intensity area that is over the standard uy
approximately 141; however, tt,e proposed land use is compa-
tible with existing single family (Sh-7) and multi-family
(MF-1) land use in the area. The proposed land use is also
an acceptable transition from the multi-family development
to the west to the single family (Si-7) zoned area to the
east. Many duplexes developed today are similar to single
family detached structures insofar as arcnitecture and
esthetics are concerned, Many duplexes are platted for
sale and individual occupancy. The character of duplex or
two-family housing in today's market teas far more in common
with single family land uses than multi-family and this de-
velopmentcould effectively blend into the area, She said
that staff cannot recommend approval of this request as the
area intensity policy is already violated by approximately
141; however, the proposed land use is compatible with ex-
isting land uses in the area and is an acceptable transi-
tion from the multi-family development on the west to the
single family area to the east,
Mr, Juren asked for the maximum allowable limit of a
cul-de-sac.Ms, Spivey said L,UUU feet, Mr. Juren said
that the col-de-sac proposed appears to be approximately
154UU feet. Mr. Moore stated that it is less than l,000
WIN
P 8 Z Minutes
June 11, 1996
Page 7
feet. Mr. Burke stated that this property is land locked
and the cul-de-sac Is close but that they will certainly
check on this.
Mr. Juren stated that the Commission encourages rear
access. He asked if it would develop this way with
straight zoning. Ms. Spivey stated that they talked about
a planned development and the only difference between a
planned development and straight zoning was the rear
access.
Ms. Brock asked if the Commission could attach a condition.
Ms. Spivey stated conditions could be added only if the
regeust was for a planned development.
Mr. Holt asked if this proposal would cause a traffic prob-
lem. Ms Spivey said that based on traffic studies from
Engineering the additional traffic would not cause a signi-
ficant problem.
Dir. Pearson stated that the light industrial zoning caused
this intensity area to be over the standard. He asked if
staff had a study on what this property was likely to de-
velop as besides light industrial uses. Ms. Carson stated
that the Clark Brothers have submitted a possible land plan
for the area but there are not guarantees of the property
developing in that manner. Mr. Pearson asked that staff
present informatirn about that land plan to the Commission.
REBun'AL; Mr. Burke stated that this is a good transition
a:Is more appropriate than SF-7.
Ms. Brock stated that the Narks Department objects to this
proposal because tney feel the owners will complain about
the park. Mr. Burke stated that he felt the people who
buy the lots will see that the park is tnere,
Chair declared the public hearing closed.
UEC1SiUN; Mr. Juren stated that he felt It is good
development and moved to recommend approval of Z-18U9.
Seconded by Mr, Pearson.
vote was called:
Aye - Claiborne, Escue, Juren, Pearson
Nay - Hrock, (-Ole, Holt
f ion carried (4-a).
U. Z-1810. Petition of Burke Engineering, representing
BTI Roberds, requesting a change in Zoning from the
agricultural (A) to the planned development district.
The tract is 58.602 acres in size and located west of
North Locust (FM 2164) and northwest of Hercules Lane and
more fully described In the l'nomas loby Survey, Abstract
1288, if approved, the planned development would permit
the following land uses;
General Retail - 4.73 acres
Multi-Family - 15.90 acres, 3U2 total units,
with a density of 19 units per acre
'rownhouse - 19.79 acres, 14U total units,
with a density of 7 units per acre
Greenbelt - 18.24 acres
Eight notices were mailed to property owners within 2UU
feet; no reply forms were received in favor or opposition,
one reply form was received undecided.
PETITIONERt Brian Burke of Burke Engineering representing
bill Roberds, said that this site plan is the tnlyd revi-
504L
.
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 NO, 69-10
AND AS SAID MAP APPLIES TO APPROXIMATELY 7,366 ACRES OF LAND OUT
OF THE T. M. DOWNING SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 346, AS IS MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; TO PROVIDE FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING
CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FROM AGRICULTURAL "A" DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION AND USE TO TWO-FAMILY 112-Ft' CLASSIFICATION ANO
USE FOR SAID PROPERTY; PROVIDING FOR A MAXIMUM PENALTY OF $1,000
FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS IIEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
That the Zoning Classification and Use dosignation applicable
to all or part of the property described in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and incorporated by reference herein, is hereby changed
from Ag ricultural "A" District Classification and Use to
Two-Pa mily 112-11" District Classification and Use under the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas,
SECTION II.
That the Zoning Map of the City of Denton, 'Texas, adopted
the 14th day of January, 1969, as an Appendix to the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, under Ordinance No.
69-1 is hereby amended to show such change in District
Classification and Use.
SECTION III.
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 of Denton, Texas, and with reasonable consideration, among
other things for the character of the district and for its
peculiar suitability for particular uses, and with a view to
conserving the value of the buildings, protecting human lives,
and encouraging the most appropriate uses of land for the
maximum benefit to the City of Denton, Texas, and its citizens.
SECTION IV.
or person who
violate a provision of this ordinance,
thereof, or of a permlF or certificate issued thereunder, shall
be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding
One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00). Each such person shall be
deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or
portion thereof during which any violation of this ordinance is
committed, or continued, and upon conviction of any such
violations such person shall be punished within the limits above.
SECTION V.
That if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause,
phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any
Person or circumstance Is held invalid by any court of competent
jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of
the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have enacted
such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
• SECTION VI.
That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14)
days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is
hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be
published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official
newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of
the date of its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1986.
RAY S71PT M.,
CITY OP DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST;
CHARLOTTE ALLEN, CITY SECffffM
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM;
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
2-1809/PAGE 2
EXHIBIT "A"
Tract or parcel of land lying and being situated In the T. M. Downing Survey,
Abstract 346, Denton County, Texas, being all of a certain (called) 7,262 acre
FIRST TRACT described in a deed from Pauline Berry Mack to C. F. Pofal on Efay 5,
1971 and recorded in Volume 621, Page 1290 Deed Records of said County, and being
more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at a steel pin on the South right-of-way of McKinney Street (F.M. 426)
same being the Northeast corner of said 7.262 acra tract;
• THENCE S. 0° 56' E. 64,50 feet to a steel pin nt the beginning of a curve to
the left;
THENCE Southeasterly with avid curve with a central angle of 21° oo', a radius
of 674.44 feet, ,d tangent of 125.0 feet, the chord bearing and distance being
S. 110 26' E, 245.81 feet, and an arc length of 247,20 feet to a steel pin;
THENCE S. 21° 56' R. 190.00 feet to a steel pin at the beginning of a curve
to the right;
THENCE Southeasterly with said curve with a central angle of 17. 29', a
radius of 975.67 feet, a tangent of 150,00 feet, the chord bearing and distance
being S. 13° 11' 30" E. 296,52 tact, and an arc length of 297.67 feet to a
steel pin;
THENCE S. 40 27' E. 198,20 feet to a steel pin at the Southwest corner of
said 7,262 acre tract and the South Boundary Line of said Survey;
THENCE S. 880 48' W, with said South line of said tract and said Survey
317,01 feet to a steel pin at the Southwest corner of said tract;
THENCE N. 5° 53' W. 256.80 feet to a steel pin;
THENCE H. 14° 55' W. 47,30 feet to a steel pin at the beginning of a curve to
the left;
TfiENCE Northwesterly with said curve with a central angle of 7° 01', a radius
of 619.82 feet, a tangent of 38.0 feet, the chord bearing and distance being
N. 18° 25' 30" W. 75.86 feet, and an arc length of 75.90 feet to a steel pin;
THENCE N. 210 56' W. 190.0 feet to a steel pin at the beginning of a curve to
the right;
THENCE Northwesterly with said curve with a central angle of 21° 00'1 a
radius of 998,17 feet, s tangent of 185,00 feet the chord bearing and distance
being N. 11° 26' W. 363.80 feet, and the arc length being 365,85 feet to a
steel pin;
THENCE N. 0. 56' W. 75.0 feet to a steal pin on the South right-of-way of said
McKinney Street;
THENCE S. 88. 51' E. with said Street and the North line of said tract 320.0
feet to the place of beginning, containing in all 7.366 acres of land.
Z-1806
DATE: 07/15/88
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO. Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Z-1812
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at its
June 11, 1986 meeting and made nc recommendation.
SUMMARY:
The property is located in a low intensity area along I-35. The
uncontrolled growth of undesirable land uses along main entrances to
City can significantly alter the image of Denton.
BACKGROUND:
The staff suggested to the petitioner that a plane-.' development
should be requested. Surrounding property has been zoned planned
development by the Council to control land uses. TK a petitioner has
submitted a site plan that could be easily altered to meeti.the
requirements of a concept plan for a planned development.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
six (6) property owners were notified within 200 feet.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No impact can be determined at this point.
Respectfully submitted:
Lloyd rrell L0~ f
Prepared by: City anager
Cecile Carson
Urban Planner
App v
Jeff M
Director of Planning
and Development
1625a
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
To: Denton City Counci
Case No.: Z-1812 Meeting Date: July 15, 1986
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Holbert-Wyatt Volkswagen, Inc.
419 S. Elm
Denton, Texas 76201
Status of Applicant: Owner
Requested Action: A change in zoning from
agricultural (A) to commercial (C)
district.
Location and Size: A 6.114 acre tract located on I-35S,
south of Pockrus Road, and south and
adjacent to the MK&T Railroad.
Surrounding Land Use
and Zoning: North - Agricultural, residence,
mobile home, business
South - Agric ltural, residence
East - Mobile homes
WesL - Planned development,
commercial
Denton Development Guide: Low intensity area
SPECIAL INFORMA^ION
Transportation: Th roperty is located on the
service road of I-35, a primary
thoroughfare of the City of Denton.
Access will be determined by
Subdivision and Land Development
Reguiations.
Utilities: A 16" water line extended from an
existing 8" water line in service
road east approximately 800' across
property frontage is necessary.
Saaita,~y sewer line crosses property
(Hickory Creek Trunk Line) and must
be extended across property along
TMPA easement.
(Case Z-1812)
Page Two
SPECIAL INFORMATION (continued)
Drainage; Detention is required on the tract
because the property is at the top
of the basin. Downstream improve-
meets may be necessary.
ANALYSIS
This request is located in a low intensity area that includes
predominately agricultural property as well as scattered
residences, mobile homes and small businesses. The proposal
violates the rummercial, retail, nonresidential concentration
allowed in a low intensity area. I-35 is a main entrance to the
City cf Denton. The uncontrolled growth of undesirable land
uses can significantly alter the entrance to the City and
ultimately the image of the City.
The zoning ordinance was revised in 1985 to prohibit the
development of residential land uses on land with a non-
residential zoning district; however, the development of office,
neighbok:hood service, general retail, and commercial is allowed
in a oommercia,l district. The commercial district is one of the
least restrictive of the zoning ordinance and permits some land
users that could be considered undesirable along a primary
arterial. While the petitioner has plans to build an auto
dealership on the property, there is no guarantee that other
less desirable land uses would develop including rodeo grounds,
hauling and storage companies, freight terminals, truck parking
lot, truck stops, cleaning and crying plant, cleaning plant bags
or carpets (epecial equipment), clothing manufacture, contractors
shop and storage yard, feed store, laundry plant, storage and
sales of furniture or appliances outside a building, and storage
or sales warehouse (mini warehouses). While property on the
west side of I-35 does include a commercial tract that is used
for an auto dealership, the property adjacent to that tract is
zoned planned development (Oakmont and Henry S. Miller) and
limits on the land use and height are conditions of the planned
developments. The staff has encouraged the petitioner to submit
a planned development on this property. A site plan was prepared
for the project and could be altered to meet the requirement of
the planned dovelopment ordinance; however, the petitioner
requested a straight commercial zoning district. The staff
feels that a planned development would be consistent with other
requests along 1-35 as well as protecting the adjacent residence
and the City from the possibility of undesirable land uses
developing on the property.
(Cas9 Z-1812)
Page Three
SUMMARY
The Planning and Zoning Commission was divided on its
recommendation to the City Council, Three Commissioners felt
that the land use was too open and not restrictive enough.
Three Commissioners supported the proposal only after the
petitioner suggested removing 2.09 acres from the proposal. The
Staff recommended a planned development to ensure the<: control
of land uses along the major thoroughfares and to ensure the
compatibility with surrounding property predominately zoned
planned development. Since no recommendation was made by the
Commission, the entire 6.114 acre tract is being considered for
zoning.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Commission made no recommendation of
Z-1812 at its June li, 1986 meeting.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve petition
2. Deny petition
ATTACHMENTS
1. Location Map
2. Reply Form Total
3. Mailing List
4, Minutes of Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of
June ll, 1986.
0249e
~I
L~
c~r4r~e ~c~o
r
T2 LO ~4.,
~'YI L Eip ; v
u
x
PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FORMS
CITY COUNCIL
Z-1812
IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION UNDECIDED
Enderby Gas, Inc. None Received
James J. Bishop
P.O. Drawer 717
Gainesville, TX
r
~ L ♦ a
•C yin r a.h ~ $ .L1~1
n aw
.`L 3 its. t •~t ~~~,a
6 llA
• sr~br~Y~~ •
7
f
A
ji-wo
P 6 Z Minutes
June 11, 1986
Page 9
the project should stand on its own merit. He said that
this propposal should decrease in apartments, Increase in
the townhome area, and decrease in the general retail
section. He moved to recommend denial of Z-181U,
Mr. Pearson stated that he had a problem in this area also
but felt he had to agree with Mr. Claiborne. Seconded by
Mr. Pearson.
Ms. Brock stated that the constraints were there when the
owners bought the property.
Mr. Holt stated that if this proposal was built along with
the property to the west and north, this area would be
apartment USA. He said that the multi-family concentration
policy would be grossly violated,
vote was called and unanimously carried (7-0).
Mr, Juren left the meeting.
E, Z-1811. Petition of Holbert-wyatt Volkswagen, Inc.
requesting a change in zoning from the agricultural (A)
to the commercial (C) district on 0.114 acres located on
1.35 South, south of Pockrus !toad and south of the NI,K,6T.
Railroad, rhe property is more fully described in the
Gideon Walker Survey Abstract 133U. If approved, the
property may be uti Ized for any purpose permitted in the
commercial district of the City of Denton Zoning urdinance.
Six notices were waited to property owners within ~uu
feet; three reply forms were received In favor, no reply
forms were received in opposition,
PETITIONER: Jim Hemsworth, Rogers u'8rien Lonstructioit,
stated Mat the 6.11 acre tract is crisscrossed by two
easements, He said that the easements made this tract
-.xtremely challenging in a manner that would facilitate an
auto dealership. He said that Phase I consists of 4.ut
acres with a showroom and ootices at the front of property
and office and service facilities at the rear of the prop-
erty. He said rile balance is iutdevulopanie or concrete,
lie said that Phase 11 consists of 1,uv acres wire ho plans
for development at this rime. He said rhar the reason tur
commercial zoning is because it is common in rnls area, is
of similar type land use, and Inc property is uttticulr to
build on because of the easements,
Mr. Pearson asked if they had reservations about a planned
develop went. Mr. Hemswortri stated that staff requested
setbacks in a planned development that would prevent dis-
play of vunicles.
Mr. 1;olt asked if the setbacks were discussed with staff,
Mr. Hemsworth said yes in the Development KeVIeW 1,ummlttee
meeting. He said that they felt they would be unable to
utilize the site with the setback requirement,
Mr. Ellison stated that a planned development is used to
ensure control of land use along J-.ii. He said the set-
back for landscaping and no parking is fairly common vi tit
commercial development.
Mr, Holt asked if the McNatt dealership nad landscaping,
Mr. Ellison said no.
IN FAVOR: Ms. H. W. "Pete" Puckrus stated that uer prop-
erty jo ns tnis property, 5ne said that racy nave had
their business there for 43 years, sne said that she
P A Z Minutes
June 11, 1986
Page 10
could not understand the difficulty in commercial zoning
because there are other commercial uses in this area.
Ms, Brock asked if their property is zoned commercial.
Ms. Pockrus said not yet.
Mr. Claiborne asked how long have they been in the city
limits. Ms. Pockrus stated that the front of the property
has been in the city for years and the rest was just
recently annexed.
Charles Holbert stated that he bought the property two
years no, He said that when they bought the property,
they had no idea they would have any trouble In obtaining
commercial zoning. He said that they would be happy to
plant shrubs and beautify but that they needed the 25 foot
setback to display cars. He said that they would not
invest and move to 1-35 to destroy the beautification of
1-35,
A, B. Wyatt stated that he didn't forsee any problem in
commercial zoninQ , He said that his experience with old
dealership buildings has been good, not bad and ugly, tie
said that he actually thought they had an option of 1'U or
commercial.
Ms. Brock stated that with stralQht commercial zoning the
city has no control over the land or land uses.
Mr, 611ison stated that staff has no problems with an
automobile dealership just with the commercial zoning
classification.
uFFOSSD; None present.
'IM,_ 1_tB_P_OkTt Ms. Carson stated that this property is Lo-
cat; n-a~low intensity area that includes predominately
agricultural property as well as scattered residences, mo-
bile homes, and small businesses, I-35 is a main entrance
to the City of Denton and uncontrolled growth of undesir-
able land uses can significantly alter the entrance to the
city and ultimately the image of the City. Sne said me
zoning ordinance was revised In 198S to rohibit me devel-
opment of residential land uses on land ~n a nun-residen-
tlal zoning district; however, the development of office,
neighborhood service, general retail, and commercial is
allowed in a commercial district, the commercial disrrict
is one of the least restrictive of the zoning ordinance
and permits some land uses that could be considered unde-
sirable along a primary arterial. While the petitioner
has plans to build an auto dealership on the property,
there is no guarantee that other less desirable land uses
would not develop including rodeo grounds, hauling and
storage companies, freight terminals, truck parking lot,
truck stops, cleaning and drying plant, cleaning plant
bags or carpets (special equipment), clothing manufacture,
contractors shop and storage yard, teed store, laundry
plant, storage and sales of furniture or appliances out-
side a building, and storage or sales warehouse (mini ware-
houses). While property on the west side of 1-35 does
include a commercial tract that is used for an auto
dealership, the property adjacent to that tract is zoned
planned development (uakmont and Henry S. Miller) and
limits on the land use development are conditions of the
planned developments. The staff has encouraged the peti-
tioner to submit a planned development on this property.
A plan was prepared for the project and could oe altered
to meet the requirement of the planned development ordi-
nance; however, the petitioner requested a straignt com-
mercial zoning district. She said the setback is a minor
P i Z Minutes
June 11, 1986
Page 11
issue in comparison to the Land use question, The staff
feels that a planned development would be consistent with
other requests alone l-3S as wall as protecting the adja-
cent residence and the City from tue possibility of unde-
sirable land uses developing on the property, She said
that staff recommends denial of Z-1811.
REBUTTAL: Mr. Hessworth stated that the reason they were
concerned about the setback to because they only have two
rows of parking and tiith the setback it would be cut to
one row. He sold that if the 2.09 acre tract is causing a
pproblem, the owners are willing to leave it agricultural.
Ne said that the 4.02 acres would remain as commercial as
reflected on the site plan,
Mr. Claiborne asked Mr. Morris if the Commission could
reduce size of the zoning request, Mr. Morris salt! yes.
Chair declared public hearing closed,
DECISION: Mr. Pearson stated that t':1s proposal is very
beneficial to the City because of the clustering of this
kind of land use on 1-35. He stated rhat they nave a good
point on the setback and that he understands the problem,
He said that this proposal is a good land use plan and is
something to approve.
Ms. Brock stated that removing the 2.09 acres is not
solving the problem. She sail that tnls Commission zoned
land not people. She said that she would like to see a
dealership and agreed with Mr. Pearson in that it would be
beneficial to Denton. She said that with commercial
zoning the Commission has no control over building,
buffering, or greenery.
Mr, Holt moved to recommend approval of 4-Id12 with
the 2,U9 acres to remain as agricultural. Seconded by
Mr. Pearson,
Mr. Holt stated that he had some concern in that he would
like to see a setback but that he was familiar with ease-
ment problems.
Mr. Pearson stated that he was concerned about controls.
He said staff is asking the petitioner to zone his land
planned development just for the desire of a green strip,
He said if one wanted to really control the City of Denton
just do away with zoning and tone everything planned Jevel-
opment and solve all the problems,
Mr, Ellison stated that staff is not concerned with the
green strip. He said tnat tney are continuing a policy of
encouraging planned developments so that the city will
know what will happen to the entrances af, far as land use
is concerned,
Mr. Holt stated tnat rte is not worried about this case
with these people.
Vote was called;
Aye - Claiborne, Holt, Pearson
Nay - Brock, Cole, Escue
Motion failed (3-3),
Ms, Brock moved to recommend denial of Z-1811, Seconded
by Ms, Cole.
Vote was called:
Aye - Brock, Cole, tiscue
Nay - Claiborne, Holt, Pearson
motion failed (3-3).
P 6 Z Minutes
June 11, 1986
Page 12
Mc, Claiborne stated that this case will be forwarded to
the City Council with no recommendation from the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Ms. Cole left the meeting.
F. V-30. Petition of lion M. Bryant requesting a variance
oo "$rovisions of the City of Denton Subdivision and Land
Development Regulations requiring sidewalk, paving, curb
and gutter, an drainage improvements for perimeter streets
adjacent to proposes subdivisions, Two 3.0 acre lots
located adjacent and rest er Hickory Hill Road between
Gibbons Road and FM 1830 are proposed, The property is
located in the City of Denton's area of extraterritorial
jurisdiction (ETJ) and single family development is
anticipated.
one notice was mailed to adjacent property owner; one
reply form was received in favor,
STAFF REPUKT: Mr. Ellison stated that this is a request
or a variance of perimeter street paving required for
Hickory 11111 Road. He said that this is an area tnat is a
considerable distance from the urbanized portion of the
city. He said that the petitioner has proposed two three
acre lots for a residential estate type subdivision and
the City of Denton regulations apply both for the city and
ETJ, He said that the petitioner is required to pave a l7
toot section across the frontage of property plus a side-
walk across the entire frontage of the property, He said
the Issue of drainage has been resolved. He said that the
petitioner believes that these tracts are so far from (lie
city that improvements are not necessary, rte said that
the City Council believes this property is too far for
city services at this time and will not be annexed soon,
He said that a ten foot strip along Hickory Hill Road nas
been annexed. He said that the development Review
Committee recommends denial of the variance,
PETIFIUNER: Uon Bryant, resident of flower Mound, stated
that he is partners with nis tarnor-in-law. use said roar
dill Staff is interested in uuying rnree acres, lie said
that the road in front of rile property is In good condi-
tion and handles the traffic now, tie said rust tne vlan-
ning and ZZoning Commissiun nds power to gram iialver and
asled rngm to make a decisir)u I+a;ed on lok rvnsiry, low
traffic, hardship, value of cite land, and rive into dc-
cotilat the condition of me road,
IN FAVUR: Bill Staff stated that tie is Interested an pur-
e afi`sing-the northern section of the property, he said
that if the variance is granted he will be bullding a home,
UPPUSEli: None present.
REBUTTAL: lone offered,
Chair declared public hearing closed,
UECISIUN: Mr. Llaiborne stated that he emparniced totally
a' o6 ut variances especially this far our of me city, Ire
said that he felt bound to support rile SUDdIVISl,an degula-
tions. He moved to recommend denial of a-3U with me
stipulation that the street improvements oe deferred Uy
method of bonding.
Seconded by ,ifs. Brock,
Mfr, Morris stated that once (lie bond expires there is no
way to make anyone post pond. tie said tnat rtiis does
DATE: 07/15/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR 2-1814
RECOSIMENDATION t
The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at its
meeting of June 25, 1986 and voted to recommend denial of Z-1814 by
a vote of 3-1.
SUMMARY:
This is a request for a change in zoning fsrxn the single family
(SP-10) district to the office (0) classification on a 18.2 acre
tract located at the northeast corner of U.S. Highway 380 and Old
North Road.
ACK OUN : I
Development Guide policies limit office concentrations to four acres
in size in low intensity areas. The Planning and Zoning Commission
voted to recommend denial of this case due to the gross violat m of
the office concentration iol:cy.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Not applicable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact on the general fund.
Respectfully submititee~d::~~/~
- W=94 09 A
L toYd r r el l d~1lut:~.~_
y.
Prepared by: City anager
% I
Denise Spi ey
Urban Planner
~ipr ed
Jeff Mey
Director of Planning
and Development
1830g/1
3
A'p1h r J \ r :.`A
di✓.. a...,, . ...sue .
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
To: Denton City Council
Case No.: Z-1814 Meeting Date: July 15, 1986
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Dr. Bill Cudd
637 Londonderry Lane
Denton, TX 76205
Status of Applicant: Owner
Requested Action: Change in zoning from the single
family (SF-10) district to the
planned development: (PD)
classification for office use.
Location and Size: An 18.2 acre tract located at the
northeast corner of U.s. Highway 380
and old North Road.
Surrounding Land Use
and Zoning: North - Single family, SF-10
South - Fennel, Lumber Co., Pargasj C
East - Vrcantj SF-10, A
West - AparL,,!ents t MF-l
Denton Development. Guide: Low intensity area.
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Transportation: The property has frontage on Mingo
Road, a collector, and Old North
Road, also designated as a collector.
Perimeter street paving regulations
are applicable to Mingo Road. A
left-turn lane will be required on
Mingo Road and a right-turn lane from
U,S. Highway 380 onto Old North Road
will also be needed. Sidewalks will
be required on Old North Road and
Mingo Road.
l
(Cage Z-1$14)
Page Two
SPECIAL INFORMATION (continued)
Utilities: The existing 12" sanitary sewer line
on the north side of Mingo Road will
provide adequate service for this
project. The internal water line
should be 12" from Old North Road and
tie into the existing 6" line at the
northeast corner of the project at
Craig Lane. Pro rata charges will be
required for the sanitary sewer line.
Drainage: off-site drainage to Cooper Creek
will be required for this tract.
HISTORY
In October of 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the
City council denied a request for a planned development at this
location that would have permitted the following land uses:
1. 1.4 acres - neighborhood service
2. 2.8 acres - zero lot line
3. 5.4 acres - cluster housing
4. 6.5 acres - of'fioe/warehouse
5. 2.0 acres - pazk
Strong neighborhood opposition was a factor in the denial of the
request.
ANALYSIS
The following is an analysis of the proposal according to
Development Guide policies:
1. Intensity - The property is located in a low intensity
area which is designated primarily for residential land
use. Approval of this request will not violate the
intensity standard for the area due to the large amount
of undeveloped property in the area.
2. Office Concentration - Development Guide policies limit
office concentrations in low intensity areas to four
acres in size. These projects are to be separated from
other concentrations by at least one-half mile in
distance. The current request contains bighteen acres
of office land use. Approval of this request will lead
to a gross vi,)lation of this policy.
Z' °~{'~n,~^j ai5, 1 .rreley s,a "F.a9s,7
(Case Z-1814)
Page Three
ANALYSIS (continued)
34 suffering - A six-foot solid screening fence is shown
on the northern property line to visually screen f,his
project from the adjacent single family homes to the
north. A thirty-foot landscaped setback/drainage
easement is also provided on the northern edge of the
property. No buildings are located within this
easement.
4. Neighborhood Input - The developer has conducted a
series of meetings with neighborhood representatives
and appears to have incorporated their suggestions
into the design of the project.
RECOMMENDATION
The Ylanninct and Zoning Commission considered this iLen at its'
j meeting of June 25, 1986 and voted to recommend de;iial of Z-1814
by a vote of 3-1. if the City Council is inclined to consider
this request, staff would recommend the following conditions for
development:
1. Land uses permitted in the planned development shall be
the following uses permitted in the Office District of
the Zoning Ordinance, Appendix H, of the Code of
ordinances: office - professional and administrative.
2. P. detailed plan shall be submitted consistent with the
l:oncept plan, development schedule, and development
otandards attached.
3. The six-foot solid screening fence on the northern
boundary of the property must be erected prior to the
issuance of building permits for the project.
4. The detailed site plan submittal must include
architectural elevations to ensure that the proposed
office buildings are physically compatible with the
single family dwellings adjacent and north of the
project.
77
r
(Case Z-1814)
Page Four
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve petition
2. Approve petition with additional conditions
3. Deny petition
ATTACHMENTS
1. Location Map
2. PD Concept Plan
3. Development Standards
4. Mailing List
5. Reply Form Totals
6. Minutes of Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of
June 25, 1986
1600a
~ s
~ ,I ~ l I~~ Y <r Y.,,i
}
. y
Y
r-
I ~
17
r ,
771
~ rwr ~
MF-! c
rwr _ r
~ I 1
V
P .4
r I
SF-71
PD-64 i q I C
7 SF I 1
,d -81
I I
ww 1 I ~ I
2mms- IS W-w III
c
cv ~ ~
SF-10
A IR S-5
I
' PO-73
,
~ w r .r .r j
- -
1
PHO L I
1 A
j f I
I ~ ~
. 1. 1. yr` i
SF 10
Eu al
q
w
Wwi
:t 9F-10
Yr 4 A ~F1.
y r s ~ ~1
}
cow, C".
CONCUPT PLAN 0
OAF7OM OF=F ICM 0610 F KNIT
DID. WILL CUDO
' rOMa •!►~dwr Mr~~• r•• r
.r~y.•.. .wr....n,., .r•mq:YAT M.. ygr r•.r,. .r.., .i~.w, .
~u 1y~ •
f f
` f , 4L ~ 1
{ 3 C
S
n1 y
e
y ~-7
r
will
` 5~ V w
* a
fi`b r 7~ . It' \
pot
r
~ r~il1 ~A.~ r 1
V • t'1
H Y' r
w ..w ,l v sWwre pLm
CST P.AN 0
k OAAD~IV ICM CIS' MLOPNlIe"Or
Cft M" CXJM
R
:r
i
pi WSED
r
eR' d ~ ~IA',• s~~~4r i ~44~r~
61 U*-M7.PD
•ri4.4 `li
co" Carden Of t* F.•
flee
1. Steteamt Of Ymtmat
A. To develop a garden office subdivision in compatibility with
the surrounding area and permitted use under Office district.
B. Development and marketing to coincide with established and
future market demand. Construction to be accomplished by
phasing.
2. Rel~ tq_,_„r M1yj Plea
The proposed district is designated as a low intensity area by
the City of Denton Development Guide. Garden office use as
proposed has been permitted in these districts.
3. r e
18.24 acres
4. Land u_.
A. Existing land use - agricultural, pasture - 18.24 acres
B. Proposed land use - garden office - 18.24 acres
S. M -Site Informstion
As shown on the Concept Plan
6. J fi$ Agd Tr_aalcortation
As shown on the Concept Plan
A. Projected amount of traffic - 4,741 V.T.D.
B. Parking requirements as permitted by ordinance in office
district
tP
r as _ ' a" , .z";a F.i i " fl 1 ` :n•,r „.`t,~k,.. -awy
Y3f F. -1..,
r 'F 6, ~a"r~` mac' • ar..`
Rt Mf )W a the ceaoeot Plan
0' 3640" twomato► aN 24-foot 1 1/2 story
~staM► e~ tt~'t ~
C.' !ltaiwm wildin$ setlsekst
team Lard - 13 test
fi
lar' yam. S t
Perimeter r ",a feet
D. Haxim= total gross floor area: 357,540 S.F., .45 to 1 F.A.R.
8. 8281daatial_ SuWldsioas
H.A.
9. Mj%gg sad Draiggite
As shown on Concept Plan
10* Utilities
As shown on Concept Plan
11. 15raes
As shown on Concept Plan. There are no existing trees three
inches in diameter or greater on site.
12. 0092A Mace
202 private use as shown on Concept Plan
13. romina
As shown on the Concept Plan, 6-foot privacy fence along north
property line
OMENS
:A A
jil
a
~g v v
r z
r
f V4
A. of ceesta Ucat 1967
D " Estfirtsd' ° plw3y as sUows oe the GwttePt Plus according to
.
awket A- s
Phase I 1967-19f Detailed Sato Plus Juno 1987
Pharr II 1989x»1991 Detailed Bite Plsq,, ww 1989
?he" III 1991. "S' " Drtsaw site Pin, Jww 1991
Phase IV 1993-1999 Detailed Site Plana$ Juns 1993
Phase V 1995-1997 Detailed Sits Plan, Jura 1995
PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FOR16
CITY COUNCIL
Z-1814
IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION UNDECIDED
Milton Savage None Received
2908 Mistywood
Denton, TX
i
~
:54
otl ~M, ,ii 'f `icy t;• ~ +
t
J o-
G p . c C
-Tv
r0a 1~9~Fv- ~ c
G
,
n- ,
~h C_7
O S.
C`
46 1
O
r'.. 5
R _
y. Jv. ss`~AA~''NJJ
F f 'Otll k lt+ l~~ F f~ t '\.~I ~ t > fah .
MP I
i
i ~
/log 74
21
Oa o
ao3co
o cvoo
WL
00
-amp. Rrl~ 6o9nb / _z
1
76~oi
MON
f'. .Y
4 ~ A l x" 7a.. S'l
OI 300
0 00
0
~ 15r~a ~
• b c
~r~od
6nh 7A
~ r~oo
J
rC/
hTe
r
JNW
4 is t Igiswteni „
,r . •hate.'r `.1Nd* ~~.7 zk F
Tan
V. ^ Tet
1G* ritlom of 9r. Wit Cudd requesting a change
a eldi• from the single faith
t y (&#-I*) district to the
pplni "4 development (PD) classification oa an 18.24 acre
tract located at the northeast corner of U.S. Highway 380
and Old North load. The property is further described as
a tract in the, Caswell Carter Survey, Abstract 275, and
the A. Longbottom Survey, Abstract 775. If the planned
develo eat is approved, it will permit the development of
an office park.
Twenty notices were mailed to property owners within 200
feet; thirteen reply forms were received in favor; two
reply forms were received in opposition.
PETITIONER: Dr. Bill Cudd, local physician in Denton,
stated `tTt he has worked closely with the neighbors on
the garden office land use. He said that the purpose of
this petition is expressly for professional office use.
He said that they hoped by creatin office use in this
area such problems as traffic and drainage could be ad-
dressed effectively. He said that the proposal is very
residential in ;,haracter.
Roger Barrett, Metroplex Engineering Corporation, stated
that they are proposing a six foot screening wall on the
northern boundary of the property. He said that they have
a 30 foot landscape and drainage easement to help eliminate
drainage problems that already exist for the property own-
ers to the north. He said '.hat theyy have large setbacks
to address all sides of the propose l. He said that they
have a connecting road from Mingo to Old North Road with
no parking permitted to alleviate traffic congestion. He
said that the proposed two story buildings will be built
to a certain point at the front of the property and the
rest will be one and one-half story buildings. He said
that it is very residential in nature and similar to a
SP-10 type subdivision.
Mr. Llsiborne asked if the street is a public dedicated
street, Mr. Barrett said that interior streets such as
this are maintained by the builders.
Mr. Holt asked if all possible land uses were discussed at
the meetings with the neighbors to the north, Mr. Barrett
stated that the neighbors were asked to create a plan that
would be suitable.
IN FAVOR: Sam Rosson, 151b Freedom Lane, stated that he
11 in 'Favor of the project as long as the drainage problem
ir, corrected on Mistywood which is directly behind the
proposal, He said that he believed this project will
bring the property values u , be well constructed and
maintained, and have a quality appearance. He said that a
positive aspect about the proposal is that there will be
lots of trros and landscaping and a common organization
for maintenance, He said that ne would like all office
type uses not retail. He added that the city or the state
needed to improve University and old North Road.
Mr, Clark stated that the cit, is working on the problem
with the funds that were allocated for this intersection,
Mr. Rosson stated that the schools are happy to hear that
there will be no additional housing. He said that he had
a petition of thirteen homeowners that are in favor on
Mistywood. He said that they had a committee of block
captains for the area north of the proposal. He asked for
the block captains in favor of this proposal to stand.
Approximately 7 people stood up.
:R t d Minot"
1
June IK/0 Isl*
page 3
x '=Sid Foxaroft, 4tated that be is is favor SEA
his aid only sea of the nsetimgs that were held with
C ?etstod So Staid that be wanted no rental units in this
that be had a petition. of eleven home-
own.srlthdt are In favor on. Foxrroft.
Mr. Holt asked if he objected to single family on this
property, Mr# Lewis said so if is is fsaaible.
Jean Akin, 1116 Will Fond, stated that he had a petition
with twelve families in favor and one that would make no
commitment. He said that be would prefer single family
but this is the best proposal that has been brought to
than.
lathe Ulatnski, 2517 Emerson, stated that this i, a
feasible and viable solution. She said that tb.s is a
difficult piece of property to sell. She said that the
majority of the neighborhood is in favor of the proposal.
She said that she is a mother and homemaker and wanted no
more single family or multi-family to overload the schools.
Bob Gorton, 2414 Emerson, stated that ho is in favor of
the garden office space.
Mr. Holt asked if it bothered his that theyy would be set-
ting a precedent. Mr. Gorton stated that he would take
this over multi-family.
Tom Collins, 2808 Mistywood stated that none of them can
obtain federal fundini for hooding. He said that there
will be low density after S o'clock and weekends. He said
that Mistywood is opposed to single family.
OPPOSED: Barbara Ross, 2728 Mistywood, stated that she
NOT- `$is1000 swimming pool and did not want an office
building overlooking her backyard. She added that she was
not contacted by any of these people in favor. She wanted
to know if the 20 foot utility easement would be given back
to the property owner.
Mr. Clark said yes,
his. Ross stated that she was not crazy about a six foot
screening fence. She said that the road through the
proposal is private and not public. She said that she
would prefer single family over anything else.
STAFF REPORT: Ms. Spivey stated that this property is
locate in a low intensity area which is designated
primarily for residential land use. Approval of this
request will not violate the intensity standard for the
area due to the large amount of undeveloped property in
the area. She said that Development Guide poiicies limit
office concentrations in low intensity areas to four acres
in site and these projects are to be separated from other
concentrations by at least one-half mile in distance. The
current request contains eighteen acres of office land use
and approval of this request will lead to a gross violation
of this policy. She said that a six-foot solid screening
fence is shown on the northern property line to visually
screen this project from the adjacent single family homes
to the north. A thirty-foot landscaped setback/drainage
easement is aolso provided on the northern edge of the
property and no buildings are located in this easement.
She naid that the developer has conducted a series of
meetings with neighborhood representatives and appears to
have incorporated their suggestions into the design of the
project. As always, it is difficult for staff to ascertain
the degree of input solicited or received when not directly
r involved with the n*lotiations. She said that staff recom-
mends denial of Z-3114 due to the violation of the office
f
xy } .
1 t Minutes
,
just 250 1946
rase 4
i
w ntsatioa policy foe log intensity area. She said
At it the Planning and Zoalad Comission is inclined to
approve this request, staff recosateads conditions.
RIisMAL t Dr. Cudd stated that they intended that their
private road be used for public access. He apologised
that M a4a was aot a t led. • aid t at tbis roe
posal rs sibflar to a 9$- type ~es~ga. ie said ttat
this proposal is it combined effort between the neighbors
and developers.
Chair declared public hearing closed,
DECISION: Mr. Claiborne stated that this proposal sounded
like a unique concept. He said that the main selling
point is the drainage. He added that he had mixed
emotions.
Mr. Holt stated that his initial thought was for
opposition. He said that he was impressed with the
neighborhood and individual or ani:ation. He said that
his big concern is the intensity.
Mr. Claiborne moved to recommend approval of Z-1814 with
conditions as recommended by staff.
Motion dies for lack of a second.
Mr. Holt stated that he would be less objective to the
proposal with lesb buildings.
Mr. Escue moved to recommend denial of Z-1814. Seconded
by Mr. Holt.
Mr. Escue stated that he sympathized with the neighborhood
but that this is too gross a violation of the policy.
Vote was called and carried (3-1). Mr. Claiborne voted no.
I
Z
DATE: 07/15/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: V-30
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of the
variance request.
S MMARY:
Mr. Dort N. Bryant requested a variance of the Art. 4.03 of the
subdivision and Land Development Regulations concerning perimeter
paving. The regulations include eight conditions that must be met
before a variance may be granted. The request does not meet four of
the eight conditions and the specific reasons are outlined in the
attachment from David Salmon, Civil Engineer, Engineering Department.
BACKGROUND:
A preliminary plat for a 6 acre tract on Hickory Hill Road west of
FM 1830 was submitted to the City of Denton. The property is
located in the extraterritorial jurisdiction and in an area where
several estate subdivisions have been approved in the past year.
The Commission denied the variance request for the Keenan Farms
Addition. According to the regulations of Appendix A of the Code of
Ordinances, the Commission may postpone improvements of unimproved
streets if the requirements are not feasible or desirable at the
time of development. The Commission stated in the recommendation of
the preliminary plat that a performance bond approved by the City
for one and one-half the current estimated cost of construction must
be posted by the developer and a written agreement must be signed by
the developer obligating the developer to pay the cost of
construction. (Art. 403, p. 1104). The preliminary plat was
approved with the bond condition on July 1, 1986 by the City Council.
PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Adjacent property owners, citizens of Denton, and all departments
involved in the development process.
,
a
City Council Format (v-30)
July 15, 1986
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT;
If improvements are not required, the citizens of the City will be
required to pay for the improvements.
Respectfully submitted:
Lloy 8a ell
Prepared by. / City Ma ger
f
David Ellison
Senior Planner
Appr
Jeff Meyer
Director of Planning
18299
CITY CUUNCIL AGENDA
BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET
MEETING DATE: July 150 1986
SUBJECT: V-30. Petition of Don Bryant {Keenan }arms
Addition) requesting a variance of Article 403 of
the City of Denton Subdivision and Land Development
Regulations. The article details perimeter street
paving requirements.
SUMMARY: Variations and modifications of the requirements
of the Denton Subdivision and Land Development
Regulations are discussed in Article I, Chapter
III, and states in part that in no case shall the
Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council
grant modifications unless it finds that all of
the following conditions are satisfied:
1. The modified proposal would conform to the
city master plans.
2. Literal enforcement of a provision would
result in an extreme hardship for the
development of the subdivision.
3. Granting of a modification will not have the
effect of preventing the orderly subdivision
of other land use in the area.
d. The modification accomplishes the spirit and
intent of the standard,
5. The problem in question is not generally com-
mon to other properties in the city. If the
problem standard in question is of general
application to numerous properties throughout
the city, then the Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion is prohibited from granting such variance,
but should instead recommend an ordinance
change to the City Council.
6, The actual pecuniary cost of development of
the property shall be considered for modifi-
cation of standards.
7. The hardship must be a physical hardship
relating to the property itself as distin-
guished from a hardship relating to
convenience.
8. The hardship must not result from the
applicant's or proposed property owner's
own actions.
I
9R0•. Jt y a , ......^f %.d'. r 1 Yet ik
City Council Backup
V-3D
July 15, 1986
SUMMARY:
(continued) If the City Councll concludes that the eight
conditions as specified in the Subdivision
Regulations are met, a majority of affirmative
votes is required to grant the variance.
A memorandum from David Salmon, Assistant City
Engineer, describing the cost and effect of the
improvements is attached.
ACTION REQUIRED: Approve or deny the request for variance.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
that the variance be denied and Improvements
be required.
ALTERNATIVE: Approve or deny the request for variance.
ATTACHMENTS: Reduced plat and memorandum
A"erl 4
NaVrd-ETIIsn sV"-
Senior Engineer
ati ~M ,
V 40 4-1 It, al .l l HI Irrlrl[llll.
IJ PRA7NA' PiSlNU 1r u Oil t
Y'tl 'S .y11• ,1y - rr.n,. .I IM I in rM.; 01 AIA I u 1l1'1•
,1 ..`u t, '+•,•r. 1 s 111' . n91 t 1, IN 1,4 9.11f, nYl'rt t. AMINA I h IIM'
1 11. I 11 n'.A h 1 1 , '.l Ir, n. 1l.' A./ Mir, 1111 1011AIn LM 41. IN.,
Mee •/roil /%n Y ..uI 1'. r1 yr 11 In /I,w Ap,A' 01 At h Orr• 0r A111M0 AM Ir. f1 ' u
w'p ~/nl „•j0 0 ! +A 1 rn F I to I. .1 $..1 rl'O"t, SrfrrM t't IO, Mn /At, uul.fl
7 l' to JOi. lp !1. I I, Llrw..
Irrr A1,/ •I' 1,5:11..1 <r b,. 0, If, •.1 I" ILI em A,agI 'Ofrt 4 MP lr.rl• 1,11 pr'It V1ll It
lla wr, 1111 a Ilvi,v. Pill 1 0IAA ..4 4111. "rlly IM AeIIMArI .rrrl N NII 11101 if"
' •an I u. 1
-411ft f: yl1. P. Ur 1111 1.."'( IF, .Y0 Lm tl MI, 1•00 It M IIM ,I" Nl 1,.1 IM
' ~ •.•M.11 ,'IYII -I InrA IrAel,
I Idl'aI Ys,.N 111' ,f' II' Yrll, 1'A, 0.• 1.11 b• M IIM p• NI for M Oplr rl lnll A t11•
Ir 111.
) r ~ i~ (ul Fl" Swth H' Wnl' It Ibl Anrlr r rlN ly f0•t• flr In M ItM pln nl
~G pCX I 1 I IF. I. IM.M .1 lrt' of I011 110'1.
M :f :11"I S .ry, -I..V h•1 1, AA Ire" yar .01 1.1 IN rrltrr•1 46,mr of Iln. lief.
V r ' 0, ` • No--1 IF 111, ' l:' I1.1. A1'. 0 0111 1 IM /•Ip1 Y1 p1}11116. 111, tt"I 1..•I IAtAr
0 W a tpA".r.1 ` 'ryNyr .Me`'` IAA{, p., F•IA!d, 1 r!ur1 1,r F, xl• J,1 In'• plu h,HHll•/ IM MIO.'1NA•r e1.
dc n•n'
I. I. A' II1:•.S 111." 41- 111.4. AI tool'.... to fh Al.n1 L•W,t 1. Po'.. IF
1 y~.,O! y` (•f',~• z IQ A 117 ;t; 1' a 1% U. Iru. ,{N.Ir AI' I, ,+AN, I., I:nrr, III foil. 1hr1. M.. Aut+lrlr rtNMr.l.. tulrn
.14 < { Z.TM ~tQf✓ V 1~ ' l:`r .I 1, M.A.M. III a, *(#O11, 11,. Ill, W' 11fht I., ItM.1 rl ►n, 111
1N Tf•✓ j.~(c gCPFJ Y _ Irl r fu• Ilr, , .rhlt. ,I yl Mr 1141u°trAlf .y olwh. w,., 1,
F 1i tn. •Ar .M.r'r.t 'nl. rlnr. 0". of, '111 Vr IrM, Mlrl"n * Ar •I III UAt11t I,.
O d I p r IF A'... Irq r. 1... .•up p, .111.1, I1t-•III• •J .II 0.6111 wiltllb A1ull Al All I1*• I. n'
V V , h l 1•,1 11 1'.., ,A IAnn 1'..,I Ilw ,nA 00, r11'1111....AMA1 to, IM ,YII' •11
n 1 y 7 n^1•. ,1., 11..,lln , rl.Iplrlq. it'll :Ilnl., MI11tlA1M Md AGAIN /e of /Mwrtl 11'
y y `4 ` I fl I' I'. n-Irr1N. .1.Lr1.111-IYI lH r.UrrY •t AAr lift of HMIrr1M IM 11H V.I.r
N rl Afr ~.r
It tt rw .1 Ai 'P Wt, W. d... rJ . 11p1
SO It 4,
I
w~~ 0'01'4 1q A• f
f+! 1 , ~~!T, / 1 I r.,.• IV\I 1 111.44 41, Ifl ..,..II 1,14"01 AVIF.•I II" Yw 111t 4, 0
•IIIA17N
/ 131" ` 1 NU':, 1.rlo, r, rr:r to w t.. N 46 141144 004'00 AM,. IA ow".1pM110 1M LVrs•Uf
'•nu•v A.0 dF, ' 1. IINI F1 0.1..110 11/ 64" lot tr "took ►A/ flrt,ll\III
c.J.IJT/G'/ n:np n .0101. ,•.~',lYlgr 1111111, Il/Ln Arw/.
_~1_frM Pn ~r' _ 1111 If I M G.'1 A,P 111. fl PI!h1. 111• 01..1 1 HIT,
LI(., . ✓,1 1.-,*
t 'rrv, AI,.r 1'1.1. PF'T'., I
V.tr. l,•f1. 1. OF
4.50 6" yly.•}_QArIUA•w S:, J1o1', 11A1I11fAh
I"'N AI' I'I\ Ir fill'I 111'10!.},0
I 4- v!l yJU 1hA• 1. rMi 10 1. It lvt 1.' Muo, ,uI J, r•.I , ".tmoj it I, 01n if" 11 1,1..1 .14
1"• r n!.Itll• 1 .t.tl nl IM I..". Ir1 IMI 11.. 1 11,1 NY,l oto IN rhatIH. M11 tluylll, yi A1Y
.r uAn. ...e~'.fA,S1H
1.. I tI,^. f.~.iA-~~1..'1- 1.~Y1., 1. I.'Ln.111 (I nAl l'Y• AYM rf 111:
~Knfl.okr • -11 11
,...••f a •Ow•'Ah1.A- I~ I ' ","..rrla A. L..Y, •A;?
~r..lrill r w •/Mfl~.Ar
O WNf/f7.
Don P Ory•noi oir+ne.
Pit IF to 0 4 ?g, op
L ra',l rl/111 T/M, pirfl
i,f'oRbt
FI
• 40 V M M r .04 W NO
oRF'O10PFD d✓
Poll •If.e... 3Yrrryr
.Y.114 71 • 9Ar
c r ac an a wtira s•.z-c Ewa co ;';Jac r1 0 / r
1 w w.. r I 'C t NAN f a 1?A~?3 ADD,I T/ON
!•I.~ INr p7ec 4 6\O gCRpJ
A dt.f• . fIA1Mr 1,"AtApr .A 1Yrr
J. A. s!•7;,*I; SL'Lw[•r00401L nIo : AC
!>lfN7ON GDCI/017)'1 TE-X.~.S
R E V I
Afl►
TAW"
UY Of DMW7 i46 NX" MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. MoKINNEY ST. / DEMON, TEXAS =01
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 3, 1986
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: David Salmon, H.I.T. Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Perimeter Street Paving Variance
Keenan Farms Addition (V-30)
The developer of the Keenan Farms Addition is requesting a
variance of the perimeter street paving requirements for his
project. His major reason for the variance is the cost which
would be approximately $10,000 which the developer considers
excessive for two single family estate lots.
Of the eight variance conditions, the developer only meets or
could be considered to qualify for #1, 112, 116, and #8. Both M2
and M6 relate to whether the cost of the improvements are a
hardship to the developer. That is your decision to make.
Proper research before starting development could reveal to
developers whether their plans are feasible or not before
starting such projects.
Item M1: 'I'bis portion of Hickory Hill road is planned to be a
local residential type street which is what it
functions as presently.
Item 42: To be determined by Planning and Zoning Commission
Item N3: If this tract is granted a variance, other tracts
will have to drive over deteriorated county roads to
get to their projects. Also as this would be an
estate road section with borrow ditches, construction
of the road would promote proper drainage in the area.
Item 04: Spirit and intent of the standard is to have roads
meet city specifications when tixey are annexed. This
variance will not.
Item #S: The problem is common to all properties in the ETJ
tilat have frontage on county roads
Item 06: To be determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission
t (/5004" DIFW METRO 434.25M
page 2 of 2 pages
Item 07: There is no physical hardship in this case. There
are n,) major hills, bridges, etc that would cause
prohibitive costs to the developer.
Item 08: The hardship is not caused by the property owner's
actions.
In summary, since at least tour of the eight conditions are not
met, a variance should not be granted.
David Salmon, B.I.T.
Civil Engineer
is
00400B
P ; Z Minutes
June Its 1986
Page 12
Mr, Claiborne stated that this case will be forwarded to
the City Council with no recommendation from rho Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Ms. Cole left the meeting.
P. V-30. Petition of bon M. Bryant roquestin a variance
6"rovisions of the City of Denton Subdivision and Land
Development Regulations requiring sidewalk, paving, curb
and gutter, and drainage improvements for perimeter streets
adjacent to proposed subdivisions. Two 3.0 sere lots
located adjacent and west of Hickcry Hill Road between
Gibbons Road and PM 1830 are Qroposed. The property is
located in the City of Denton ?s area of extraterritorial
jurisdiction (Fi'1'J) and single family development is
anticipated,
one notice was mailed to adjacent property owner; one
reply form was received in favor.
STAFF REPUkT: Mr. Ellison stated that this is a request
o a var ante of perimeter street paving required for
Hickory Hill Road. He said that this is an area that is a
considerable distance from the urbanized portion of the
city, He said that the petitioner has proposed two three
acre lots for a residential estate type subdivision and
the City of Denton regulations apply both for the city and
E'ri. He said that the petitioner is required to pave a 0
foot section across the frontage of property plus a side-
walk across the entire frontage of the property. He said
the issue of drainage has been resolved. He said that the
petitioner believes that these tracts are so far from the
city that improvements are not necessary. He said that
the City Council believes this property is too far for
city services at this time and will not be annexed soon.
He said that a ten foot strip along Hickory Hill Road has
been annexed. He said that the Development Review
Committee recommends denial of me variance,
PET1r1UNER: Don Bryant, resident of flower Mound, stated
that he is partners with his father-in-law. +re said friar
dill Staff is interested is buying rnree acres. Ile said
that the road in front of the property is tri guod condi-
tion and handles the traffic now, He said that rue i'lan-
ning and Zoning Commission nas power to grant waiver and
asked rtrem to make a decision based on low densiry, low
traffic, hardship, value of riie laud, and raze into ac-
count the condition of the ruad.
IN FAVOR: Bill Staff stated that ne is interested in pur-
r` aasin`g the northern section of the property. He said
that if the variance is granted he will oe building a home.
OPPOSED: None present.
REBUTTAL: None offered.
Chair declared public hearing closed.
DECISION: Mr, Claiborne stated that he empathized totally
a o5 ut variances especially this far out of the city. lie
said that he felt bound to support the Suodivision Regula-
tions. He moved to recommend denial of ti-3u girt, the
stipulation that the street improvements oe deferred by
mernid of bonding.
Seconded by ms. Brock.
Mr. Morris stated that once the bond expires there is no
way to make anyone post bond. tie said that ibis does
P 6 Z minutes
June lit 1986
Paso 13
create a problem and that no time is given when the bond
will be called,
Mr. Clark suggested escrow into an interest account,
Vote was called and carried (4.1). Mr. h6cue voted no.
G. PRELIMINARY AND FINAL kOPLAT UP THE ALEX ROBERTSON
ADDIriums 0 4, Block IS.
STAFF R6NURT: Mir. Ellison stated that this is a U.46S
acre commercial (C) tract located adjacent and south of
Dallas Drive, east of Johnson Street and north of Smith
Street. A car wash development is proposed and the
purpose of the replat is to remove an existing lot line,
He said that extensions will be made to the water and
sanitary sewer lines and all other public facilities are
adequate, He said that the Uevelopment Review committee
recommends approval of the preliminary and final replats.
PETITIUNER: Brian Burke, representing Burke Engineering,
state t at no was available for questions.
IN FAVOR; None present,
UPPUSED: None present.
Chair declared public hearing closed.
DECISIUN; Mr, Claiborne moved to recommend approval of
the preliminary and final replat of the Alex Robertson
Addition, Lot 4, Block IS, Seconded by Ms. Brock and
unanimously carried (5-U).
A, 5-16S Cont. Ms. Carson stated that Mr. Willis, represent-
In g is requesting that 5-16S be withdrawn oe-
cadse Mr. Holigan is unable to be present at the meeting.
She said that this item was withdrawn previously from the
May 17 agenda. She said that this item was scheduled for
the May 14 meeting and the meeting was cancelled due to a
tack of a quorum. She said that the policy of the Planning
and Zoning Commission is rnat once an item nas been with-
drawn, the Planning and Zoning 1.ommission must maKC a de-
terminar'on whether the case can bn withdrawn again or
whether the public hearing should proceed. Sake said tear
sf - tf had no recommendation on the witndrawai of rile case
but that rho petitioner would bo required to suorait ~.3
for advertising fees.
Ms. Brock moved to withdraw S-165 from the June 11 agenda.
Seconded by Mr. Fscue.
Mr, Ellison stated that if this happens again that staff
would strongly advise proceeding with the public hearing
regardless of the time or situation.
mr. Claiborne amended the motion to add that S-165
would be hea=d within the next two weeks. Seconded by
Mr. Pearson.
Vote was called on amendment and unanimously carried (S•-J).
Vote was called on original motion and unanimously carried
(5-U).
IV, GUNSIDERATIONS
A. PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE GREENFIELI) NOUDS AUCii'IUN,
MCI n .
a
DATE: 07/16/ 66
i
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FOEXAT ~
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council '
FROM. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of the preliminary and final replat of Freeway Park
Addition, Lot 4B, Block A; preliminary plat of the sun Country
Additions and preliminary plat of Hannah Estates, Block 11 Phase IV
}iECOMMENQATION:
The Planning and Zoniog Commission recommends approval of the
above-referenced plats and replete.
su~;MARx
Townhouse-type residential development along the east side of
Bernard Street between Collins and Greenlee on 494 acres is proposed
for the Sun Country Addition; single family (SF-10) dtsvelopment (18
lots) situated between Kings Row, Windsor Drive, Nottingham Drive,
and Block A of the Kingston Tract Subdivision is proposed for Hannah
Estates, Phase IV. The purpose of the replat of Freeway Park
Addition, Lot 4B, Block At is to equally divide a medical office and
the lot on which it speaks into two lots.
BACKG ROUND:
Not applicable
PROGRAMS, DEPARTM"VTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
City of Denton and developers/owners
FIi
.C AL IMPACT:
Undetermined
RespectLu2ly submittedt
Lloyd Ha ell
Prepared by., City Ma ger
David Ellison
Senior Planner
Appr ed
Jeff Mey
Director of Planning
and Development
1628a
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET
MEETING DATE: July 15, 1986
SUBJECT: Approval of final replat of the Freeway Park
Addition, Lot 44 Block A
SUMMARY: This is a 2 acre tract located south of the
intersection of Barcelona Otreet and Mesa
Drive. The property is zoned light industrial
(LI) and a medical office has been constructed
recently. Two doctors will share the office.
The lot was divided to establish separate
ownership in May, 1986. The purpose of the
replat: is to reconfigure the lots making them
more equal in siz9.
ACTION REQUIRED: Approval of the replat
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.
ALTERNAVVE: Approval of the final,,,repl.pt.; .i
ATTACHMENT: Reduced plat,
1694g
S rrrtc/trs
*110Nt of o u
s/R anltau
1 "Ism. TIAw R. owftld ,w LM
(I wwt►w tmoi RwYtw we tie .w.. ,w us bif.Yty
Al i u" w-we 7,000 evs Uses w PAtt•1 of tow
j" wt 'I IN 6. rll(CYtlr WA A. hm" Park Ss"tHSAN, Sm"m Too N shw Y "cor"d Is your 1t
LSEC{~O OM A rM K. pin "N .+••f lwtr CNNr. rNN. A trot wIy fMWt
' wNlIIW hRSY 11 RN•s tomm" " lellewl
vet.N h.N►R. how" fee the N•tatnt wrw• of I Ira W ores! bit" lothH
flit dwl M th •N{hou 't Lot 44 sloth A room Pak use. . Iste"s, swlr fgift I" " wisma *~W mefew is r 11, have 79. Ptw
tommi
ly { Thor Iot1 Il NSrr b highways IAN 517,7 low Aw too ~ It" of Am
0 1.000 Ae ~r 9vin to r /maw fN eN to tw fANRIi
"rANr wit 3".4 fe" to r Ira qe is the vest
LOT I-91-0 A0 ' 1TI shit Y IN As
I
tr , .r TITIM" IMA OL Aslress 00 "sots, foes rtt.77fr is W twthesos sw»r K
NAMMALL,Ne1' , .
iU /34 O.A Rya, VOZ
• 0 .6 I%"" asewfAAnwM Nwrr Rw711,77 tot w th Pales N a•Hrlel
LOT 4•RI•R
tl` r W trwulN I. 0000Q0 serfs at Le".
1.00 As. IN. TRWTOK, 71NY AII, RQ K TRW Mai I
Y t{ A It .l
Met. TrnN A. QerwN W Paw
~r M WW MM this Ill HY//rook
LAs Mr•le dowft1" twt r t
C1 1 rACCWAY PARR INA/H•tN. S•CLLN TWO, Catr ow Caw? of asNw. bt• es, W M ib"ot
gtllt~ lSW ON TWO 4"1t•ts to take rolls w as rents W sewws stow b"'",
Gin Wl.a ►e."RA. owa
A A. wtl
e ~J STAR M TVM
13 3 I i t;l~ 0: 0
.0 i alleys a, his " "mod SLANT MNie ter tae stm {I Tway. M this *IT
If r rertArllr IPW Hower A. OrtwAl M l JaM SAYNN stows to r to be the
N~4~a N so th~"'be NwNw 4 r w6buthal the No for the luoyhow L ~YrY 'r`w«rwt~sms t~iw. is
4 ~ N R OWON " w " far rePet.90 sow".
dim wMy N w.0 rA wl K elfiN uiak W Ae1"
1144.
yaks f , .
ri. M the • ssw
Clow OrINtN sANrwt "
~M~r t•wu a 7MOOrA, OMtW 1
NW li ~tti. MA ttreno, YL 1
OWM OMMe, 111011 ALL 1071 If TMU I tMI 1
LOCATION NY flat I, Strferl 11Nrrte. Animism Pe"It so jam. M bwo" rrtltl Net
1' • 1000' this Plat w rettl PttN we M•PA/•1 !rN N Ntal •en•er
the Ira" W that The Sews 9sN eASw theeta mate PIN" ~ N
wtar.lHr to WWAM" with .ee her.
It may as
t•N Fm7 it
wod ICALS I'd 100' RIPLAT OF
UCt" TWO
FREEWAY PARK SUBDIVISION
LOT I-rl•R AYM L074-U-M OLUCK A
RsW LOGO SRNtNd LOt 4, ILOOR A,
IIRAV PARN SIMIMMSON, I+tCT. It
VM. I, ft {I P.1Las.fi
PR REVIS.C.A.,
010"M RATION f OVO A-411 tiff & ""If w OUT", "I"
ARTRCPLIN htOR me A?"
1.I .-iqf .r a mv.- Myn
~mw
tt'1r~ , AIOIt1011
LIT MW pM L&I 4•RMR
- RL~OtIt A
ter{ eta
,aau t"■ r00 R7aT/N ROOZiIA
iAVtYIlQ 4aRS'SNI
ar .
7- 771, 'Slir- W-
CITY COUNCIL
BACK-UP SUNMARX SHEET
MEETING DATE: July 150 1986
SUBJECT: Approval of the preliminary plat of Hannah
Estates, Block 10 Phase IV
SUMMARY: This proposed phase of the Hannah Estates single
family (SF-10) subdivision consists of eighteen
(18) lots situated between Kings Row, Windsor
Drive, Nottingham Drive, and Block A of the
Kingston Trace Subdivision. The tract is 6.564
acres in size and all lots conform to SP-10
zoning ordinance requirements.
All lots will have access from two new standard
residential cul-de-sacs and Kings Row. Perimeter
street paving improvements to Kings Row is
presently under construction. Adequate water
and sewer service is in place and available for
extension. All other public facilities are in
place or available for extension. The property
is in the 100-year floodplain (A-0 zone/special
flood hazard area) and plans for drainage comply
with subdivision regulations.
ACTION REQUIRED: Approval of the preliminary plat
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.
ALTERNATIVE: Approval of the preliminary plat
ATTACHMENT: Reduced preliminary plat
1616a
` ~ ArM. ral ull
f
:I I
r f a I f ~ f
l
R 1yo ~ ~ I~ amrlc tu~ii~ITOn
4 i t efnar a
\ I VOL eu n.n
:ur
6 e. to
;
6 h
10.4 40 9.
L-jo
4 1 V♦~ + to
t ;r fa a
Woo" r
OQr ~
NOi •^..........~--l.rtt%reuftfn
t!lIONaN OA. to :al[ It X11 f ts`t. ^ ow wTtL
RIM~ra butt
. \ OCF A .l
\
,1
S~7E I
WINDSOR 9R.
LOCATI04 MM
I t/t/M $100A n71f100 I.r.t.
Part ttmirrla yrlpRp
tIEY(SIOMS
HANNAH R A 9RPHAK IV
!LOCK f
e-Im 41,9" ACa1E!
J. CAPM 060MY 4-274
o"Im I&AAe IAYIMO AM LOAN A8eoCIA710k CITY Or 0COOIL 00C M Coven. TVAII
09nWW E14DOWN8 CWWATION
lalli lle t KA010141 M eIONVItAI
rIn rm mm wrft ODOM mw 7091
212,14;9 167M gl~ I
OMM Xkll DATE ft MO,
tllnrrrlr . f t i
Tog- S/I</A6' 1118023A
CI'T'Y COUNCIL AGENDA
BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET
MEETING DATE: July 15, 1986
SUBJECT: Preliminary plat of the Su.° .ountry Addition,
Lot 1, Block 1.
SUMMARY: This is the preliminary plat of a 4.4 acre attached
residential planned development approved in March,
1985, The property is located adjacent and east
of Bernard Street, south of Collins and north of
Greenlee.
A total of fifty-four (54) dwelling units within
nine buildings ranging from four-plexes to eight-
plexes were approved on the Planned Development
site plan (approximately 12 units per acre).
Other approved features include: 124 parking
spaces (104 covered and 20 uncovered); a pool,
clubhouse, greenbelts and jogging patn under
common ownershi~; a maximum building height of 24
feet; and one 4 x t' entrance sign. The prelimi-
nary plat is in substantial compliance with the
approved site plan.
Bernard is an existing residential street with 50'
of right-of-way and curb and gutter, Existing
sewer does not have sufficient capacity to serve
this development. An 8" sanitary sewer line must
be extended north and connected to a proposed new
10" sanitary sewer line that maybe installed
along Nagle Drive. If the sewer line in the
Capital Improvement Program is not built, the
developer will be required to build tho line.
The plans for the sewer line must be included in
the final engineering plans. An existing 6" water
line on Bernard Street is available for domestic
and fire pro,ection purposes.
Drainage is a significant factor. Detention is
required for this tract and staff has requested
that a proposed detention pond for a contiguous
tract to the north be sized to accommodate both
properties. A concrete lined channel is required
and must be designed to handle a 10-year storm.
Culverts must be designed for the 25-year storm.
Sizing calculations will be required for all
drainage structures during the final plat stage.
This includes showing the capacity of the
driveways to carry a 100 year flood between
building lines.
to r4 ,Y fmn. A '.'3 p•r '~~rA 4 ).r- 'reay~. ks{ : ap.-V L~4 _ _ r... a.~
City Couttcil Agenda
July 199 1986
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval of the preliminaryy plat with the
condition that plans for the storm water detention
must be included with final plat and engineering
plans.
ALTERNATIVE: Approval of preliminary plat
ATTACHMENT: Reduced plat
01570
a
i
i
;
z
oMlweu Iwtnsliot ~ oua
ow 0 HUM Iqft~zr 1 +
'POPE
POP")-
NOW 40
ps pis 04
1 1
0) - - N P! M
r. r r w. _ _ r
t rrwl.i w
1
i •
W IWEST ON M!1 S ~ ~
rt i r
r ti ti r
~ 1 IM~r r
0%"Wh "AT1 It
r' i 1'' t t
1 i 1
~Iar NgIB~
N M1
1 r 4l
OM B MkomdK! r ' Lr Ir 1
M It171`\
w N*y
IMlr i
►T ;I i m
ME tlN ~ W M W
t00.AL OpCM►TlON "C"M MOW '"t"
41M N 1 IN• uN IN Na It IN INI IINI•Ih
l1 AI N blllll NINI t INIM 141.1 IA111 IItN y
•I NI N•1NII I
6, IIt1i «N I/I' 11« alp INI, IN 7
NuNm urur •I u41 11 INI NN. u u t.l. MI IN
Ih, tl 411 N NII nININ N V 3.r1 111. NV 11h
M NN l1Nq NN N/1rN' am LOT
Il~pl Id1'!1'll'1. 1141 IN INII IIU 11 NH Ntl Ifp4 MTt
It .M INI N 1 Ill'MN M NI N IN 141441 IllNr .t ,
Nf1111N1 , ~
7•' ~y ALL
Mamma um
f4Kl Y INII 11'1. INI IN NN IIN « NU IUf tlgl r Lr••• P•y. z/t~I~/~
M.N INI N t I/I• IIN/Ip NIA aY 411414 NINI N p,l
offaawom .,..t11 I.Y.~r or-?
NN Up" Mar w tafm N.001lum
MNI I N')t'll•1 I ININN p11~....... 1N11I1I r1 I N.u lU ,~ttt~l~t /,yy~y Y
b4tMN MN~ iN11I1 N a1W'1,14 1Na IIL,IpI NI/IY~ t•' { ' ^'T ...p.1111~ Toa
NH NIN1N " 4.0749 ACASS
I4KI l., weI NN{ 111 01:11:U NN rl 1444 41M I'~~
INII I Ib we M 11).ll Lnl N IN tI IIN1 NIW. Ian ~
IN 141441 1441 N NII 11411 1 ,
11414 "If .IN .N INII NN N NN 11tH INN IMd1
tNl ll • lll•lI~ IK W IN NNNNI NIII. N t 1141 1
INI MN
N~~IN Irp H4 1431 W I MNNp1 N 1111 I4NM/ iI 1 1 '
NII.I I1W 1111 sNN111NLt NN 111If111
flNi, r M•11'f l•1. nN/ 111 NMNII bN .r u11 ""b, AUM IIalIT1~A1~ I /
II4l 11 YN 141 N
It .r IN IN.4 N1 ...N1 tl Nti 1141 MI '
4 L1I W! INN1 11 NI 11 111 .NN/1111 11141 1.^ r
~l•11 W NFr. 111411 t. 11{1 t1 tlp IINI r/ N M1IM. " p' I It
Ir1! IN. Ip, INrZ11.. .1/ NM //«11' 4 i
4 ll , uNNp N 1 ,AM11G ~f 1T7fA~MIY.
.4.}I 4N ..111 b.l 1y NI. .YM.11•.1I 1./ M NII
NNI auN i1.. 1.W I tM NN W N411.J1rM'IM'1: 1.11 Nal ~y~.• / •
I0114 4.1 IlN 14 NNI !INN NU rlNl LNI IN.N INI Imam
1. 1 If'• Ig111 .Mp IIN IN IN1t L .IN IIN .1 aY 11.11 •lriY 4i. I '
NNN4I NIa.l1 WN11 111 ~~~~MMMI
{1. N11u~'..'IY KY IN 4p NN r. .111 WN.1 Hr.a. ..w
1411 n •.YIN MIr. .1~,«I«IN IN fYf1111N 111141 .N...
'r[ 1 .k ..i •.I .1. 1:1. .'a t! 1114 V '(Ibip Yi 1:.1$ ..~:I / '1~, I ~l~
too
DATE: July 159 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Y, Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: P.O. #72432 Bid Contract #9675 Yellowstone-Sherr.ton Drainage
Outfall Channel.
RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this Change Order be approved on our Bid #9575
or $14,495.00 to Calvert Paving Co. See attached estimate from Calvert and
Jerry Clark.
SUMMARY: This Bid has awarded by the Council on Feb. 18,1986 for the
total of $666,886.42 to Calvert Paving Co. This Is Change Order #1 and
includes a part of the drainage that the City Crews were planning to complete,
We now find that the City is unable to do the job, therefore the alternative
is the Change Order.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet of bid, Purchase Order #72432, Memo: Jerry
Clark, Change Order Proposal.
PROGRAMS. DEPART14ENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Street Drainage
FISCAL IMPACT: Budget Fund Account #432-002-0010-9105
Respectfully submitted:
'W IA'41"Zvl -
Lloyd X. rrell
City Manger
Prepared by:
0~vo- John Marshall
Title: Purchasing Agent
t
Approved:
A s
go: Wt)hn Marshall
T_ t,1s_ _ &mhasinw Agent
I
B1D TITLE YELLOkiSTL1IlE/PRAIRIE DRAINAGE
CALVERT UTILITY ATKINS DICKERSON ALBENESIUS MALL ALBE T
OPENED Fghruary 6, 1986 M. PAVING CONTRACTOR BROS. CONST. CONTR. CONTT.
Co. Inc. EQPT. CO. CO. CO.
ACCOUNT N 432-002-0010-9105-SIIB
l QTY, V R VENDOR VENDOR.-.,. VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR
I Yellowstone/Sheratnn 461,957.32 _n5,325,W 494,512.59 631,240.1 650,629.00 551.763,0
Prairie Strapt DrainA9-0 61 X53,911 62,270,.5 88,755.00 84,508.01
3 Sun Valley Flume 64,991.70 120,386.32 110,156.9 -
4 Yellowstone flume 73 503.50 140 756,29 137 796,2 - -120,500. 0
5 TOTAL BID 662o386.42 020 925.76 9631,600.1 846s622.011
Did Bond Yes Cash. Ck Yes Yes Yes Yes
rr ' x
904 TEXAS STREET PURCHASE ORDER DENTON, TX 76101
P. O. NUMBER DATE /VEND 0. DOCUMENT TYp?
72432 03/25 S26
CAL67000 : p
VENDOR
CALVERT PAVING CO CITY orPi~TE sONr ENGINEERING
P.G. BUX 266 CENTRAL RECEIVING
DENTON• TX 76201 903'-8 TEXAS : 3TREET ~
REVISED D9NTON* • 7X, 76201
***NOTE: THIS PURCHASE ORDER SUPERSEDES P.0•0 72432 SENT 03-26-•86
ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER UNITS NUMBER DESCRIPTION BID NO. JL$7S--- LINE AMOUNT
01' 432 007 0010 9108 $l i e 1 . YELLOMSTONE*SHERATON DRAINAGE 146109570.4s
,09 432 002 0010,9108-5116 1 .YELLONSTONE it SUN VALLEY.-PLUNH 238#575529
03.432 002'0010':9105 $120 1 PRAIRIE STREET DRAINAGE 61*853*9C
04-432 002 0010,'9105 5120 ; 150 :ROCK' EXCAVATION IF NI'E090 9870 4s5000-0c
Y5,439 002,0010;'9105 SI18 1+,CHANGE ORDER 01 EXCAVATION FOR 14e495•0C
'04 432 008 0010'-9105 SI16 DRAINAGE OUTPALL:CHANNELS
fhe City of Denton, Texas Is tax exempt • House Bill No. 20. TOTAL FOR P.O. 681,381.41
Deference P. 0. Number on all BY L, Shipments and Invoices.
Alpments are F, 0, B. City of Denton; or as indicated. By
Send Invoices T0: Direct Inquiries T0:
City of Denton, Accounts Payable John J. Marsnall, P.M. Purchasing Agent
215 E. McKinney St., Denton, TX 76201 Toot D. Shaw, C. P, M. Asst. Purchasing Agent
(or as Indicated on Purchase Order) 817/566-8311 D/FE Metro 261.0042
The Clty of Denton is an equal opportunity eaaployer
Cf rY of DIBNTON DBNTON, rBXAS 70201
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 30, 1986
TO: Rick Svehla, Assistant City Manager
FROM: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Excavation for Yellowstone Drainage Outfali Channels
As you are aware, we had originally planned on Jim Corbin of
the Street and Bridge Division completing this work. Since the
channel bottom turned ou. to be hard limestone, Jim did not
have proper equipment to excavate the rock.
Calvert Paving is the contractor for the Yellowstone/Sheraton
drainage project, We asked them for a bid on the work. Their
bid is enclosed with a total price of $14,495,00. The value is
about two percent of the contract amount. Their bid prices
seem fair for a difficult little project. We strongly
recommend acceptance of the change order for Bid X19575 (1985
CIP Drainage).
A twenty working day extention will be granted to the
contractor with acceptance of this change order.
CQAr--~--
e ry 1 rk
ty sneer
cc: Charlie McKenna
Roger Wilkinson
#0400E
Pop No. of PMU
CALVERT PAVING
P. 0. Box 268
DENTON. TX 76202
(817) 387-"31
PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO PHONE DATE
STREET City of Denton
JOB NAME
CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE JOB LOCATION
ARCHITECT DATE Of PLANS JOB PHONE
We hereby submit specifications and estimates for:
Yellowstone Drainage Outfail Channels:
12.8-A 811 Ductile Iron Pipe 20 L.F. @ $26.00/L.F. $520.00
12.8-B 10" Ductile Iron Pipe 25 L.F. @ $33.00/L,F4 825.00
3.3 Unclassified Excavation 100 C.Y. @ $10.00/C.Y. 1000.00
3.7 Cattpacted Fill 110 C.Y. @ $5.00/C,Y, 550.00
7.4 Concrete Eircasentent 50 C.X. @ $65,00/C,Y, 3250.00
8.15 Concrete Rip-Rap 50 S.Y @ $27.00/S.Y, 1350.00
SP-17 Rock Excavation 200 C.Y. @ $25.00/C.Y. 5000.00
SP-18 Vertical Tie-Down Blocks 2 Ea, @ $1000.00/Fa. 2000.00
212.8-C 1211 Ductile Iron Pipe- 25 L.F. @ $36.00/L.F, 900.00
Lower Wetter Line
Adddendtm Received
Total $14,495.00
TgP crap st hereby to furnish material and labor - complete in accordance with above specifications, for the sum of:
F01.2rte9M TbQUSA 7 it rndrPA Nirw V Five n Nn/l A0 dollars (E 140495 00
)
Payment to be made as follows;
Alt mateelal is guaranteed to be as spec Hied. All work to be completed in a workmanllke
manner st.cording to Standard practices, Any Nlof0lon or deviation Irom strove specifics. Authorized
11Mt InvoNwa #Mfrs eost$ will be eaecutld only upon written orders, and will become an Slgneivre
extra charge v"r and above ten estimate. All agreements contib"M upon strikes. accidents
or delays beywvl our control. Owner to carry life, tornado and other nscesc ry Inwranee, Note: This proposal may be 7
Our workers are fully covered by Workmen's Compensation Insurance. withdrawn by us if not accepted within days.
Arreptimt of f ralwaid-The above prices, spftI ications
and conciitbns an satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized Signature _
to do the work as specifl d. Payment will be made as outlined above.
Date of Accwancr. Signature Eli
0923E
NO.
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRAC'r
FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR SERVICES;
• PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated
competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials equip-
ment, supplies or services in accordance with the proceAures of
state law and City ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has
reviewed and recommended that the herein described bids are the
lowest responsible bids for the materials, equipment, supplies
or services as shown in the "Bid Proposals" submitted therefor;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has pprovided in the City Budget
for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of
the materials, equipment, supplies or services approved and
accepted herein; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.36 (f) of the Code of ordinances requires
that the City Council approve all expenditures of more than
$10,000; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.09 of the City Charter requires that
every act of the Council providing for the expenditure of funds
or for the contracting of indebtedness shall be by ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ;)ENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
That the numbered Items in the following numbered bids for
materials, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the "Bid
Proposals" attached hereto, are hereby accepted and approved as
being the lowest responsible bids for such items:
BID ITEM
NUMBER NO. VENDOR AMOUNT
9629 All McKee Auction $17,000.00
9634 All Duncan Equipment 190500.00
9636 All Priester Supply 23,892.00
9637 All Temple, Inc. 11905S2.00
j p SECTION II.
That by the acceptance an approval of the above numbered
$ items of the submitted bids, the City accepts the offer of the
persons submitting the bids for such items and agrees to
purchase the materials, equipment, supplies or services in
' accordance with the terms, specifications, standards quantities
` and for the specified sums cuntained in the Bid Invitations, Bid
Proposals, and related documents.
SECTION III.
That should the City and persons submitting approved and
accepted items and of the submitted bids wish to enter into a
i
.c
PAGE ONE
formal written agreement as a result of the acceptance,
approval, and awarding of the bids, the City Manager or his
designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the
written contract which shall be attached hereto, provided that
the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions,
' specifications, standards, quantities and specified slims
contained in the Did Proposal and related bid documents herein
approved and accepted,
SECTION IV,
That by the acceptance and approval of fhb` above numbereu
items of the submitted bids the City Counci, - reby authorizes
the expenditure of fuiids therefor in the amount and In
accordance with the approved bids or pursuant to a written
contract made pursuant thereto as authorized herein.
SECTION V.
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 15th day of July, 1986,
A 5 EPHE S, R
CITY OF DHNTON, TEXAS
ATTEST;
CHARLOTTE , CITY SECUMAW
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON TEXAS
BY: 1-1 Al~_
v
a
PAGE TWO
i
DATE: July 16, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: BID# 9629 Truck-Tractor Used
RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest evaluated bidder of
McKee Auction in the amount of $17,000.00 for a 1977 model Mack Truck.
SUMMARY: This bid is for the purchase of a previously owned truck-tractor for
use by the Public Works Department. The unit will be utilized to haul heavy
equipment and as a winch truck. We chose to solicate bids for a used truck due
to the extremely high cost of a new comparably equipped truck.
The bids of Graff Chevrolet and Southco Auctioneers were rejected after in-
spection of the trucks offered. Representatives of the Purchasing Department,
Street Department and Vehicle Maintenance Department reviewed these trucks and
felt they were not suitable for the use intended. Cost, age, milage, physical
condition, maintenance and equipment were taken into consideration in our
evaluation.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation sheet
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Street Department and Motor Pool
FISCAL IMPACT: Funas are available in the 1985/1986 Budget
Account # 100-002-0033-9104
Street Department. Capital Equipment
Respectfully submitted,
oy arre
City M ager
Pr ared by,
Name: Tom Shaw
Title: Assistant Purchasing Agent
Approved
o arsh1
le: urchasing Agent
1 I I I I ,
I I I 1 I 1 I
BID I 9629 I HAVISTAR I SOUTHCO SOOTHED 1 MAHAHAY 1 GRAFF 1 LONE MCKEE I
BID TIII.E TRUCK TRACTOR - USED INTERNAIJONALi AUCTIONEERS 1 AUCTIONEERS IINTERNATIUNALI CHEVROLET 1 STAR 1 AUCTION 1
OPENED 6-17-86 2r00 PM I II 1 02 I 1
ACCOUNII I I 1 I I 1
I i 1 1 ,
-----------------------..----------------I-------------I------------- 1------------- 1-------------1-------------1-------------I------------
I 1 01'f 1 ITEM DE5.'IIPI1DN 1 VENDOR I VENDOR 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR I VENDOR I VENDOR I VENDOR
----1-- 1--------- 1------------ 1 - - - -1-------------- -------------1------------- I-------------1-------- •---1
I V I I I 1 I 1 I i
1. 1 I !TRUCK IRACIOR - USED 1 291600 1 23,750 1 14,500 1 NO BID 1 12,870 1 401000 1 11,000 1
1 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 I
1 I 1 i 1 I J 1 I 1
1 I HAKE I INIL 1 PETE I KY 1 I NESI STAR 1 PETE 1 M60. I
1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 ! I
1 1 YEAR MODEL 1 1981 1 1976 I 1973 1 1 1973 1 1981 1 1977 I
1
1 , I I
I I I I I I I 1 1 1
i 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 1
1 1 I I I I I , , I
I 1 V 1 ,
1 1 1 I I 1 1 I
I I I
I I 1 I 1
I ! I 1 I 1 I I 1 1
1 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1
DATE: July 15, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Bid #9634 Used Refuse Truck.
RECOIKNDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the only bidder
Duncan Equipment in the amount of $199500.00.
SUMMARY: This bid is for the purchase of a previously owned front load
refuse truck. The truck will serve as a back-up unit for the single front
load truck we currently have in the fleet. The truck bid is a 1982 Ford
chassis with a 25 cubic yard Pak-nor body. It has been inspected by the
Vehicle !Maintenance Department and the Solid Waste Department, A new unit
simular to this would be approximately $55,000,00.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet
PROGRAMS, DEPARTKATS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Solid Waste Commercial and
Vehicle Maintenance
FISCAL IMPACT: 1985/86 Budget Funds Account # 630-002-0802-9104
Respectfully submitted:
Lloyd V Narrell
City Manager
Pr ared by:
Name: Tom Shaw
Title: Assistant Purchasing Agent
Approved:
a John Marshall
Jitlt; Purchasing Agent
La .C I) !r ','h ,11. 1 1AJINIr~iA I I
1{a r) r!. rr.r-. I1~,l:1) I~J::rIJ~l: Ir,:ln:I I I::I~i_J):r'rll~ra! 1 '
ff'~EJCF';
I
Ir I E"~IY rII'.r'I 1+i IE.lll D01% WN i 1
r::
I . 1 r r tJr.~r::n rtUT IJSSr:. rrrr.JC;I,:. . I'a yritr,
I I ;
13
I I I E:iq f HN I ;
I i I
rEt
DATE: July 15, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Y. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Bid #9636 Capacitors
RECOtMDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest bidder of
PriestAr Supply in the amount of $239892.00, with delivery of item 1 in 16
to 18 weeks and item 2 in 2 to 4 weeks.
SUMMARY: This bid is for the purchase of electric distribution capacitors
and capacitors with racks. They will be utilized in the maintenance and new
construction of the electrical distribution system, Temple Inc. offered a
lower price for item 2 however the delivery of 12 to 14 weeks is unacceptable.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet
PRO&RAMStDEPART11EATS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Electric Distribution
FISCAL IMPACT: 1985/86 Budget Funds Account #611-008-0252-9222-E368
Respectfully submitted:
Lloyd Y Harrell
City Manager
Prepared by:
Name; Tom Shaw
Title: Assistant Purchasing Agent
Approved:
o n Marshall
IM S.- Purchasing Agent
RID 6 9636 1 CUMMINS I TEMPLE 1 PRIESTER 1 GENERAL 1 POLELINE NESCO I GRAYDAR : NELSON 1
RID TITLE capacitors : SUPPLY : I SUPPLY I ELECTRIC I I I 1 ELECTRIC I
OPENED July 3, 1"6 200 1 1 ! 1 1 I I
ACCOUNT:!
I
°--------------••-----..I--------------------- '
1 : DTY I ITEM DESCRIPTION 1 VENDOR I VENDOR 1 VENDOR i VENDOR I VENDOR 1 VENDOR I VENDOR : VENDOR
1
'_--•-----......_I ' -•----...._•I------------- 1 4 :CAPACITORS & RACKS I NO RID 1 3591,00 1 3493,00 i NO BID I NO
RID 1 3600,05 1 NO RID I NO DID i
: I 1 I 1 I I I 1 '
I DELIVERY 1 i 1 16-JON I I 1 17 N I I
I
'
i
2 1 24 !CAPACITORS 1 ! 395199 i 391,00 1 1 ! 401,00 1 1
I I I i i i I I '
2 1 1 DELIVERY ,
2-4 N 1 I 1 ION 1
1 1 I I I i
I 1 ALTERNATE I ! 1 2112,00 ; 1 1 1 1 1 !
I I 1 ! I i I I I '
: 1 ALTERNATE 2 1 : 401100 1 1 1 1 ' I
I I I I I 1 I I 1 ;
! i 1 d. 1 I I I ! ;
I I I I ! 1 I I I
I I F 0 0 1 ` DENTON 1 !
I I ! DENTON 1 1 I
i ~
I 1 I 1 1 !
! 1 I ; 1 I
DATE: July 15, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Bid #9637 500 MCM Power Cable
RECOtKNDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest bidder
meeting specification Temple Inc. in the amount of $19,552.00.
SUMMARY: This bid is for the purchase of 4500ft of 500 MCM power cable.
It is replacement for warehouse stock and will be utilized by the Electric
Distribution Dept.
The alternate cable offered at the lessor price is not compatable with
our stock of connections, terminators and fittings.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet
PROGRAMS DEPARTIUTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Working Capital Inventory and
Electric Distribution.
FISCAL IMPACT: 1985/86 Budget Funds for Electric Utility Warehouse Stock
Account 10-004-0582-8708
Respectfully submitted:
ov~
Lloyd V. arrelI
City Manager
Prepared by:
Name: Tom Saw
Title: Assistant Purchasing Agent
Approved:
i
m John Marshall
r «s; Purchasing Agent
BID Y 9637 1 TEMPLE 1 CUMHINS 1 ORAYBAR 1 PRIES1Ek I WESCO 1 POLELINE 1 NELSON 1
BID TITLE 500 ME" ijWER CABLE I 1NC, I 5UPPLY I ELECTRIC I SUPPLY 1 1 1 ELECTRIC I
OPENED 7-8-86 2100 PIMI 1 I 1 I I 1 1
ACCOUNTO ; I 1 1 T 1 1 1
1 1 I I I 1 1 I
------------;_.--.--------1-------------I----.. _-I-------.......--I----.---_-..__1-,. 1
A I QTY I ITEM DESCRIPTION I VENDOR 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR I VENOM 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR I
°---I---- I-------------------------1-------------1-------------'-
1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 4500' 1500 MN POWER CABLE 4345,00 1 4349.00 1 I I I NO BID I NO BID 1
1 1 TOTAL 1 19552,50 1 19570,00 1 I 1 1 1
I 1 DELIVERY 1 STOCK 1 SION 1 1 I 1 I 1
1 I MANPACTURE I ANACONDA I ANACONDA I I I 1 I 1
I 1 I I
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
' I
' 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
' I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 I ALTERNATE 500 MCM 1 3685.00 1 3640100 1 3608.92 1 3685.00 1 3612.00 1 1 I
1 I TOTAL 1 16582.50 1 16380100 1 16240,14 1 16582.50 1 16254.60 1 1 1
1 1 DELIVERY 1 10-20 DAY 1 3 DAY I STOCK 1 14 DAY i 5 DAY 1 1
I 1 MANFACTURE 1 ROME I ROME I kDME I ROME 1 GENERAL 1 I 1
I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i '
I I I I I 1 I 1 1 1
J923L
NO.
AN ORDINANCE ACCBPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE
AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING
FOR THR EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated
competitive bids for the construction of public works or
improvements in accordance with the procedures of state law and
City ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the city Manager or a designated employee has
received and recommended that the herein described bids are the
lowest responsible bids for the construction of the public works
or improvements described in the bid invitation, bid proposals
and plans and specifications therefore; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.36 (f) of the Code of Ordinances requires
that the City Council approve all expenditures of more than
$10,000; and
WHBREAS, Section 2.09 of the City Charter requires that
every act of the Council providing for the oxpenditure of funds
or for the contracting of indebtedness shall be by ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1.
That the following competitive bids for the construction of
public works or improvements, as described in the "Bid Invita-
tions", "Bid Proposals" or plans and specifications attached
herato arm hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest
responsible bids:
BID NUMBER CONTRACTOR AMOUNT
9628 Dickerson Construction $1090273.05
SECTION II.
That the acceptance and approval of the above competitive
bids shall not constitute a contract between, the City and the
person submitting the bid for construction of such public works
or Improvements herein accepted and approved until such person
shall comply with all requirements specifiaJ in the Notice to
Bidders including the timely execution of a written contract and
furnishing of performance and payment bonds, after notification
of the award of the bid.
SECTION III.
That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all
necessary written contracts for the performance of the
construction of the public works or improvements in accordance
with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such
contracts are made in accordance with the Notice to Bidders and
PAGE ONE
i
i
i
I `
i
l
Bid Proposals, and documents relating thereto specifying the
terms, conditions plans and specifications, standards,
quantities and specified suns contained therein.
' SECTION IV.
That upon acceptance and approval of the above competitive
bids and the execution of contracts for the public works and
improvements as authorized herein, the City Council hereby
authorizes the expenditure of funds in the manner and in the
amount as specified in such approved bids and authorized
contracts executed pursuant thereto.
SECTION V#
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and approval.
i
PASSED AND APPROVED this the ISth day of July, 1986.
RAY STEPHENSp MAYOR
CITY, OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
MARLOTTE MEN, CITY SECRETXRY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
E
} BY:
i
r PAGE TWO
P: I
art, e'
y July 15, 1986
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS ON THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJBCT:
Consider Bid Opening, Bid #9628, McKinney Street Sewer Line.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of June 25, 1986,
recommended to the City Council approval of the lowest bid of
Dickerson Construction Co,, Celina, Texas, in the amount of
$1090273,05,
SUMMARY:
The bids were opened June 170 1986, and the results are as follows:
Dickerson Constn,, Celina, Tx 109,273.05
LE Delekta, Inc,$ Plano, Tx 1120331.50
Calvert Paving, Denton, Tx 1180066,00
Idela Constn., Bedford, Tx 11660767000
Atkin Bros. Constn, Grand Prairie, Tx 1990708,00
C$W Utility, Desoto, Tx t2029677.00
The Staff recommends approval of the lowest bid of Dickerson
Construction in the amount of $109,273.05.
BACKGROUND:
This is an approved FY 86 CIP project to install approximately 3900
LF of 10" Sewer Line on McKinney Street from Mack Place to Loop
288, This area is presently without sewer and the individual houses
are presently on septic, tanks. Part of the cost of installing the
line will be realized from pro rata reimbursement from customer
tie-ins onto this line.
PROGRAMS, DEl'ARTMhNTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
City of Denton Municipal Utilities, Legal Department, Purchasing
Department, Contractor, City Engineer, and Citizens.
441OU:1
t'~ e-WVTF t. r, tea. r; IRP
P-1-
FISCAL IMPACT
FY 86- Budgeted CIP Amount $180,000.00
Recommended Award of Lowest Bid
(Dickerson Construction) $109,273.05
Source of Funds: Sewer Bonds 624-008-0471-9114
Note: It may be noted that the lowest bid is very competitive
with respect to the budgeted estimate.
Prepared by: Respectfully submitted,
e~. ~-P*4.-,)
av am, Asst. rector oy a re
Civil Engineer city anager.
APPROVED:
Re be Nelson
Director of Utilities
ATTACHMENT I Bid Tabulation
II Location Map
III Minutes PUB Meeting of 6/2S/86
i
4410U:Z
a v ti I t; t
n to .t.U
BID i QQ WD~ W ~11n~
OPEN b -yam ~rO d' ~j V . (It lJ
ACCOUNT # G At
# QTY.l ITER DEPRIPTION VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR IVEWDOR VENDOR VENDOR
a o
1~ l ti'8 ebC 16b'1b X6'1 10
- 101 S
r
T
y
ti
1 I• ~
A
ti 1
1 L\
W
Yrr ~1 ~ ti ti
04
J
ANN@
Opt
• _ Imo, ~,/p'll~
OLI ~r
WOO
ANIL_
,
i
PROJECT LOCATI
tt
l Jl 11 1, r I'r~ two 01 J
C C~
.r„ft
' "a ' lo" Sankt SQ,►~tr
1
EXCERPT FROM
MINUTES- PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
June 25, 1986
4. CONSIDER BID OPENING -BID 09628, MCKINNBY STREET SEWER LINE._
Nelson explained that the Utilities Staff recommends
approval of the lowest bid of Dickerson Construction Co.,
Celina, Texas, in the amount of $109,273.05
Accordingly, the bids were opened June 17, 1986, and the
results are as follows:
Dickerson Constn., Celina, Tx 1099273.05
LE Delekta, Inc., Plano, Tx 1129331.50
Calvert Paving, Denton, Tx 11180066.00
Idela Constn., Bedford, Tx 1660767.00
Atkin Bros. Constn. Grand Prairie, Tx 199,708.00
COW Utility, Desoto, Tx $202,677.00
This is an approved FY 86 CIP project to install approxi-
mately 3900 LF of 10" Sewer Line on McKinney Street from
Mack place to Loop 288. This area is presently without
sewer and the individual houses are presently on septic
tanks. Part of the cost of installing the line will be
realized from pro rata reimbursement from customer tie-ins
onto this line.
Chairman Laney motion to approve the subject bid opening.
Thompson second. All ayes, no nays, motion carried
unanimously.
4411U:1
„4'~a
912SL
NO.
AN ORDNANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENUITURE OF FUNDS FOR
EMERGENCY PURCHASES OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR
SERVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW
EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
WHEREAS, state law and ordinance require that certain
contracts requiring an expenditure or payment by the City in an
amount exceeding $10,000 be by competitive bids, except in the
case of public calamity where it becomes necessary to act at
once to appropriate money to relieve the necessity of the
citizens, or to preserve the property of the city, or it is
necessary to protect the public health of the citizens of the
cityy or in case of unforeseen damage to public property,
mach~nery or equipment; and
WHEREAS, Section 2,36 (f) of the Code of Ordinances requires
that the City Council approve all expenditures of more than
$10,000; and
WHEREAS, Section 2,09 of the City Charter requires that
every act of the council providing for the expenditure of funds
or for the contracting of indebtedness shall be by ordinance;
s NOW9 THEkEFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
r
SECTION I.
That the U ty Council hereby determines that there is a
public calamity that rakes it necessary to act at once to
appropriate money to relieve the necessity of the citizens, or
to preserve the property of the city, or to protect the public
health of the citizens of the city, or to provide for unforseen
damage to public ,property, machinery or equipment, and by reason
thereof, the fallowing emergency purchases of materials,
equipment, supplies or services, as described in the "Purchase
Orders" attached hereto, are hereby approved:
~j PURCHASE
f ORDER NUMBEil VENDOR AMOUNT "
73901 Richard R. McAlpin 1S,080,22
74205 North Texas Savings & Loan 14,439.08
SECTION II.
That because of such emergency, the City Manager or
designated employee is hereby authorized to purchase the
materials, equipment, supplies or services as described in the
attached Purchase Orders and to make payment thereforo in the
amounts therein stated, such emergency purchases being in
accordance with the provisions of state lax exempting such
purchases by the City frog the requirements of competitive bids.
SECTION III.
That this ordinance shall become effective immedi►itely upon
its passage and approval.
~t
f
f
PASSED AND APPROVED this thu IStn Jay of July, 1b46.
f
UT-MMS, 1• 0
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
r
I
CHARLOTTE XMBN'CITY SECRETARY
{ CITY OF DENTON,oTEXAS
i
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM,
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
K
PAGE TWO
DATE: July 15, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: P.O.# 73901 BID#9609 CITY STREET PARTICIPATION RYAN ROAD
$15,080.22
RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this Purchase Order to Mr. Richard R. ;IcAlpin for
Murphy & Rochester for the amount of $15,080.22 for Street Participation Ryan
Road for extra width and depth as shown on the attached memorandum.
S RY: The unit prices were obtained from the above bid approved
recently by the City Council. The quantities are as those estimated for the
project. Payment will be made on the actual units as shown when the project
is completed by our inspectors. The use of the aforementioned bid is in
accordance with our Code and Procedures.
BACKGROUND: Copy of Purchase Order #73901
Participation Memorandum
Memorandum from Jerry Clark
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Street Department
FISCAL IMPACT: Account # 100-002.0033-9105
Respect•rully submitted:
Lloyd V Harrell
City Manager
Prepared by:
,O
me o n J. Marshall, .P.M.
itle: Purchasing Agent
Approved:
John J. Marshall, CC P.M.
Tit)#: Purchasing Agent
901.8 TEXAS STREET PURCHASE ORDER DENTON, TX 76201
F I P, 0. NUMBER DATE /VENDOR NO. DOCUMENT TYP
73901 06/27/86 C24
14CA39000
VENDOR SHIP TO:
NRe RICHARD A* MCALPIN CITY OF DENTON - STREETS DEPT*
NUAPHY.a~.90CHESTBR CONFIRMA7ION LNLY
8900"ZOUGLAS AVE SUITE 800: 00 NOT DUPLICATE
AALLAS r TX 75225
416*NOTE TKic ASE QAQ9R SUPERSEDES PeQ*& 7 901 _ 3ENT 06-06-86
ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER UNITS NUMBER DESCRIPTION BID NO. LINE AMOUNT
01 100 002 0033 91 05 1066 SY 'PAEPAJRATION 6 LIME STASILIZ 1 *830092
02,100-402; 0033 .9105, 1006 SY .60 'H W A C ASPHALT yr7S8.2C
U3 1410. 802:.0033.9105 2155,S Y I" H M -A C 3.441.30
REVISED
fhe City of Denton, Texas is tax exempt -House Bill No. 20, TOTAL FOR P*0* 150060422
teference P, 0. Number on all B/L, Shipments and Invoices, f11 1 l
Aipments are F, 0, B. City of Denton, or as Indicated. By _ l..~i I
Send Invoices TO: Direct Inquiries io:
City of Denton, Accounts Payable John J, Marshall, C. P. M, Purchasing Agent
215 E, McKinney St., Denton, TX 76201 Tom D. Shaw, C. P. M. Asst, Purchasing Agent
for as Indicated on Purchase Order) 817/566.8311 D/FW Metro 267.0042
The City of Denton is an equal opportunity employer
,:`I a
1r 1.
,N A.
MEMORANDUM
DATE; June 24, 1986
TO: City Council
FROM: John J. Marshall, C.P,M. Purchasing Agent
SUBJECT: City Participation RYAN ROAD
1. BID# 9609 Stewart/PAisley Paving/Drainage
2. P.O.# 93901 Richard R. McAlpin Murphy & Rochester
3. Account# 100-002-0033-9105
4. Approved by Council 7-1-86
5. Cost of City Participation as per Bid
1006 S.Y. Preparation with 18M Lime Per S,Y. $ 1,830.92
1006 S.Y. 6" HMAC Asphalt @ 9,70 9,758.20
2155 S.Y. i" HMAC Asphalt @ 1.62 31491.10
TOTAL $15,080.22
i
: c:
i
till's
WrY of nENTON, TEXAS WIUNICMAL BUILDING / 215 E. MCKINNEY ST. / DENTON, TEXAS 78201
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 19, 1986
TO: John Marshall, Purchasing
FROM: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
SUBJECI': City participation oil Ryan Road
Please find enclosed a letter from Bill Cneek of Jagoe Public
with quantities and prices for City participation on Ryan
Road. The developer and his address for future mailing with
the participation check is listed on the letter.
We have reviewed the quantities and found them to be correct.
Call if questions arise when you submit this for city Council
approval of participation.
Jer,r Clar
G i t ,Engyjl' ~P E r
cc: James Corbin
#0387E
C; ('r iii- Ui: JTp+
P_iJ~;C,lasif OJT.
r
8171568.8200 D/FW METRO 434.2520
ii
A
JAGOE-PUBLIC COMPANY
GENERAL OFFICES t~G
P. 0. Box M
DENTON. TEXAS 74202 ~0
A
May 14, 1986 1
r
Mr. Richard R. McAlpin ,~•~y
Murphay & Rochester
8300 Douglas Avenue
Suite 800
Dallas, Texas 75225
Dear Richard,
I talked with the engineering department today, with the City of
Denton, and they instructed me to revise the City participation
figures eliminating the transition on Ryan Road.
Below are the revised quantities and prices for the City of
Denton's participation on their part of Ryan Road:
City Participation: 7 foot by 1293.43 L.F.
Lime and Preparation (1811) 1,006 S.Y. @ $2.25 $ 29263.50
6" HMAC 1,006 S.Y. @ $10.45 10,512.70
1 HMAC 2155 S.Y. @ $ 1.70 3,663.50
Total $169439.70
Since, eventually, this half street will become a divided blvd.,
we propose to put the modified crown in the middle.
Sincer y y rs
Bill Cheek
V-pres.-Finance
Copy to: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
1
DATE: July 150 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Y. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: P.O. #74205 Street Participation Kings Row b Hannah Estates
RECOMWADATION: We recommend this participation be approved to North Texas
Savings for Street participation on Kings Row in Hannah Estates for.the
extra width and depth as per our Bid #9609 to determine the unit price for
the estimated total of $14,439.08. This recommendation is according to
present participation ordinance.
SUMMARY: This is for the extra width and depth of City street (Kings Row).
The cost per square yard has been determined by a recent bid and a calculated
total from their estimates, we will be paying from the actual engineering
field notes when completed, This is in accordinance with our present
participation Article III 4.03 Denton Code and City of Denton procedures.
BACKGROUND: pemo: showing details, Memo: from Jerry Clark, Purchase
Order #74205
PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Streets
FISCAL IMPACT: 1985/86 Budget Funds Account #100-002-0033-9105
Respectfully submitted:
Z.1 &4
-,4'A,,0 Al 4611w,1401
Lloyd Y. arrell
City Manager
Prepared by:
a
Atl. #po'hh ars hll
0
ha sing Agent
.Approved:
: Po
Marshall
F; ; Purchasing Agent
901.6 TEXAS STREET PUMNA$E ORt?E011 DENTON, TX 76201
P. 0. NUMBER PATE/ VENDOR NO. DOCUMENT TYP,
74E05 06/E'V " $24 a
VENDOR SHIP TO.
NORTH,'TEXAS -SAVINGS '.L LOAN 'CITY, Or DZNTONe STREET DEPT
P.0•' sax 69 CENTRAL. RECEIVING
D&NQNTe, TXe 76202; 901-E, 7F,XAS- STREET
DENtQN9; 7X 76201
TEM ACCOUNT NUMBER UNITS NUMBER DESCRIPTION B{D NO, LINE AMOUNT
01 100 002.'00'33 9105 1 STREET PARTICIPATION FOR 149439.06
Oz•.iaO•.a02..~a33..9105.. K,IJb "irP j%,,,AND.. HANNAH, ESTATES
he City of Denton, Texas is tax exempt - House Bill No. 20, t T F P.O. 14,439.0E
eference P. 0. Number on all B /L, Shipments and Invoices.
'aipments are F. 0. B. City of'Denton, or as indicated.
Send Invoices T0; Direct Inquiries TO:
City of Denton, Accounts Payable John J, Marshall, C. P, M. Purchasing Agent
215, E. McKinney St,, Denton, TX 76201 Tom D, Shaw, C. P. M. Asst, Purchasing Agent
for as Indicated on Purchase Order) 817/5668311 D/FW Metro 267.0042
The City of Denton is an equal opportunity employer
Ip v?\\
1 1 i
5
C.A J~r vI ~.1 ~11r f.:l ~~~~'~:i ~r_. ' . J~j•7 r "N TENA") ?6207
MEMO_RAN0UM
DATE: 6/25/86
TO: Jr:rry Clark, City Engineer
FROM. John Marshall, P.A.
SUBJECT: City Participation Kings Row- Hannah Estates III
Oversize Streets
1, Bid # 9609
2. P.O. # 74205
3. Account # 100-002-0033-9105
4. Approved by Council July 1, 1986
5. Cost of City Participation as per P.O.
953 sy Lime preparation w/22N sy @ 1.98 1,886.94
953 sy 6" H M A C asphalt @ 9.70 sy 90244.10
2042 sy 1" H M A C asphalt @ 1.62 sy 31308.04
TOTAL 149439.08
CITY of DENTON, rff"S MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 218 E. MCKINNEY ST. 1 DENTON, TEXAS 78201
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 11, 1986
'1'0: John Marshall, Purchasing Agent
FROM: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
SUBJECT: City participation - Kings Row - in conjunction with
Hannah Estates III
1'he Engineering Division has reviewed the enclosed
participation request from North Texas Savings and Loan
regarding Kings Row,
The work on Kings Row is being done in conjunction with Hannah
Estates Phase III. We find the quantities to be accurate and
the prices seem in line with the existing public bid on tile.
Please review the prices to see that you agree.
Call if questions arise.
Je C a
City Eng veer
is
#0400E
I'
817158&8200 D/FW METRO 434.2520
. 1T.
DATE: 07/15/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO$ Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECTS ADOP'T'ION OF ORDINANCE FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT (0-190)
RECOMMENDATION:
i
The City Council approved S-190 at its meeting of July 1, 1986.
SUMMARY:
This is a request for a specific use permit for a day care center in
a single family (SP-7) area. The property is located east of Audra
Lane and north of Paisley Street.
BACKGROUND:
The intensity is approximately 28 over the standard for this low
intensity area but a day care center limited to 40 children could be
a valuable addition to this rapidly developing single family area.
PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Not applicable.
FIOCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact on the general fund.
Respectfully submitted:
Lloyd Ha ells
Prepared bys City Ma ger
1 Qeutj
Denise Spivey
Urban Planner
Appr
Jeff Mey
Director of Planning
and Development
1830g/3
1493c
NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A DAY CARE
• CENTER; PROVIDING FOR THE kEFERENCING OF SUCH USE ON THE ZONING
MAP OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AS SAME WAS ADOPTED AS AN
APPENDIX TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE C;TY OF DENTON, TEXAS,
BY ORDINANCE NO. 69.11 AND AS SAID MAP APPLIES TO APPROXIMATELY
0.84 ACRES N THE CITY , TEXAS.
BEING LOCATEDP ONATHE IEAST SIDE OFAAUDRA uLANE,O NORTHTOf PAISLEY
STREET; PROVIDING FOR A MAXIMUM PENALTY OF $1,000.00 FOR
VIOLATIONS THEW PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
DECLARING AN EKtBLiiVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS;
SECTION 1.
That the Zoning Classification and Use designation of the
property located on the east side of Audra Lane, north of
Paisley Street, as is more particularly shown in Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which is
classified as a Single-Family 11SF-7" zoning district under the
comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, is
hereby granted for the use of such property a specific use
permit for a day care center, subject to the following
conditions and resrrictions;
. 1. That the property shall be developed anL used in
accordance with the site plan shown in Exhibit "A",
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
2. The day care center shall not accommodate more than
forty (40) children at any one time,
3. A permanently maintained six foot (61) solid fence
shall be erected along the north, south and east
property lines of the site.
4. No detached advertising signs shall be permitted on
the property.
SECTION II.
The Zoning Map of the City of Denton, Texas, adopted the
14th day of January, 1969, as an Appendix to rho Code of
Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas under Ordinance No,
69.14 shall be referenced to show the property herein described
being granted a specific use permit for the use approved herein.
SECTION III,
That the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas hereby
finds that such use is In accordance with a comprehensive plan
for the purpose of promoting the general welfare of the City of
Denton, Texas, and with reasonable consideration, among other
things for the character of the district and for its peculiar
suitability for particular uses, and with a view to conserving
the value of the buildings, protecting human lives, and
encouraginq the most appropriate uses of land for the maximum
benefit to the City of Denton, Texas, and its citizens.
1;. V
SECTION IV.
Any person who shall violate a provision of this ordinance,
or fails to comply therewith or with any of the requirements
thereof, or of a permit or certificate issued thereunder, shall
be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding
one Thousand Dollars (;1,000,00). Each such person shall be
deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or
portion thereof during which any violation of this ordinance is
committed, or continued, and upon conviction of any such
violations such person shall be punished within the limits above,
SECTION V.
That if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause,
phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any
person or circumstance is held invalid by any court of competent
jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of
the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have enacted
such remaining portions despite any such Invalidity.
SECTION VI,
That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14)
days from th^ date of its passage, and the City Secretary is
hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be
published twice in the Denton Record -Chronicle, the official
newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of
• the date of its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1986.
MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
,
CHARLOTTE ALEIN CITY SEMMTM
CITY OF DENTON,tTEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADMIT DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY: { h
S•190/Page 1
t
,'I
I
~ ~ I I +
r
/
-rMgJIMYY. fy
%ft 2L ft.
Vl / / Ir.lr Y~rr r~ N
MA H
_ n
"yr
wqww
r
my l.AM G
~►r
Mew
i , I + , - I - (ql
; 1 »1 kU I I I
JAY D*AJTAZ
'AlWrLM
t~uwgr ro•LU 0.r► Advo a3JT/~1, fWA$ 11dM
wwr n«.q..y 41~
Ovum. .
kaM
• MrHp..MI„ y
i
~,,e+~ y'.-'rFa eR•~`v-' , r...::. r# :i y..- •'R~w'sue ,i.-" ~
CITY SWCIL WORT E RMAT
(p. G.r ►
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Adoption of an ordinance and service plan annexing approximately
66.42 acres situated in the Moreau Forrest Survey, Abstract 417, and
beginning adjacent and east of G eesling Road► south of U.S. Highway
380 East, and west of Trinity Road (A-36)
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and zoning Coe+mission recommended approval at its
meeting of May 27, 1986.
SUMMARY:
Miller of T o:as, Inc., has requested annexation of approximately 60
acres and the balance of the proposal is being considered for
involuntary annexation by the City of Denton. The involuntary
portion of the request will fill in gaps between Miller of Texas
property and an existing annexation strip along Highway 380E. The
purpose of the Miller of Texas request is to seek zoning in
conjunction with the Lakeview develop'aent plan.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council instructed staff to ►,egin the annexation process
for the Miller of Texas property and t) e involuntary portion at its
meeting of February 18, 1986.
PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Several mobile home units in the Capricorn Mobile Ham* Park are
included in the involuntary portion of the proposed annexation.
Approximately 5-8 residences and 10 total structures are located
within the proposed annexation] these structures are clustered
around the intersection of Trinity Road and Highway 380 east.
There are no businesses or dwellings on Miller of Texas property.
Approximately 1,146.75 feet of the west side of Trinity Road and
approximately 300 feet of the east side of Geesling Road is included
in the area of proposed annexation.
July 18, 1986
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT;
Undetermined
Respectfully submitted;
Prepared ,&~Jby: SS'' y
z% CO A.*^ Lloyd H e11
ag
Dd d Ellison A4-- City Ma ar
Senior Planner
App
Jeff M
Director of Planning
and Development
1551a
NO.
•
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING A TRACT OF LAND CONTIGUOUS AND ADJACENT TO
THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS; BEING ALL THAT LOT, TRACT OR PARCEL
OF LAND CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 3.70 ACRES OF LAND LYING AND
BEING SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF DENTON, STATE OF TEXAS AND BEING
PART OF THE MOREAU FORREST SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 417; DENTON
COUNTY, TEXAS; CLASSIFYING THE SAME AS AGRICULTURAL "A" DISTRICT
PROPERTY; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, a request for annexation for the property described
In Exhibit "A", a copy of which is attached hereto and incor-
porated by reference herein, was introduced at a regular meeting
of the City Council of the City of Dorton, Texas, on the
petition of Miller of Texas and the City of Denton; and
WHEREAS, an opportunity wal, afforded, at a publ!., hearing
held for that purpose on the - day of , 1986 in
the Council Chambers for all Interested peraons ro s ate their
views and present ovidence bearing upon the annexation provided
by this ordinance; and
WHEREAS, an opportunity was fforded, at a public hearing
held for that purpose on the .7072 day of , 1986 in
E the Council Chambers for all'Interested person to state their
views and present evidence bearing upon the annexation provided
b by this ordinance; and
f WHEREAS, this ordinance has been published in full at least
one time in the official newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas,
prior to its effective date, and after the public hearings;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1.
That the tract of land described in said Exhibit "P." be, and
the same is hereby annexed to the City of Denton, Texas, and the
same is made hereby a part of said City and the land and the
present and future Inhabitants thereof shall be entitled to all
the rights and privileges of other citizens of said City and
shall be bound by the acts and ordinances of said City now in
effect or which may hereafter be enacted and the property
situated therein shall be subject to and shall, bear its prorate
part of the taxes levied by the City.
SECTION II.
The property described In Exhibit "A" is hereby classified
as Agricultural "A" District and shall so appear on the official
zoning map of the City of Denton, Texas, which map is hereby
amended accordingly.
SECTION III.
Should any section or part of this ordinance be held uncon-
stitutional, illegal or Invalid, or the application thereof
A-36/MILLER OF TEXAS/PAGE ONLY
i
-1 ~17
•1
ineffective or inapplicable as to any territory, such unconsti-
tutionality, illegality, lnvaliiity or ineffectiveness of such
section or part shall in no wise affect, impair or invalidate
the remaining portion or portions thereof, but as to such
remaining portion or portions, the some shall be and remain in
full force and effect, and should this ordinance for any reason
be ineffective as to any part of thb area hereby annexed to the
City of Denton, such ineffectiveness of this ordinance as to any
such part or parts of any such area shall not affect the
effectiveness of this ordinance as to all of the remainder of
such area, and the City Council hereby declares it to be its
purpose to annex to the City of Denton every part of the area
described in said Exhibit "A" of this ordinance, regardless of
whether any other part of such described area is hereby
effectively annexed to the City. Provided, further, that if
there is included within the general description of territory
set out in Section I of this Ordinance to be hereby annexed to
the City of Denton any lands or area which are presently part of
and included within the limits of the City of Denton, or which
are presently part of and included within the limits of any
other City, Town or Village, or which are not within the City of
Denton's jurisdiction to annex, the same is hereby excluded and
excepted from the territory to be hereby annexed a3 fully as if
such excluded and excepted area were expressly described herein.
SECTION IV.
This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its
passage.
Introduced before the City Council on the day of
~N At. , 1986.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council on the day of
1986.
MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CURL 2A LENO
CITY SECRET)MY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCN, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY: ~SIE/.L11fl.iL(!L[~- u
A-36/MILLER Of TEXAS/PAGE TWO
i
.
EXHIBIT "A"
TRACT A
All that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being
situated in the Moreau Forrest Survey, Abstract 4179 Denton
• County, Texas, being part of a tract conveyed by deed to Ralph
T. Dullard and recorded in Volume 1511, Page 948 of the Deed
Records, Denton County, Texas (being alto part of Lot 6 and Lot
7, Block A of the subdivision of said Moreau Forrest Survey
according to the plat recorded in Volume 50, Page 236, Deed
Records) and more fully described as follows;
BEGINNING for the Southeast corner of Tract A described herein
at a point in the present city limits as described in Ordinance
85.110 same being in the center of a North - South public road
known as Trinity Road;
THENCE South 890 SS' 22" West along said present city limits a
distance of 1388.89 feet to a point for corner, said point bein
the Southwest corner of said Lot 7 and th; Southeast corner of
said Lot 6;
THENCE North along the present city limits as established by
ordinance 84-98 same being the East boundary line of said Lot 6
and the West boundary line of said Lot 7, a distance of 886.18
feet to a point for corner said point lying in the present city
limits as established by ordinanre 69-40, said point also lying
350 feet South of and perpendicular to the center line of U.S.
380;
THENCE North 790 171 11" East along said present city limits,
350 feet South of and parallel to the center line of U.S. 180, a
distance of 11411,63 feet to a point for corner In the center of
Trinity Road;
THENCE South 000 OS' 36" East along the center line of said road
a distance of 10146.73 feet to the place of beginning and
containing 31.39 acres of land.
TRACT B
All that tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in the
Moreau Forrest Survey, Abstract 417, Denton County, Texas, being
part of a tract conveyed by deed to Ralph T. Bullard, recorded.
in Volume 15210 Page 948 of the Deed Records, Denton County,
Texas (being also part of Lot 6, Block A of the subdivision of
said Moreau Forrest Survey according to the plat recorded iu
Volume S0, Page 236, Deed Records) and being more fully
described as follows;
COKMENCING at a point in the present city limits as established
by Ordinance 94-98 said point also being the Southeast corner of
said Lot 6;
THENCE North 890 52' 11" West a distance of 500.0 feet to the
point of beginning, said point also lying in the present city
limits as established by Ordinance 84-98;
THENCE North 890 S2' 11" West along the present city limits as
established by Ordinance 85-210 some being the South boundary
line of the above mentioned Lot 6, a distance of 889.2 feet to a
point for corner;
A-36/1WILLER OF TEXAS/PAGE 1 of 3
THENCE North 000 07, 49" Esst, a distance of 627.84 feet to a
point for corner, said point lying in the present city limits as
established by Ordinance 69-40, said point also lying 350 feet
South of and perpendicular to the center line of U.S. 380;
THENCE North 790 18' OS" East along said present city limits 3S0
feet South of and parallel to the center line of U.S. 380 a
distance of 903.48 feet to a point for corner, said point lying
in the present city limits as established by Ordinance 84-98;
THENCE South along said present city limits a distance of 797.58
feet to the place of beginning and containing 14.54 acres of
land,
TRACT C
All that tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in the
Moreau Forrest Survey, Abstract 417, Denton County, Texas, being
part of Lot S and Lot 6, Block A of the subdivision of said
Moreau Forrest Survey according to the plat recorded in Volume
S0, Page 2360 Deed Records, and more fully described as. follows:
BEGINNING for the Southwest corner of Tract C described herein
at a point in the present city limits as established in
Ordinance 86-120 said point also being the Southwest corner of
said Lot 5;
THENCE North 1° 40' East alon said present city limits, same
being the West boundary line ofd said Lot 5, a distance of 339.51
feet to a point for corner, said point lying in the present city
limits as established by Ordinance 69-40, said point also lying
350 feet South of and perpendicular to the center line of U.S.
380;
THENCE North 750 44' 54" East (by Ordinance, North 790 18' 18"
East) along the present city limits 350 feet South and parallel
to the center line of U.S. 380, passing at 1,413.71 feet the
east boundary line of Lot S, same being the West boundary line
of said Lot 6 and continuing for a total distance of 10469.75
feet to a point for corner;
THENCE South 000 071 49" West, a distance of 627,84 feet to a
point for corner, said point lying in the present city limits as
established by Ordinance 85-210, same being the South boundary
line of said Lot 6;
THENCE North 89° S2' 11'' West along said present city limits, a
distance of 55 feet, more or less, to a point for a corner, said
point being the Southwest corner of said Lot 6, same being the
Southeast corner of said Lot S;
THENCE South 860 66' S9" West along the present city limits as
established by Ordinance 86-12 same being the South boundary
line of said Lot S, a distance of 1,379,92 feet to the place of
beginning and containing IS.79 acres of lr.nd.
TRACT D
All that curtain tract or parcel of land lying and being
situated in the )Moreau Forrest Survey, Abstract 417, Denton
County, Texas, being part of Lot 4, Black A of the subdivision
or Said survey according to the plat recorded in Volume S0, Page
236, Deed Records and more fully described as follows.,
A-36/MILLER OF TEXAS/PAGE 2 of 3
r
. BEGINNING at a point in the present city limits as established
in Ordinance 86.22, sold point also being the Southwest corner
of said Lot 4, same being the Northwest corner of Lot 10;
THENCE South 20 4S' Si" East along the present city limits as
established by Ordinance 86-220 same being the West boundary
line of said Lot 10 and the last boundary line of a North -
South public road known as Geesling Road, a distance of 214.44
feet to a point for corner;
THENCE South 870 14' 09" West to a point for corner, said point
lying in the center line of said road, said point also lying 660
feet South of and perpendicular to the center line of U.S. 380
and in the present city limits as established by Ordinance 6S-43
i;
THENCE North 20 45' S1" West along the center line of Geesling
Road and said present city limits a distance of 313.0 feet to a
point for corner, said point lying in the present city limits as
established by Ordinance 69-400 said point also lying 3SO feet
South of and perpendicular to the center line of U.S. 380;
THENCE North 790 18' 05" Beat along said city limits to a point,
said point lyiny in the last boundary line of Geeslin* Road,
said point also lying in the West boundary line of said Lot 4;
THENCE North 79° 18' OS" East along said present city limits 3SO
feet South of and parallel to the center line of U.S. 380 a
distance of 95$.84 feet to a point for corner, said point lying
in the present city limits as established by Ordinance 86-~2;
THENCE South 10 03' 40" East Along said present city limits a
distance of 227.90 feet to a point for corner, sold point lying
In the present city limits as established by Ordinance 86.229
same being in the South boundary line of said Lot 4;
THENCE South 876 04' 1S" West along said lines a distance of
939.92 feet to the place of beginning and containing 3.70 acres
of land.
A-36/MILLER OF TEXAS/PAGE 3 of 3
,x
PLAN OF SERVICE FOR ANNEXED AREA,---CITY OF DENTON. TEXAS
WHEREAS, Article 970a as amended 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 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 proposed
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 equip-
ment of the fire fighting force, will be provided
on the effective date of annexation.
C. Water
(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 *ith 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
data of annexation,
i<
Service Plan
Annexed Areas
Page two
F. Streets
(1) Emergency maintenance of streets (repair of hazardous
chuckholes, measurer; 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 effec4*.ive
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.
8ervice Plan
7' 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.
i6 4 r
_ •-~,'e w-~~~ rte, ~ ~ ~
`~r,r
HAP c ~
M rt1~s LFistd !t w-'
Y ti -
_
r r _
r. r ~w r 1
_ - A
• v 4.5
34b r -
`t am" ~
i , ,1-
low -
288 1 _
wry , , •
h ` r••
.F4S 426 '
h M:.
WT , '7
AMIrATIOtt S
CHEptJ
G1S
April 7, 1986 Submit City Council agenda item
ro'Apeil'9, 1986 Submit agenda back-up
* r April is, 1986 City Council sets date, time and place
for public heating
✓ April 160 1986 Notice to Denton Record Chronicle
Apr i1 2S, 1986 Publish notice and mailout
April 28, 1986 Submit City Council agenda Item
d/April 30. 1986 Submit agenda back-up
* May 6. 1986 City council holds first public hearing
at regular meeting
may 7, 1906 Notice to Denton Record Chronicle
may 9, 1986 Publish notice and mailout
May 12, 1986 Submit City Council agenda
May 14, 1986 Submit agenda back-up
✓May U, 1986 Planning & Zoning Commision makes
recommendation on proposed annexation
* ✓May 20, 1986 City Council holds second public
hearing at regular meeting
May 26, 1986 Submit City Council agenda item
L~Aay 28, 1986 Submit agenda bark-up
" June 3, 1986 City Council institutes annexation
proceedings at regular meeting
✓ June 54 1986 Ordinawu,e to Denton Record Chronicle
✓June 8, 1986 Publish ordinance 17
Ldtf t~0~, ',986 Submit City Council agenda item
duly 40 1986 Submit City Council agenda back-up
* July 4 1986 Final action by city council at regular
meeting
* Denotes action by the City Council
09648
P i Z Minutes
May 27, 1906
Page 8
said that water and sewer rates will be affected by the
new plants. He said that the overall consensus is to
leave rates as is and adjust when necessary.
Mr. Claiborne asked about the Lewisville and Ray Roberts
pro acts. Mr. Laney stated that thtty are pursuing these
protects to keep their license alive. He added that there
is not enough money to do them right now.
Mr. Escue asked about the current rates. Mr. Laney stated
that they were holding their own in regards to the
competition. He said that the competition rates will be
adjttsto within the same range as the City of Denton.
DECISION: Mr. Escue moved to recommend appproval of Denton
Municipal Utilities Capital Improvement Plan for fiscal
years 1987-1981. Seconded by Mr. Pearson and unanimously
carried (6-0).
Mr. Pearson left the meeting.
B. EXPANSION OF MUNICIPAL AIRPURT HIGH INTENSITY ARkA.
STAFF REPURT: Ms. Spivey stated that the current high
intensity line western bounder Y1 runs down the middle of
the runway. S{~t, said that staff has several cases in the
office and have a question in how to handle them in regards
to policy. She said that staff has conferred with the
Planning and Zoning Commission and Airport Advisory board
to establish an interim land use policy. She said that a
mutual agreement was reached that the line should be moved
westward from the current line to the Dry Fork Branch of
the Hickory Creek. She said that the light industrial
would be westward to this point and residential type uses
west of the creek. She said that the Land Use Planning
Committee will be establishing a permanent land use policy
in the future. She said if approved by the Commission,
the policy will be forwarded to the City Council In the
form of a resolution,
Mr. Claiborne asked how far the line moved, Ms. Spivey
stated that the moving of the line added approximately 2U0
to 250 acres to the high intepsity airport node.
Dir. Holt asked if the staff is making a buffer to the
airport. Ms. Spivey said yes.
Mr, hscue asked if by moving the line was there additional
pproperty provided for the second runway and noise level,
Ms. Spivey said yes.
DECISION: Mr. Escue moved to recommend approval of the
expansion of municipal airport high intensity area.
Seconded by Mr. Holt and unanimously carried (5-U).
C. A-36. Proposed annexation of approximately 06.41 acres
Mu-ated in the Moreau Forrest Survey, Abstract 417, and
beginning adjacent and east of Geesling Road, south of
U.S. Highway 380 East, and west of Trinity Road.
STAFF REPORT: Mr. Ellison stated that Miller of Texas,
nc. Bas requested annexation of approximately 60 acres
and the balance of the proposed annexation is berg
requested by the City of Denton. The involuntary portion
will fill In gaps between Millar of Texas property and 3n
existing annexation strip along Highway 3808. He said
that Miller of Texas, Inc. has petitioned for zoning that
will be part of the Lakeview development proposal. He
said that several mobile home units in the C~pricorn No
bile Home Park are included in the involuntary portion of
i
P 1 Z Minutes
may 27, 1986
Pap 9
the request. He said that approximately S-e residences
and 10 total structures are located within the proposed
annexation= these structures are clustered in the area of
the southwest intersection of U.S. Highway 3808 and Trinity
Road. He said that appproximately 1 146.76 feet of the west
aid* of Trinity Road, ind approxlna~ely 300 feet of the
east side of Geesling Road is included in the proposed
annexation.
Mr. Holt asked about the result for the City if annexed.
Mr. Ellison stated that the city would immediately start
providing services with the exception of utilities.
Mr. Holt asked about the land south of Blall Road.
Mr. Ellison stated that the land is in the ETJ. Mr. Holt
asked -+hy the city should annex the involuntary section.
Mr. h:ison stated that it is the 1n ical approach of
filling in the gaps and avoiding can usion.
Ms. Carson stated that the final annexation of this
property is July 8, 1986.
DECISION: Mr. Juren moved to recommend approval of the
propoie3 annexation of approximately 66.42 acres situated
in the Moreau Forrest Survey, Abstract 4170 and beginning
ad~acent and east of Geesling Road, south of U.S. Highway
38 East, and west of Trinityy Road. Seconded by Ms. Cole
and unanimously carried (S-0).
D. OF,THB `-1RBBIN NAKY PLAT OF 'PHE
STAFF REPORT: Mr. Ellison stated that this is a 4.288
acre parcel located adjacent and north of Londonderry Lane
between Sam Bass and Jason. The property is zoned light
industrial (L1) and multi-family development is proposed.
The ptoperty was zoned light industrial (LI) before the
effective date of the ordinance that changed the
cumulative zoning structure. He added that the question
about the sewer had been resolved and that the Development
Review Committee recommends approval,
Mr. Claiborne stated that his reason for withdrawing the
plat from the consent agenda was In regard to his concern
over the storm sewer drainage. He asked how much addition-
al •+ater would there be on Londonderry Lane. Mr, Clark
stated that it would be within the normal capacit; of the
street but might rise a little bit. He raid that the fall
on the street is pretty good, lie said that there needs to
be a drainage system but that it should have been done when
the street was built. He said there is a drainage sysieo
on the master drainage plan and that it needs to be in the
capital improvement program. He added that there is a
field to the south that is west of Teasley Lane that
serves as a holding pond. Mr. Claiborne asked for the
cost of a drainage system on this street. Mr. Clark said
approximately $80,000. Mr. Claiborne asked if this cost
could be recouped from property owners and development.
Mr. Clark said no.
DECISION: Mr. Juren moved recommend approval of
theLondonderry Addition L. 1, Block 1, Seconded by
Ms. Cole and motion carried lS-l), Mr. Claiborne and
Mr. Holt voted no.
Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
'
DAM 7/15/$4
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAL' /
CQ! ,
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Adoption of an ordinance setting a date, time, and place for public
hearings concerning the proposed annexation of approximately 132.64
acres of land being part of the G. Walker Survey$ Abstract No. 1330,
and part of the W. Durham Survey, Abstract No. 3000 and beginning at
a point approximately one mile south of F, M. 426 (East McKinney)
and one and one-half mile north of I. H.-35E (A-37)
RECOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that public hearings be held on August 5, 1986 and
August 190 1596,
SUMMARY:
All the property in this request is owned by the Corps of Engineers$
and the annexation petition was precipitated by the need to have all
property that will be affected by the proposed Lakeview Development
major thoroughfare annexed within the City of Denton. The Parks ant
Recreation Department requested that additional property be included
in the request for their planning purposes, The City of Denton
would be the Petitioner of this proposed annexation.
BACKGROUND:
Not applicable.
PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTEDt
City of Denton, Corps of Engineers, Miller of Texas, Inc.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Undetermined,
Respectfully submitted:
Lloyd H cell,
Prepares: by City Ma ager
e
David Ellison
Senior Planner
Appro s
Jeff Mey
Director of Planning
and Development
1626&
1468L
.
NO.
AN ORDINANCE SETTING A DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
ON THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN
EX:iIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO BY THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AND
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO PUBLISH NOTICE OF SUCH
PUBLIC HEARINGS,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1.
On the day of 1986, at 7:00 o'clock P. M.
in the City~ouncil Citam eers off` he Municipal Building of the
City of Denton, Texas, the City Council will hold a public
hearing giving all interested persona the right to appear and be
heard on the prop'),ted annexation by the City of Denton, Texas of
the property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
incorporated by reference herein.
On the day of , 1986, at 7:00 o'clock P.M.
in the City-Z uncil Chaa er'T rs Of the 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 l;Ity of Denton. Texas of
the property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
incorporated by reference herein,
SECTION II,
The Mayor of the City of Denton, Texas, Is hereby authorized
and directed to cause notice of such public hearings to be
published once In a newspaper having general circulation in the
City and in the territory described in Exhibit "A" not more than
twenty days nor less than ten days prior to the date of such
public hearingIIs, all in accordance with the Municipal Annexation
Act (Article 970a, 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 1986.
RAY
MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLEN CITY S9CRETX9Y
CITY OF DENTON,,TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY i AJX~I(~U Ny! GJG~? YTS [h
or
A-37/CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
EXHIBIT "A"
All that certain lot, tract or pares, of land lying and being situated in the
0, Walker Sutvsy, Abatcact 1330, and part of the We Durham survey,
Abstract 330, Denton County, Texas, and more pattioularly dseoribed as follows
• 88G3MMIM0 at a point in the present city limits es tablishad by Ordinance
No, IS-110, Tract 10 said point also lying in the Nasteeboundary lino of the We
Durham survey, same being the Cast boundary lifts of the G, Walker survey, said
point also being a U.B. Army Corps Of Cnginoocs Monument P-250-Wt
TMINCE South 890 03' Cast along said present City limits passing at 10116.57
feet the Southeast corner of said Tract If Continuing for a total distance of
U,S6 Army Corps of enginsets Monument P-251-WI
THEMCI Southeasterly along the U.S. Army Corps of engineers boundary the
following six (6) courses and diStanoser (1) South 10 480 east, 52360 feet to
a U,s, Atay Corps of engineers Monument P-252-101 (2) West. 600.0 feet to a
U.B. Army Cotps.of tnglaesrs Monument P-253-Ms (3) South, 620 test to a U,89
Army Corps of Engineets Monument P-254-Ws (4) Nast, 194,0 toot to a U.B. Army
Corps on Engineers Monument P-255-WO (S) south 356 350 east 62244 test to a
point for Cotner, said point being A U.B. Army Corps of Inginesrs Monument
P-256-Wr (6) South 584 21' Cast, 562,8 toot to a point tot corner, said point
being a O,S, Army Corps of Engineers Monument P-257-W)
TNENCE south 380 46' 590 West crossing the Corps Tract and the P4oaa Creek
Fork of Lake Lewisville, a distance of 943.72 fast to a point for cornet, said
point being a U.S. Army Corps of engineers Nonu"nt P-234-WI
THINCE Northwesterly along the U.S, Army Corps of engineers boundary the
following sixteen (16) courses and dlatanees► (1) North 506 10' Woot, 477.5
toot to a U.B. Army Corps of Ingineers Monument P-235-w# (2) South 820 21'
west, 244,0 toot to a U.B. Army Corps at Engineers Monument P-236-Wt (3)
North 211 45' West, 1,16248 toot to a U.S, Army Corps of Engineers Monument
P-237-Wf (4) North 670 43' West, 310, P6 foot to a 0,8. Army Corps of
engineers Nonument P-138-No (5) South 82. 18' Wsst, 136,4 feet to a U.S$ Army
Corps of Engineers Monument P-239-Wr (6) South 690 35' Wmst, $56,5 foot to a
U.S. Army Corps of engineera Monument P-240-Wi (7) North 360 $9' West,
1,140,8 feet to a U.B. Army Corps of Engineers Monument P-241-Wr 18) south
500 12' Weat,67269 feet to a U.B. Army Corps of tngineore Monument 0-242-Wr
(9) Nortb aP $a' Westr 547,2 feet to a U.s. Army Corps of Engineers Monument
P-243-Nf 1101 North 170 12' West, 341.7 toot to a U.S. Army Corps of
englnsors Monument h244-Wr (11► North 270 41' Seat, 164.7 toot to a U.S,
Army Corps of engineers Monument 0-245-Wr (12) South 8/• 58' ease 931,1 toot
to a U.B. Army Corps of EngLnoors Nonument P-146-Wr (131 North 56; 59' Casr~y
666,0 toot to a U.S. Army Corps of Ingineera Monument P-241-Wr (14) North Q2•
$41 Cast, 153,0 feet to a U.B. Army Corps of Snginesta Monument P-248-Mr (15)
Last. 1,484.1 foot to a U,S. Army Corps of engineers Monument P-249-Ws (16)
Mort: 000 241 West, 454 feet to the point of bpinning and containing 132.64
sores of land.
A-37
"aim
1448L
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROP01AD ANNEXATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS THATt
The City of Denton, Texas, proposes to institute annexation
proceedings to alter the boundary limits of said City to add the
territory described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and
incorporated by reference herein, to the corporate limits of the
City of Denton.
A Public Hearing will be held by and before the City Council
of the City of Denton, Texas, on the day of ,
19866 at 7:00 o'clock P. M. in the C ti-y-Zouncil C ant ers o 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 ratters 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
1986, at 7:00 o'clock P. M. in the Cif-y-Touncil C am ers o 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.
RAY STEPHENS, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHIRLOTTE ,
A•37/CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
j
EXHIBIT "A"
All that certain lot, treat or parool of land lying and being situated in the
0. Walker 84eveyr Abstract 1330, and part of the W. Durham survey,
Abstract 330, Denton County, Tablas, and more particularly described as follovaa
' 61011*200 at a point In the present city limits as established by Ordinance
No, 45-210, Tract It •aid point also lying In the West boundary kine of the No
DUrham survey, sane being the test boundary line of the 0, Walker Survey, said
point also being a U,S, Army Corps of RngLneers Monument P-2$0-Kr
TMRNCR South 69' 051 last along eald present city limits passing at 1,136.57
toot the southeast corner of said Tract 10 oontinnlnq for a total distance of
Uses Army Corps of Sngineere Monument P-2Sl-101
TNtNCR Southoastetly along the U,S, Army Corps of Sngineers Boundary the
following sit 14) courses and distancear 41) south 10 41' Rast, 423.0 feet to
a Us Army Corps of Rnglnsere Monument P-252-Wr (2) West, 69040 feet to a
U.S. Army Corps.of engineers monument P-253-Vt (3) South, 420 feat t0 a UaS.
Army Corps of ingineets NonUmont P-154-Wi 14) West, 194.0 toot to a U.e. Army
Corps on Engineers Monument P-255-Wi (5) South 33' 35, cost 62204 toot to a
point for corner, said point being a Us&, Army Corps of Ragineoro Monument
P-234-141 (4) south $40 21' Bast, 562s8 toot to a point tot corner, said point
being a 'less Army C:tps of Engineers Monument P-257-Wr
T
NENCR South 34' 461 59' West crossing the Corps Tract and the Pecan Creek
Fork
pointobeingea`Us$, Army o Corps distance
P-234-wjc for corner, said
of n Sngineare Monument to A
THENCE Northwesterly along the U'S, Army Corps of Enq1n4%ra boundary the
following sixteen (16) courses and distances; (1) North 50' lU' West, 417,5
feet to a U.S# Army Corps of Nnginoore monument P-235-Wi (2) South 81' 21'
Weots 244.0 foot to a U.S. Arley Corps of tngineeru Monument P-234-Wr (3)
North 21' 45' West, 11142.1 foot to a Us$# AV.2y Corps of Engineers Monument
P-237-Wr (4) North 674 43' West, 310.06 foot to a U,s. Army Corps of
Engineers Monument P-231-Mr (5) south 92' 16' Most, 236.4 toot to a U084 Army
Corps of engineers Monument P-239-11r (4) south 690 35, waste $56.1 feet to a
U,B, Army Corps of Enginoors Monument P-240-W) (7) North 39" 59' West,
1,140,1 (set to a U,S, Army Corps of englnears monument P-241-Wr 18) South
50' 12' Neat 472,9 feet to a UsB, Army Corps of 109inotes Monument P-242-No
(9) Merth, 88; $10 Meet, S47s2 Not to a U.S, AtVy Corps of Bngineors Monument
P-243-Mi (10) North 376 12' West, 341,7 feet to a Us$s Army Corps of
Engineers Monument P-244-Ni (11) North 27' 411 East, 164,7 feet to a UaB.
Army Corps of Rnginoers Monument P-245-Wr 112) South 8s' S8s seat 93241 feet
to a U.R. Army Corps of tngtaoore Monument P-246-WI Ilia Worth Sig $9' Ras t,
661.0 teat to a U,E, Army Corps of Engineers Monument P-247-Wr (14) North 1'
$4, last, 133.0 toot t0 a U,B, Army Corps of Enginoors monument P-24S-Ws (15)
Bast, 1,44461 feet to a U.S, Army Corps of Engineers Monument P-249-Mr (16)
North 000 241 Most, 45,5 toot to the point of beginning and containing 132.64
actor of land,
A-37
1 t
1
L ` 1
'ter • ~
I. 5A~7 ~ ~ • i•' 1
Irif I
.
~j
04
f 'N l
• r
g„Itd. r
A 37'
Alrf"'rid h ♦,IJ at-..+~•~w ~.y 1~ ~ .r ~ .
w S'H04DY S
It
a `
LAKI iKW
wOUWI N
1 y
rr C OMM hAOPEMY
1,
"080 AMEN
~r
L.OWNIVRAO LAX* /11f1~iL~[
s (ti;
i
z. r r i
, y4~3L n
1
NO,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDINO FOR ANGLE
PARKING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WALNUT STREET FROM ELM TO LOCUST
STREET; PROHIBITING PARKING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WALNUT STREET
FROM ELM TO LOCUST STREET; PROVIDING FOR 30 MINUTE PARKING ON
THE WEST SIDE OF LOCUST STREET FROM WALNUT TO MULBERRY;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $200,00 FOR VIOLATIONS
THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
That the north side of Walnut Street from its inttersectlon
with Locust Street to its intersection with Elm Street is
designated for angle parking,
SECTION 11.
That parking on the south side of Walnut Street from its
intersection with Locust Street to Its Intersection with Elm
Street Is prohlbitod,
SECTION Ill.
That the west side of Locust Street, beginning from its
intersection with Walnut Street to Its intersection with
Mulberry Street, is designated for parallel parking of motor
vehicles, provided that no one motor vehicle shall be parked
within such designated area at on- location for a continuous
period of time in excess of thirty (30) minutes between the
hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5.00 P.M. from Mordr,y through Friday,
inclusive of each week.
SECTION IV.
It shall be unlawful for any person, without regard to his
or her mental state, to park any motor vehicle in violation of
the provisions of this ordinance, when such locations are posted
or marked giving notice thereof. That any person violating any
of the provisions of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be
fined a sum not exceeding Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00); and
each day and every day that the provisions of this ordinance are
violated shall cL^atttute a separate and distinct offense. This
penalty is In addition to and cumulative of, any other remedies
as may be available at law and equity.
SECTION V.
That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14)
days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is
hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be
published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official
newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of
the date of its passage,
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1985.
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLEN CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON,,TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCN, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY: R YY1 UNAA t
I~
•
PAGE 2
s
MINUTES
Citizens Traffic Safety Support Commission
May 5, 1986
PRESENT; Gilbert Berstein, Chairman
Virginia Gallian
Gene Gohlke
BCUCt. Chamberlain
Vivian Edwards
Wayne Autrey
John Tompkins
Doris Chipman
David Martin
The meeting was called to order by Gilbert Berstein at 5:30
p.m, on Monday, May 5, 1986. Gene Gohlke made a motion to
approve the minutes of April 7, 1986 and Dan Martin seconded
the motion. Motion passed unanimously.
ITEM 2. WALNUT STRFET PARKING AND CONGESTION ISSUE
Jerry Clark, City Engineer presented a view graph and
pictures of Walnut street for the commission to
review. Jerry Said this had been brought before the
commission a couple of times. The commissioners had
requested the staff to notify all businesses involved
and allow them to have input into a possible solution.
Jerry said the businesses have come up with a
possible solution of making angle parking on the
north side and no parking on the south side. The
city staff would be interested in trying that.
Gilbert Berstein asked Jerry to define the staff's
recommendation. Jerry said he recommended changing
the north side to 450 angle parking and change the
south side to one (201) loading zone. Jerry
presented a drawing Bob Tripp had done showing how
the concept would work. Angle parking would
eliminate two parking spaces. The Board members
discussed the possible effects this would have.
Bob Tripp representing Evers Hardware came forward to
present his recommendation. He said they look out
the back daily and to their knowledge have never seen
an accident in the street. There are many accidents
on either Elm or Locust but never in the middle of
the block. Evers Hardware and Cravens receive a
large amount of business through the back from people
who park on that street. if parking were restricted,
it would cause a great loss in the amount of
customers who came in. Mr. Tripp said he would
Page 2 of 6 pages
appreciate the boards consideration of angle parking
on the north side. Angle parking had teen on the
books since 1961 - Ordinance #81-32. The width of
the pavement from the parking area on the south side
to the edge of cars on the north side was 27 feet.
It would be easy to get. 12' strips in there for
travel lanes, To his knowledge the traffic would
never be cleared up on that street because there were
eleven businesses there. Some of them are
restaurants and many times of the day large eighteen
wheel trucks make deliveries. If loading zones were
made on the south side of the street, that wouldn't
do these any good when they would be unloading for
businesses on the north side. Thcy automatically
park on the north side coming in from Locust street.
This caused the congestion. It wasn't the regular
packing that created the problem but the massive
vehicles who stop in there from time to time, This
has been part of doing business on the square which
everyone should be proud of the viable businesses
there. He differed from Jerry Clark's recommendation
in that he would like to see parking remain on the
south side of the street. There are only two parking
spaces there, The rest are all loading zones. Doing
away with only two parking spaces gains only two
loading zones whicii are not needed.
Mr, Tripp said the bank created a lot of traffic. On
a typical Friday they counted 1,056 cars that came
out of the bank, of that count 400 turned west. Mr.
Tripp said he would like that traffic to go east but
Mr, Bly from the bank might not, Representing ,avers
Hardware, he recommended parking remain as it was on
the south side and change the north side to angle
parking.
Homer Bly from First State Bank came forward to
suggest that parking adjacent to the bank on north
Locust on the west side between Mulberry and Walnut
be restricted time wise (20-30 minutes). People
could park there and walk up to the window,
Charles Hillard from Denton Word Travel, on the
corner of Elm, asked if changes would be made on
north Elm. Jerry said there would be no change there.
Jerry Clark reiterated the staffs recommendation in
making parking on the north side 450 angle entering
from the Locust side and recommended the south side
be changed to one loading zone only. On the corner,
restrict 20 feet for one truck,
~u
page 3 of 6 pages
Gene Gohlke asked if parking on the north side was
presently etxaight in. Jerry said it was 900 angle.
Gene arcked 19 angle parking would eliminate some
spaces. Jerry said angle parking would give fewer
spaces but prevent a car blocking yoar view when
backing out and only effect one lane when backing
out. Gene asked Jerry if he had received a complaint
Crom the Fire Department, Police Department etc.
Jerry said complaints had been received from citizens
in the area who travel through there and complaints
were received from the Police Department concerning
the congestion. Jerry said traffic was increasing on
Elm and Locust since Carrell is filling up, solutions
needed to be sought now, b9fore the situation becomes
serious,
Dan Martin asked if the ciLy code recommended not
having 900 angle parking. Jerry said it did,
Jeff Craven came forward to ask Jerry Clark if his
back sidewalk would have to be reconstructed, Jerry
said it would remain as it was,
Wayne Autrey asked if any consideration had been
given to restricting parking time on North Locust by
the bank, Jerry said it could be part of the
recommendation and put in the ordinance,
Gene Gohlke said he would like to see the parking
remain as it was, Walnut was a three block street
and riot a main artery or main street,
STAFF RECOMMENDED: Parking on north side be changed to angle
parking with all obstructions removed and
one space on south side be zoned as loading
zone in front of Stop and Swap,
COMMISSIONERS: Dan Martin made a motion to remove all
obstructions on the norl,h side and change
the spaces to 450 angle patk'ssiq, On the
south oide, change the two to one twenty
foot loading zone, and restrict parking
(time wise) on North Locust, Motion was
seconded by Vivian Edwards. All voted in
favor of motion except Gene Gohlke who
voted no, Motion carried,
MCKINNEY STREET AT CARROLL BOULEVARD MEDIAN I
F N
Jerry Clark came forward and introduced Tom 8imerly
with DeShazo, Starek and Tang, They were hired to do
the traffic, engineering study at the location,
I I
IKNIDl N0~10 t111vr1 [1l rlr lol! asCaVr MNS IN(aMr !f A1110 01 0o No 9144ir'al1 [
l1pp
WICIILLq H:RCO6lly 1, llNkllr IWYWAIk rL94S rll AS POW SW~ IIAY[M
Cllt AilOl! MC lo mmds IL oft Co
SI LWOI! I~ N
1
_NOW
.r I
oolsefrucr .T w NOw 1 s
II
3 w
yl ooutr w - c o u a
H~!!~ caller "IV
lF
CYM A/q WRIlO
M r 14co
1400 Stoo N A.oO
YC- ulrl l uM
ul/. WALNUT
C.ul if 11 . NO FOftoNo
~_J. r-:.O.l~ t.• all! ~ . ~ W ~
IIOw 1
!0 MMYtL MIIa111a
Nrwal .roar
MMO E f KIMY
srlu r
IMS l1 910L alkyl
. : <9bL
r
NO,
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 11 OF CHAPTER 4 OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS; BY AMENDING THE
PROCEDURES RELATING TO VICIOUS CATS AND DOGS; PROVIDING FOR THE
IMPOUNDMENT THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE DESTRUCTION THEREOF UPON
NOTICE AND HEARING; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM
AMOUNT OF $200.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR A
SEVERAEILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HkEHY ORDAINS:
t
SECTION I.
That Article 11 of Chapter 4 of the Code of Ordinances is
amended to read as follows;
ARTICLE Ii. VICIOUS CATS AND DOGS
Sec, 4,41. Procedure and Hearing
(r) F
cat or iling of Complaint. Any person compplaining of any
section 4 ~ of this wchapter, hasebittenviolation
attacked
animalncontrol cente% The complain~pshall betflled
within ten days of the incident complained of and
shall contain the following information=
(1) the name, address, and telephone number of the
complainant and any other witnesses to the
incident, if known;
(2) the date, time, and location of the incident;
(3) a description of the cat o, dog complained of;
w
(4) the name, address, and telephone number of the
owner of the cat or dog complained of, If
known; and,
(S) a statement that the cat or doQ complained of
while at large, in violation of Section 4.7 of
this chapter, attacked or bit a human being;
and,
(6) other facts and circumstances of the incident
including evidence of any required medical
treatment resulting from the attack or bit
complained of.
(b) Hearin Seti Notice Given. After the complaint It
Properly e , he complaint shall be reported to
the city manager, or his designated representative,
who shall set a time and place for a hearing. The
owner of the cat or dog complained of shall be
given notice of the hearing by personal service or
certified mall, return receipt requested, at least
}t!
I '
r
ten (10) days prior to the hearing date. The
notice shall include a copy of the complaint and a
copy of this article. After the notice is
delivered to the owner, the animal control officer
shall take custody of and impound the cat or dog
complained of, pending the outcome of the hearing,
# (c) Hearin Held, The city manag r, or his designee,
s a appo nt a hearing officor to receive evidence
at the hearing to determine whether the animal
complained of should be destroyed, The hearing
officer shall conduct the hearing in accordance
with procedures r insure an orderly proceeding,
All persons wishing to give evidence shall be
sworn, and may be questioned by the hearing
officer, the complainant and the owner of the cat
or dog complained of, or their representatives.
The hearing officer may receive and consider all
relevant evidence on the issue of whether the
animal complained of would constitute a danger to
the health, safety and welfare of the community if'
not destroyed, Including, but not limited to, the
y following:
(1) the seriousness of the attack or biting and the
attendant required medical treatment, if any;
(2) any prior incidents or attacks or biting by the
cat or dog complained of;
(3) the seriousness of the attack or biting
complained of, considered in conjunction with
any prior incidents of the cat or dog being at
large, In violation of section 4-7 of this
chapter, so as to indicate the potential danger
the cat or dog may pose to the community in the
future if not destroyed; and,
(4) whether the attack or biting was the result of
some provocation or circumstance that is, or is
not, likely to reoccur in the future,
(d) De in and Order. Within a reasonable time after
to conc us oa`of the hearing, the hearing officer
shall enter, in writing, his or her findings of
fact and an order, If the hearing officer finds
that the animal complained oft
t (1) attacked or bit a human being;
(2) the attack or biting occurred while the animal
was at large, in violation of section 4-7 of
this chapter; and
(3) the animal would constitute a danger to the
health, safety, and welfare of the community,
if not destroyed;
the hearing officer shall order the animal
destroyed. If animal is ordered destroyed, the
owner shall be liable L r any daily handling fees
for each day the animal was impounded, in
accordance with this chapter, If the cat or
PAGE ;
dog is not ordered destroyed, it shall be returned to
the owner upon payment of all impoundment or other
fees. The hearing officer shall give notice of the
findings and order to the owner by personal service or
certified mall, return receipt requested, within five
days of entry of the order. If the order povides for
destruction of the cat or dog, the animal shall not be
destroyed until time for review of the order has expired
without the filing of an appeal as provided for herein.
(a) Appeal. If the owner does not seek review of an
~orler to destroy the animal, by filing suit in a
court of competent jurisdiction and giving notice
of such filingg in writing, to the hearing officer
within five days of the delivery of the order
of destruction to the owner, the cat or dog shall
be destroyed. Upon verification that a suit was
filed, the hearing officer shall suspend the order
to destroy, pending the outcome of the appeal,
unless the owner fails to timely claim the animal
as provided for herein. In the event the order to
destroy is suspended, the owner shall be given
forty-eight (48) hours notice to claim the animal
and hold it pending the outcome of the appeal.
1 Failure to claim the animal within forty-eight (48)
hours of such notice will result in the execution
of the order to destroy.
S
Sec. 4-42. failure to Release Dog
A person commits an offense if the pparson who possesses a
cat or dug that has been charged by sworn affidavit. as
provided in section 4.41 of this chapter, knowingly fuses
or fails to release the dog to an animal control ufficer
upon demand.
SECTION 11.
That any person violating any of the provisions of this
ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding
Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00); and each day and every day that
the provisions of this ordinance are violated shall constitute a
separate and distirct offense. This penalty is In addition to
and cumulative of, any other reme6les as may be available at law
{ and equity.
t SECTION 1114
` That if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, Clause,
phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any
person or circumstance is held invalid by any court of competent
jurisdiction, such holdinf shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of th a ordinance, and the City Council of
the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have enacted
such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
SECTION IV-
That this ordinance shall become affective fourteen (14)
days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is
+-ereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be
piblished twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official
i.ewspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of
the date of its passage.
PAGE 3
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1986,
•
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CliXRLOTTE ALWIN CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON,OTEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMI
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BYt 1~M
r
PAGE 4
DATR: 07/09/96
CITY COUNCIL RBW T F /
TOt Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
RECOMMENDATIONt
It is the recommendation of the Airport Advisory Board to approve
the contract by and between We P. Wills and the City of Denton for
engineering services on the Denton Municipal Airport,
8 RY:
The FAA, under the Airport Improvement Program, has awarded the
Denton Municipal Airport 6226,450.00 for the construction of three
access taxiways, a helicopter pad and a run-up apron. This contract
is for the survey, design and construction administration of the
project. The terms provide for a fixed fee of 616,023.00 for
engineering services and up to $7,04040 for surveying services.
The FAA will reimburse the City for 90% of these fees.
BBACKGRONDr
The three taxiways, together with roadways, water and sewer lines to
be constructed by the City will open up approximately 80 acres for
development on the airport. Projections demonstrate that such
development will enable the airport to become self sufficient. The
helicopter pad and runup apron are necessary and welcome additions
to air operations on the airport.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUP, AFFECTED:
This airport project will affect to a certain degree the Engineering
and lnspectio~i Department of the City.
FljS;AL. IMgACTr
The City's portion of the entire project including engineering and
construction will be $251150.00.
Respectfully submitted:
Pr &ared by: Lloyd H well
City Ma agar
Clinton Lynch
Airport Manager
Approv.Qd t
Bill Angelo
Assistant Director
of Public Works
0219k
l sort,
i
NO.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON,
TEXAS, AND W. P. WILLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS TO PROVIDE
ENGINEERING SERVrCES FOR AIRPORT IMPROVEMENTS; APPROVING THE
EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
• DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Denton, Texas wishes to enter into a
contract with W. P. Wills Consulting Engineers to provide for
engineering services for airport improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Code of Ordinances requires that the City
Council approvo all expenditures of $10,000 or more; and
WHBRBAS, Section 2.09 of the City Chartor requires every act
of the Council providing for the expenditure of funds or for the
contracting of indebtedness shall be by ordinance; NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1.
That the City Council approves, and the Mayor and City
Secretary are hereby authorized and directed to execute and
attest, respectively, the agreement between the City of Denton
and W. P. Wills Consulting Engineors, providing for engineering
services fnr airport improvements under the terms and conditions
contained in said agreement attached hereto.
SECTION II,
That the City Council authorizes the expenditure of funds in
the manner and amount as specified in the agreement,
SECTION III.
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1986.
!t
1
r
PAT STOPHEN5o MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
WRLOTTE ALLEN, CITY 9ECRETARY
CITY OP DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL PORM:
JOE D, MORRIS, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
B Y :
V
CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
THE STATE OF TEXAS. E
COUNTY OF DENTON
The City of Denton, hereinafter called "City", and W, P. Wills Consulting
Engineers, hereinafter called "Engineer", agree as follows;
1. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED
The Engineer hereby agrees, at his own expense, to perturm all engineering
services necessary to prope;,ly develop studies, designs, and plans end
specifications on the following airport paving improvements at the Denton
Municipal Airport.
A. Airport Paving Project: Survey, design ana provide construction admin-
istration for the following improvementsi
1. Two access taxiways 730' X 30' with a weight bearing capacity of
30,000 lbs.
2. One access taxiway 1140' X 30' (600' with a weight bearing capacity
of 309000 lbs and 640' with a weight bearing capacity of 12,500 I,-.S).
3. One 10,000 sq. ft, hellpad with a ~5' X 50' connecting taxiway to
the existing apron.
4. One 250000 sq. ft, aircraft holding apron with a weight bearing
capacity of 30,000 lbs.
The City has budgeted =251,600 for this work which Includes construction costs,
Engineer's fees contingencies, testing, inspection services and related
expenses,
The City has received Federal assistance for the paving improvements through
the Federal Aviation Administration under AIP 3-40.0067.03, Compliance with
the following Federal Regulations will be required,
1, Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 as amended and the regu-
lations of the Federal Aviation Administration (14 CFR, Part 152),
2. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act as Indicated in attached Exhibits
A-1 and A-2.
Engineering Services Contract - Airport Paving Improvements
W. P. Wills Consulting Engineers
Page 1 of 9
3. Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U,S.C. 794), Section 504 which
assures r,on•discrimination towards the handicapped.
4. Affirmative Action Act as required by 14 CFR, Part 152, Subpart E.
3
I 5. Minority Business Enterprise (MBE) policy as defined in 49 CFR,
Part 23, as indicated in attached Exhibit A-2,
I ~
{ 6. Equal Opportunity Clause as defined In 41 CFR, Part 60-1.4.
} 7. Executive Order 11246 dated September 24, 1965.
II. S COPE OF SERVICES
Engineer's services under Section i will be those Basic Services which are
in accordance with Advisory Circular No. 1500/5100-14A Including Change 1
"Architectural, Engineering, and Consultant Services for Airport Grant
Projects."
i
i A. In the Preliminary Phase
3
1. Conferences with the proper City representative regarding the
proposed project, Consult with Federal Aviation Administration and other
agencies as required.
2. A preliminary engineering study and report directly related to and
part of the work being considered, The report to be prepared using
Federal Aviation Administration design criteria and based on most current
Federal Aviation Administration procedures.
3. Preliminary cost estimates of proposed construction,
4. City to furnish Engineer with preliminary information with copies of
plans of such existing facilities as are necessary and available and with
other information pertinent to the planning and design,
5. Consultant to provide all survey work required for Preliminary and
Design Phases. Work to be performed by Metropiex Engineering Corporation,
Denton, Texas.
6. Utilize support material developed during Preliminary Phase or
available from City and be responsible for the coordination of the project
Engineering Services Contract - Airport Paving Improvements
W. P. Wills Consulting Engineers
Page 2 of 9
A
S. Preparation of change orders and monthly and final estimates for
payments to the Contractor, based on Contractor's submittal.
6, Represent the City in interpreting and rendering decisions on the
requirements of the contract documents and claims or disputes between the
Contractor and the City, to include any disputes or claims made by the City
against the Contractor within one year of the final inspection; instruct the
Contractor on behalf of the City (including preparation of supplementary
drawings or instructions required to effectuate the Inttnt of the contract
documents),
1. Final inspection.
8. Revision of the construction drawings to show the project as
1
actually constructed and the furnishing of "As•Bullt" reproducible drawings.
i
' 0. Special Services
This contract includes the furnishing of situ surveying services by the
Engineer. City agrees to pay Engineer a sum not to exceed seven thousand
forty and no/100 ($1,040,00) for such services as outlined In Engineer's
letter of June 9, 1985 to the Airport Manager, This sum is in addition to
the Basic Fee as outlined in Section 111, Paragraph A herein. The C'ty is
to receive three (3) copies of all laboratory reports and other summary reports
prepared under this item. Surveying for all design work under this Contract
is not considered a Special Service but is required and is fully compensated
for and included in the Basic Fee outlined in Section III, Paragraph A herein.
E. Order of Services
a
Engineer agrees to begin ward irm(A)ate'v after written authorization
from the City and to complete the Pr,~1 min ry Phase within 15 calendar days
r after authorization) the Design Phase will be completed within 30 calendar
k9 days of written notice by the City to proceed with this phase.
Ill, FETE
A. Fee for Basic Services
The fee for performing the Basic Engineering Services will be as follows;
Engineering Services Contract - Airport Paving Improvements
W. P. Wills Consulting Engineers
Page 4 of 9
The City will pay the Engineer a fixed fee of Sixteen thousand twenty
three dollars and no/100 ($16,023) provising for all services (except Special
Services) in this Contract. This fee will be full and total compensation
for all services outlined in this Contract including additional work which may
be added during construction by change order to existing contracted work
provided that work specified by change order is in keeping with the original
scope of work and is normal and incidental to the type of construction
i proposed. Fees for Special Services are outlined in Section 1I0 Paragraph D
of this Contract,
0, Payment of Fee for Basic Services
The fee for Basic Services is to be due and payable as follows (said
services listed above), with billing for such fees to be separately Identified
by Federal Aviation Administration grant project nu.nber;
1. In the Preliminary Phase
I
For, services rendered under the Preliminary Phase as described above
for work authorized by the City, 15% of the fixed fee shall be due and payable.
Approval of preliminary engineering plans will be required before payment,
2. In the Design Ph,,-t(for Work as Authorized brLthe Citl)
For services rendered under the Design Phase, as described above,
an amount eq I to 78% of tl..-i fixed fee for work authorized by the city
shall be due and payable.
3, Cons ructlon Phase
For services rendered under the Construction ibase, as described
i
above, an amount equal to 7% of the fixed fee for those portions of the
I work covered by construction contracts shall be due and payable based on
monthly estimates of work performed by the Contractor.
IV. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT
i
The City may, At any time, with or without cause, terminate this
Contract upon seven days written notice to the other at the address of record,
In this event, the Engineer shall be compensated for his services on all
stages authorized as follows;
i
I
Engineering Services Contract • Airport Paving Improvements
W. P, Wills Consultinq Engineers
Page 6 of 9
A. if termination occurs prior to the ffnai completion and approval of
the drawings and specifications, the Engineer shall be paid a reasonable
compensation for the services actually rendered by him in accordance with
the above described schedule of fees and in proportion to the amount of work
done on such stages or phases as has been authorized.
B. If termination occurs after, final completion and approval of the
drawings and specifications, the fee of the Engineer shall be 70t of the
fixed fee,
C. If termination occurs after the letting of the contract but prior
to final completion or acceptance by the City, the fee of the Engineer shalt
be computed in accordance with the provisions of Sections III and lY of this
Contract to the date of termination,
0. The foregoing shall not be construed to require the City to compensate
the Engineer for any services not pert')rmed in a proper professional manner
suitable for use in the construction of the project contemplated by the
parties to this Contract,
I Y. _W, IATION
{
In the event that the scope of the Engineer's services as outlined herein
for the improvement project is determined, by the Engineer's Preliminary Phase
work, to be substantially different from the description of services or con•
struction budget contained herein, the fee set forth in this Contract shall
be renegotiable only insofar as this Contract pertains to the project or
projects so determined to be substantially different. Fees for projects
determined to be substantially in accordance with descriptions and budgets
contained herein shall not be renegotiable,
Y1. ENGINEER'S LIABILITY
i
Acceptance and approval of the final plans by the City shall not con.
stitute nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of the
Engineer, its employees, associates, agents and consultants, for the accuracy
and competence of their designs, working drawings, and specifications or
other documents prepared by the Engineer, its employees, subcontractors,
agents and consultants,
Engineering Services Contract - Airport Paving Improvements
W. P. Wills Consulting Engineers
Page 6 of 9
A~
it
} VII. OWNERSH1p OF DOCUMENTS
Upon completion of the project (or upon termination of this Contract,
I if pruviously terminated), the Engineer shall furnish to the City, in a
suitable container for filing, "record drawings", reproduced an linen or
mylar drafting film from the original drawings, together with a correct and
{ legible set of specifications.
• VIII. _
MUOABILaTY_
The Engineer shall not assign, transfer or delegate any of his obll-
gations or duties In this Contract to any other person without the prior
written consent of the City, except for routine duties delegated to personnel
of the Engineer's staff, If the Engineer is a partnership, in thu event of
the termination of the partnership, this Contract shall Inure to the
indi- vidual benefit of such partner or partners as the City may designate. No
j part of the Engineer's fee may be assigned in advance of receipt by the
Engineer without written consent of the City.
X. ARBITRATION
A, Except as may be otherwise provided in this Contract, or as the
parties hereto may otherwise agree, all claims, counter-claims, disputes or
other matters in question between the City and the Engineer arising out of or
relating to this Contract or the breach thereof will be decided by arbitration
in accordance with the current applicable Construction Industry Arbitration
Rules of the American Arbitration Association, subject to the limitations
stated in Paragraphs C and D below. This Contract, and any other agreement
or consent to arbitrate entered into in accordance therewith as provided
i below, will be specifically enforceable under the prevailing law of any court
having ,jurisdiction,
B. Notice of demand for arbitration must be filed in writing with the
other party to thfs Contract, with the Federal Aviation Administration and
with the American Arbitration Association, The demand must be made within a
reasonable time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen.
In no event may the demand for arbitration be made after the time when
Institution of legal or ,quItable proceedings based on such claim, dispute Or
t
Engineering Services Contract - Airport Paving Improvements
W. P, Wills Consulting Engineers
Page 7 of 9
777
other matter in question would be barred by the applicable statute of
limitations.
C. All demands for arbitration and all answering statements thereto
which include any monetary claim must contain a statement that the total sum
or value in controversy as alleged by the party making such demand or answer-
ing statement is not more than $2000000 (exclusive of interest and costs).
The arbitrators will not have ,jurisdiction, power or authority to consider
or make findings (except in denial of their own ,jurisdiction) concerning any
claim, counter-cla n, dispute or otter matter in question where the amount
in controversy thereof is more than $200,000 (exclusive of interest and
costs) or to render a monetary award in response thereto against any party
which totals more than $200,000 (exclusive of interest and costs).
r
r
D. No arbitration arising out of, or relating to, this Contract may
include, by consolidation, joinder or in any other manner, any additional
party not a party to this Contract.
t
E. By O tten consent styned by all the parties to this Contract
k and containing a specific reference hereto, the limitations and restrictions
i
contained in Paragraphs C and D above may be waived in whole or 'n part as
to any claim, counter-claim, dispute or other matter specifically described
in such consent. No consent to arbitration in respect of a specifically
described claim, counter-claim, dispute or other matter in question will
constitute consent to arbitrate any other claim, counter-claim, dispute or
other matter in question which is not specifically described in such consent
or in which the sum or vr,lue in controversy exceeds $200,000 (exclusive of
interest and costs) c; which is with any party not specifically described
herein.
F. The award rendered by the arbitrators will be final, not subject
to appeal, and Judgment may be entered upon it in any court having jurisd1c-
tion thereof.
r %i. ACCESS TO RECORDS
r
The Federal Aviation Administration, the Comptroller General of the
United States, or any of the duly authorized representatives shall have access
to any books, documents, papers and records of W. P. Wills Consulting
Engineers which are directly pertinent to the herein referenced grant program,
for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcriptions.
Engineering Services Contract - Airport Paving Improvements
W. P. Wills Consulting Engineers
Page 8 of 9
W, P, Wills Consulting' Engineers agree to maintain all required records for
three years after the City makes final are closed Payment and all other pending matters
,
EXECUTED IN DUPLICATE, each of which shall he considered an original, this
day of
ATTEST:
CITY Of DENTON
Charlotte A11en 6
City Secretary
City of Denton, Texas
f
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: W, P. WILLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS
dami Or
ayovitch Uytorney WillsPEOwner
raoA
Oenton, Texas
re
I
Engineering Services Contract - Airport Paving Improvements
W. P, Wills Consulting Engineers
Page 9 of 9
v
CONTRACTOR CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS
TITLE VI ASSURANCES
During the performance-of this contract, the contractor, for Itself, its
assignees and succefsors in interest (hereinafter referred to as the
"contractor") agrees as follows.
1. Comp'ianc! with Regulations.. The contractor shall comply with
the Regulations re a ~ve"Eo nun ser m nation In federally ass+vted pro-
grams of the Department of Transportation (hereinafter "DOT") Title 49,
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, as they may be amended from time to
time, (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which are herein
incorporated by reference and made a part of this contract.
2. Nondiscrimination. The contractor, %4ith regard to the work
performed by ur nq a con ract, shall not ditcriminate on the grounds
of race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of sub-
contractors including procurements of materials and leases of equipment.
The contractor shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the
discrimination prohibited by section 21.5 of the Regulations, including
employment practices when the contract covers a program set forth in
appendix B of the Regulations.
3. ' Solicitations for Subcontracts Includin Procurements of
Materials an gu~ n , n a so In a ohs a er by competitive id-
ng or nego a'~ion ma by the con rector for work to be performed under a
subcontract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment,
each po;.ential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the contrac-
tor of the contractor 4s obligations under this contract and the Regulations
relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national
{ origin.
4. Information and R worts. The contractor shell provide all in-
formation an reports rage re by e ReGulations or directives issued pur-
suant thereto and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts,
other sources of information, and its facilities a$ may be determined by
the sponsor or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to be pertinent to
ascertain compliance with such Regulations, orders, and instructions.
Where any information required of a contractor is in the exclusive posses-
sion of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the con-
trartor shall so certify to the sponsor or the FAA, as appropriate, and
shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information.
5. S ctlons for Non o 11a Ee, In the ovent of .he contractor's
noncompliance w e -n"on scr m na ion- provisions of this contract, the
sponsor %hell Impose such contract sanctions as it or the FAA may determine
to be appropriate, including, but not limited to
a, withholding of payments to the contractor under the
contract until the contractor complies, and/or
b, cancellation, termination, or suspension of the contract,
in whole or in part,
6. IIn~nc__o.__r__pporation of Provisions. The contractor shell include the
1 provisions or a rap s through in every subcontract, including pro-
curements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the
Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. The contractor shalt
take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the
sponsor or the FAA may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions in-
cluding sanctions for noaoompliance. Provided, however, that In the event
a contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a
subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the contractor may
request the sponsor to enter into such litigation to protect the interests
of the sponsor and, In addition, the contractor play request the United
States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the
United States.
EXH181T A-1
Engineering Services Contract - Airport Paving Improvements
W. P. Wills Consulting Engineers - Page A-1
Jo
T rry}`9 av.;r. y CT'..
..~F rtY 7
MINORITY BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (MBE) ASSURANCES
I. Polio . It is the policy of the Department )f Transportation
(DOT) that m nor y business enterprises as defined in 49 CFR Part 23 shall
have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts
financed in whole nr in part with Federal funds under this agreement. Con-
sequently, the MBE requirements of 49 CFR Part 23 apply to this agreement.
2. MBE Obligation. The contractor agrees to ensure that minority
business enterpr ses as a fined in 49 CFR Part 23 have the maximum opportu-
nity to participate in the performance of contracts and subcontracts
financed in whole or in part with Federal funds provided under this agree-
ment. In this regard, all contractors shall take all necessary and reason,
able steps in accordance with 49 CFR Part 23 to ensure that minority
business enterprises have the maximum opportunity to compete for and per-
form contracts. Contractors shall not discriminate on the basis of race,
color, national origin, or sex in the award and performance of DOT-assisted
contracts.
d
EXHIBIT A-2
t
i
i
Engineerfi.g Services Contract • Airport Paving Improvements
kills Consulting EngineArs • Page A-2
.4 '
MINUTES
AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD
JUNE 10, 1986
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DENTON AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD,
TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 1986, AT 12:00 NOON, IN THE TERMINAL BUILDING
AT THE DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Arno, Carrell, Hayward, Keith, Smith,
Williams, and Wright
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: Fernando Torres, JPTA participant,
Clint Lynch and Bruce Cardwell of the City
Staff
1. The Board considered the minutes of the regular meeting of
April 8, 1986, and the special called meetings of
May 2, 1986 and May 16, 1986. A motion was made and
seconded to approve ;:he minutes as written.
2. The Board considered recommending to the City Council the
approval of a contract for engineering services by and
between W► P. Wills and the City of Denton. A motion was
made and seconded to recommend to the City council the
hiring of W. P. Wills for engineering services pending a
review of the contract by the F.A.A. and the City
Engineering staff. The motion passed unanimously. The
Board expressed concern about the selection process and the
need for the Board to be kept up to date on all progress
made concerning the development of the airport. The
Airport Manager apprised the Airport Board of the steps
taken by the Consultant Selection Committee in choosing
W. P. Wills for the project.
3. The Board considered recommending to the City Council the
approval of an airport lease agreement by and between Mr.
Thomas: Dickson and the City of Denton.
4. The Board considered recommending to the City Council the
approval of an airport lease agreement by and between Mr,
Stan Koehler and the City of Denton.
5. The Board considered recommending to the City Council the
approval of an airport lease agreement by and between
Mr. Robert Penley and the City of Denton. The Board
expressed concern that the option clause was not
appropriate. The Board suggested that a right of first
refusal would be better and that if the right of first
refusal was exercised, then the rental rate should be based
on the then current market retail rates.
Airport Advisory Board Minutes
June 10, 1966
Page 2
The motion was made and seconded to recommend to the City
Council the approval of Mr. Dickson's and Mr. Koehler's
lease agreements, and Mr. Robert Penley's lease agreement
with the changes from the option clause to a right of
refusal clause. The motion passed unanimously.
6. The Board considered any new business. The Board
considered the proposal of the Port-A-Dort Company. The
proposal included the individual ownership of han ars built
y Port-A-Port. The Board recommended that this tem be
placed on the next Airport Board Agenda for further
discussion.
7. The Board considered the Airport Managers Report. Fernando
Torres, the J.T.P.A. program participant, was introduced to
the Board. The part-time Unicom workers had been
approved. The Board expressed concern that the Unicom
services should be a shared arrangement between the FBO's
and steps should continue to be taken to achieve this
arrangement. The Antique Association Fly-in will be held
this weekend. The Master Plan Study Report was now
complete and copies; were available. The Handar automated
weather system may still be installed at the airport if
information from the N.A.A. allows for different purchasing
and maintenance arras,;;aments. The Board asked for the
status of the C.A►F. Lease. The Manager reported that the
lease was ready except for the survey clause that would
allow for the property to be tied to a taxiway and the
lease approved before a final bound survey could be
completed. The Board asi. for the status of Jay Rodgers'
amended lease. The Mana4ter reported that the survey for
the property had been received from Coleman and Associates
late last week and that he needed to rewrite the lease
based on this information, Mr. Rodgers was informed that
his culvert had been removed to improve the road south of
his property and he would tie expected to up grade the
culvert when he put in his road.
The Board met in Executive Session to discuss legal and
real estate matters at 1:50 p.m. The Board reconvened in
open session at 1:55 p.m.
A motion was made to table Maverick Aircrafts' building
proposal until after the City Council meeting held tonight.
With no further business, the Board adjourned at 2:OU p.m.
02050
DATE:?/9/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution in support of H.R. 1400 and
General Revenue Sharing.
RECOMMENDATION:Staff recommends approval of a resolution
in support of H.R. 1400 and general revenue sharing.
SUMMARY: A resolution in support of general revenue sharing
and H.R. 1400 has been placed on the City Council agenda
for approval. This resolution would then be sent to the
Texas Congressional Delegation and Texas Senators in support
of H.R. 1400.
KGROUND-'General revenue sharing has provided a predictable
and stable source of funding for basic services since 1972.
Current tax reform legislation threatens to eliminate this
source of funding for municipal governments. H.R. 1400 would
continue general revenue sharing on an annual basis.
PROGRM S, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Continuation of general
revenue sharing would have a positive effect on all departments
in the City.
FISCAL IM PACT. Continuation of general revenue sharing would
increase revenue to the General Fund in excess of $500,000 in
FY 86/87.
RespecttulLy submitted:
j 'Lloyd V. Harrel City Manager
Prtlpur y
rya
' le Administrative Assistant
Approved: J~
G
Name Bet 1 cKee,n
Title Assistant City Manager
ID
Cl" of DMNrON, r&X" MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 78201 / TELEPNONE (817) 568.8307
Office of the City Meneper
M E M O R A N D U M
TU: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Betty McKean, Assistant City Manager
DATE: July 8, 1986
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 1400
General revenue sharing has been a predictable and stable
source of funding for basic services here in Denton for many
yearsa Current tax reform legislation threatens to eliminate
this important source of funding and thus many important
projects here in Denton.
Attached for your consideration and approval is a resolution
which opposes the elimination of general revenue sharing and
encourages Congress to support legislation which wo►Ild
re-establish this important source of funds. In particular
th;'s resolution supports H.R 1400 which would re-authorize full
funding on an annual basis,
If I can provide any further information, please let me know.
e y can
Assistant City Manager
bcs
2985M
15tfgL
R E S 0 L U T 1 0 N
WHEREAu, general revenue sharing has, since 1972
provided a predictable and stable sourco of
fdhdIng to 39,000 of this nation's local
governments, including Denton, Texas; and
WHEREAS, cities have used general revenue sharing to
provide basic services such as public safety,
health, and oeucation; and
j • WHEREAS, the outhorititlon for general revenue sharing
{ will expire on September 30, 1986; and
WHEREAS, the movement on tax reform threatens to inhibit
the ability of cities to generate municipal
financing; and
WHEREAS. the burden of housing, feeding, educating,
caring for and protecting this nation's poor is
increasingly falling to this nation's cities;
and
WHEREAS, general revenue sharing has proven to be the
most efficient and helpful of all federal
programs upon which cities have come to rely;
j NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the Denton City Council
strongly opposes elimination or fOrther
reduction of the General Revenue Sharing
program; the Community Development Block Grant
program, and support to low and moderate Income
housing,
BE IT FURTHER resolved, that the Denton City Council strongly
supports legislation which would reinstate
general revenue sharing including H.R. 1400.
i
BE IT FURTHER resolved, that the Denton City council
encourages the citizens of Denton, Texas to
inform themselves of the position of their
Congressional delegation on these issues that
could diroctly affect their local tax burden,
FINALLY, bE IT resolved, that the Mayor of the City of Denton,
Texas, be directed to convey the foregoing
Resolution to the members of the Texas
Congressional delegation, including Senators
Gramm and Bentsen.
PASSU AND APPROVED this the day of , 1986,
I
RAY STEPHENSt"MAYR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
i
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLENi CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON* TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
JOB D. MORRIS, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
CITY Of DENTON, ThXA8
bYt
C
DATE: July lb, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO. Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Appointment of special committee to study the recommended
five year Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)
RECOMMENDATION:
Adoption of the resolution
SUMMARY:
The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended a
comprehensive CIP.
BACKGROUND:
At this point in history, careful consideration needs to be
given to providing the necessary infrastructure to parallel
the population growth of the community.
ROGRAMS$ DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
The entire city
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal implications assessment will ue part of the charge
of the committee,
Respectfully submitted:
I-A
oy ar
Ci ty Ma ger C~4
Pre r
Neff May"-
Director of Planning
and Development
Ap
e
Director of Planning
and Development
CITY OF DENTON
MEMORANDUM
Date: July 9, 1986
To; Lloyd C. Harrell, City Manager
From: Jeff Meyer, Uirsctor of Planning and Development
Subject: Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
In response to the City Council's attention to the recommendations
or the Plannin and Zoning Commission concerning the Capital Improve-
ment Plan (CIP1, the inclosed resolution is provided for adoption.
Both the Councii's and the Commission's support of the creation of a
very special committee to study the CIP recommendations appears to
be a very positive step in meeting the long term infrastructure needs
of the city.
With the Council's concurronce, hopefully the executive staff could
submit an extensive list of possible appointees to the Council by
July 22, 1986. I'm sure the Council will wish to make additions and
deletions to the suggestions, allowing for the actual appointments
on July 29, 1986, This would facilitate the committee deliberating
and pproviding the Council with a proposed implementation plan by
Uctober 1, 1986.
There appears to be a real positive reaction to this concerted
effort to maintain Denton's commitment to a high duality of life.
Jeff yer
JM:ab
Enclosure
i
,1.i
I seyir
R E S O L U T I O N
WHEREAS, in accordance with the City Charter of the City of
Denton, Texas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted
a list of recommended capital improvements to be undertaken in
the next five years; and,
WHEREAS, implementation of the capital improvements plan is
an essential element of the goal of maintaining the quality of
life of the community by providing for the necessary
infrastructure, improvements and services to adequately serve
the community; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it would be
advisable to create a Special Citizens Advisory Committee to
provide recommendations on the manner of implementing the
capital improvements plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HERESY
RESOLVES:
SECTION I,
That a Special Citizens Advisory Committee shall be
appointed ;o make recommendations to the City Council on the
manner of implementing the City's five-year capital improvements
plan,
SECTION It.
ti
That the Special Citizens Advisory Committee shall be
composed of such persons of the community as specified by the
Council and shall perform its funetluns in accordance with the
intent of this resolution, as directed by the Council.
SECTiUN III,
That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and approval.
{E FASS6D AND APPROVED1 this the day of July, 1986
RXY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
UHARI.OTTh AEL99i CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
JOE D. MORRIS, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DBNTON, TEXAS
BY:
1
CffVo/offN SON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING DENTON, TEXAS 10201 TELEPHC)NE~Af776 J07
OHke of tho city WOMW
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
DATE: July 11, 1984
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF A DEPUTY CITY SECRETARY
The Deputy City Secretary serves in the absence of the City
Secretary as well as offering assistance in the preparation and
posting of agendas, issuance of permits, etc, Traditionally,
the Deputy has been a member of the City Manager's office.
Laurie Jackson had been serving in this capacity; however, Mrs.
Jackson has left the organization.
Bryan Stuart has been the Administrative Assistant in the Cityy
Manager's office for a year. As such, he is familiar wtth
Council procedures and attends the meetings, Also, from a
fiscal standpoint, Mr, Stuart is an exempt employee whtch would
eliminate additional overtime payment should he be required to
take minutes of meetings. Therefore, it is my recommendation
that Bryan Stuart be appointed Deputy City Secretary to replace
Mrs. Jackson.
Your consideration in this appointment would be appreciated.
,00114
oy d 7 arre t t'
ca
2290C
~ des a,s ~s iiti ~..p.. _ px ..fl •~6~~14/ F~~Fi~~~'~~`~~~w~
DATE: July 15, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
'Pot' Mayor and Members of the City Council
Lloyd V, Harrell, City Manager
SuBJBCT: County Health Department
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend Council approve the proposed participation reccmmendations
for the City/County Health Department for 1986-87.
SUMMARY: After researching and attending a series of meetings with County health
officials, staff is submitting recommendations for participation in the City/County
Health Department for 1986-87 for approval.
BACKGROUND: Due to reorganization of City/County Health Department, it was
necessary to review the proposed assessments for environmental and clinical
health services and research our options.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: General Fund
FISCAL IMPACT: $123,666-$152,071
Respectfully submitted:
11, '6'WZL~
L oy rreli
City Man er
Prepared by:
Paulette. Owens-Holmes
Program Administrator
Approved:
Be a
Assistant City Manager
CITY Of DAWO,N1, '$S=* MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. McKINNEY ST. l DENTON, TEXAS 7M
M E M O R A N D U M
DATEt July 10, 1986
TOt City Council
FROMt Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SU13JECTo COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
On July 2, Council members Riddlesperger and Chow, Mayor Stephens, and I met
with Ruth Tansey regarding our concerns relating to the reorganization of the
Health Department and the proposed assessments for environmental and clincial
health services for 1986-87. Results of that meeting are summarized in the
attached memo from Assistant City Manager Betty McKean. As a result of the
discussion with Council members Riddlesperger and Chew following the July 2
meeting with Ruth Tansey and the research conducted by staff, I have the
following recommendationst
1. Express willingness to contract with the County for environmental and
clinical health services for the fiscal year 1986-87.
2. Submit a counterproposal to the County Commissioners Court that would
contract for the same level of services that we are currently receiving
from the County Health Department for the fiscal year 1986-87. In
addition, we would include a willingness to increase our contribution
by twenty-five (25) percent from our current contribution of $100,000
to $1250000. Furthermore, we would indicate that the proposed
contribution is not only what we can comfortably afford in light of our
budget constraints for the fiscal year 1986-87, but also that the
contribution is in close parity to the $123,666 total amount if the
Jamison Formula would be applied.
3. Immediately form a City task force to further investigate our options,
particularly the formation of our own environmental health service. It
is anticipated that such an environmental health service would not be
operational until the fiscal year 1987-88. However, the City should
be prepared to know what options are available in the event that our
negotiation efforts with the County Commissioners Court prove
unsuccessful.
81715W4= D/fW METRO 43#4=
a6 pIRCR F ncn' 1 • <.p 1 -si7gy
page 2
4. Even in the long range, it may be best to jointly operate with the
County to provide health services, It is essential that the
City have a more formal voice in the operations of the County Health
Department, particularly when we provide the vast majority of the
funds, Therefore, we need to communicate to the County that if a long
range relationship is expected, then it is imperative that there be a
willingness to provide an organizational structure that would enable
the City to have a voice in the operations of the Health Department,
Otherwise, we will be forced into seriously considering the formation
of our own health unit for the fiscal year 1987-8R.
-C2 'x
Lloyd V, irrell
City Ma er
sl li~,~
F T2S 4~ih~yt Ik S.„ T{4 z-~~: ,}`l~l~'°.~ i i 3r51?:it dZI'€t~,til. ;R K9 E.j Sa }s4y'"/ y'S,V -^R .S Sr ,
~r
TV of DOMN, TWW MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. MCKINNEY ST. l DENTON, TEXAS 70201
M E M O R A N D U M
DATEt July 8, 1986
TOt Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
FROMt Betty McKean, Assistant City Manager
111JECT, COUNTY IIEALTH DEPARTMENT
The County's proposal for reorganization of the County Health Department has
raised several concerns for participating municipalities, specifically as it
relates to the proposed assessments for environmental and clinical health
services. We have several concerns, particularly regarding the new formula and
the proposed assessment of $83,292 for environmental services and $68,779 for
clinical services for the 1986-87 fiscal year. A summary of these concerns are
outlined below:
According to the proposed assessment for environmental and clinical
services for 1986-87p the City of Denton would be responsible for
payment of $152,071 which is a fifty (50) per cent increase over the
current year for the same services.
The new formula to,establish assessments for 1986-87 does not
adequately address the double taxation issue for the residents of
the City of Denton who pay city and county taxes.
There is a lack of clarity regarding the long range impact of
the new formula on future assessments for participating
municipalities.
After review of the activity reports from the County Health Department,
there appears to be a lack of clarity regarding the actual justification
of such a significant budget increase for the County Health
Department for one year.
There was a lack of sufficient notification of the pending
assessments as well as sufficient time to discuss the issue with
the County Commissioner's Court and research our options.
81715004M D/fW METRO 434-2S80
€k.
FV,
Harrell, page 2
At the June 10 Council Meeting, it was the consensus of the Council that a
decision could not be reached regarding the contracting of environmental and
clinical health services until some clarification of our concerns as well as the
reorganization issue could be obtained from the County Commissioner's Court. It
was therefore the Council's recommendation that the City of Denton request an
extension of th,t June 23 deadline date as well as schedule a meeting with the
County Commissioner's Court and all participating municipalities to discuss the
overall issue in depth. The memorandum to the County Commissioner's Court from
Maycr Stephens is attached for your review.
A meeting with participating municipalities and the Commissioner's Court was
held July 1. A special meeting with Ruth Tansey, the City Manager Lloyd Harrell,
Council members James Riddlesperger and Mark Chew, Mayor Ray Stephens, and me
was held July 2. Some answers to our concerns are summarized belowt
1. In 1983, Article 4436A VTCS repealed Article 4447a of 1969 requiring the
reorganization of the County Health Department as either a Health District,
Health Department, or Health Unit. The County is taking the responsibility
to reorganize the Health Department to comply with this law. In their
efforts, a new formula was devised to assess participating municipalities
for environmental and clinical health services. This formula was to replace
the arbitrary pledges of participating municipalities as well as to
hopefully establish some equity of payment for these services by all
municipalities, It was noted that the City of Denton was contributing the
highest percentage of the total pledges. The County apparently
underestimated the impact and the repercussions of such a substantial
increase, indicating simply that there needed to be a starting point, The
lack of communication regarding the reorganization process is apparently a
result of the time contraint imposed by the County's attempt to comply with
the law as expeditiously as possible.
2. The double taxation issue apparently was not considered for the City
of Denton, According to our rosearch the Jamison Formula was established in
1980 as a means to determine the City and County share of the operating
costs for the County Health Department. It stipulates that the City's share
of those operating costs would be 47%. The Formula also provides an
allowance for double taxation by yielding a lower per capita rate.
Contrary to the County Commissioner'ti, Court position that the Jamison
Formula would increase the total assessment for health services for the
City, it would in actuality yield a lower total assessment. Utilizing the
Jamison Formula, the City of Denton would be responsible fur total
payment of $123,646 (refer to Appendix II) compared to the $1529071 total
when utilizing the County's Formula (refer to Appendix I),
3. There appears to be no significant increase in services to warrant such a
significant increase in a one year period. Huwever, the proposed budget for
1986-87 for the County is approximately $700000 more than the current year.
The current year is approximately $290,000 more than 1984-85. The
significant increase appears to stem from the increase in salaries, medical
rok.
ffi1 page 3
supplies, and office rental, particularly for the current year (refer to the
attached County Healtt, Budget Worksheet). These increases in the
budget appear to lend some credibility to the need to establish a higher
pledge from participating municipalities.
4. Each participating municipality would be responsible for renewing
their individual contract each year. In the event of a disagreement
regarding the assessment for any of the health services, a counterproposal
can be submitted for negotiation with the County Commissioners Court. A
decision to accept or reject the counterproposal will then be made by the
County Commissioners Court, Therefore, it appears that the long range impact
of the new formula on future assessments continues to remain unclear.
It appears that we have sevaral options in contracting with the County for
environmental and clinical health services for 1986-87,
1. Contract with the County for one year for the same level of services for
a total assessement of $1529071.
2. Contract with the County for one year for the same level of services and
submit a counterproposal utilizing a, the Jamison formula containing its
original determination factor of 47% for the City's share of operating
costs for a total payment of $123,666; or c. an inflationary figure of 25%
for a total assessment of $125,000.
3, Contract with the County for one year for the same level of services,
and form a task force to explore our options, particularly the formation of
our own environmental health unit.
RECOMMENDATIONSt
1, Contract with the County for a period of one year for the same level of
services for environmental and clinical health.
2. Submit a counterproposal to the County Commissionerfi Court requesting that
the Jamison Formula be applied with its original determination fs.ctor of
47% to assess the City of Denton for environmental and clinical services
for 1986-87. Total payment is not to oxceed $123,666.
3. Form a task force to investigate our options, particularly the formation
of our own environmental health service.
-2-
~ 't'.v'4n~~~eva r~gf^ ;^r1 ,_1 qa~.e:. rtr u• +„ed ':•w.n~
Novato page 4
4, Press for greater involvement in the communication process with the County
Commissioner's Court on the reoganization issues of the County Health
Department.
Betty McKean
Assistant City Manager
..3W
o-9
CITY Of DfNTON# 7MS MUNICIPAL BUILDING I DENTON, TEXAS 78201 ! TELEPHONE (817) 5888909
Office of the Mayor
June 20, 1986
The Honorable 8. B. Switzer
Denton County Commissioners Court Building
212 West Sycamore
Denton, Texas 76201
Dear Acting Judge Switzer:
According to your letter dated May 2U, Denton County is in the
process of reorganizing the County Health Department. A
portion of that reorganization process includes evaluation of
the current funding received from participating municipal-
ities. Subsequently, a new formula for assessing payment for
clinical and environmental services has been established for
these participating municipalities. It is our understanding
that the City of Denton would be responsible for payment of
$830292 for environmental services and $68,779 for clinical
services for the 1956-87 fiscal year.
There are several areas of concern regarding the new formula
and the proposed assessment:
o First of all there appears to be an inequity in how
the formula has been applied. For example, the
formula does not adequately address the double
taxation issue for residents of the City of Denton who
pay city and county taxes.
o Furthermore, the proposed assessment for each city for
the 1986-87 fiscal year is substantially higher than
assessment for the current fiscal year. In our case,
the assessed total of $1520071 is a fifty (50) per
cent increase over the 1985.86 assessment for the same
services. Therefore, it appears that there is a need
to establish a formula that is not only equitable, but
also realistic.
o In addition, the question of the long-range impact of
the formula on future assessments for all the
participating municipalities remains unclear.
-5- {
Letter to Switaer re Health Department
June 20, 1986
page Two
o it is also unclear from discussion with the Health
Department Director what the actual justification is
for such a significant departmental budget increase in
one year.
o Another concern is that there has been a lack of
sufficient notification of the pending charges as well
as sufficient time to discuss the issue with the
County Commissioners Court, and research our options.
We simply need more information regarding this issue
and clarification of our concerns.
Therefore, the City of Denton is requesting an extension of the
deadline date of 'June 23, 1986, to further consider whether your
not to contract with the County Health Department,
earliest convenience, we would like a meeting to be scheduled
with the County Commissioners Court and all the participating
municipalities to discuss the overall iosue in depth. Please
let us know when such a meeting can be held. We will then act
as expeditiously as possible regarding our decision.
Sincerely,
Kay Stephens
Mayor
ca
eel Judge buddy Cole
Commissioner Ruth Unsay
Commissioner Sandy Jacobs
Commissioner Lee Walker
2252C
.6-
APP~MD1% I
{Option I)
1986-87 FORMULA FOR DETERMINING CITIES FUNDING,
(AS PROPOSED BY COUNTY) ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION
=327,477 ANTICIPATED BUDGET
-140A00 ANTICIPATED FEES
187,677 SASE
141 614 POPULATION OF COUNTY*
102 PER CAPITA RATE
S 83,292 ASSESSMENT FOR DENTON
Anticipated budget is determined by separating environmental division from the
0y.,/86 Health Department budget.
Anticipated fees are the amount projected at the beginning of FY 85/86 and
include such fees as restaurant inspection, septic inspection, etc.
*Population figures were obtained from North Central Texas Council of
Governments and are effective January 11 1986. Since this cities of
Lewisville, Carrollton, and The Colony have their own health departments and
do not use our environmental services, their populationa were not included in
this process and no assessments are indicated for them.
For this $1.32 per person, the cities have the authority available to enforce
their or&.nances and have these services available to then:
Food Inspection (restaurants and grocery stores)
Septic System Inspections
Health Cards
Complaint Inspections
Swimming Pool Inspections
Water Well Inspections
School Inspections
Day Care and Foster Home Inspections
Rabies Control
Loan Inspections
01690/5
-7-
Appendix I
July 9, 1986
Page 2
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR CITIES' FUNDING
ENVIRONMENRAL DIVISION
BASED ON ;1.32 PER CAPITA*
CITIES POPULATION _ AS$ESMB,,
Argyle 11400 $ 1,848
Aubrey 1,300 10,716
Bartonville 805 1,063
Copper Canyon 888 1,172
Corinth 2,800 3,696
Corral City 112 148
Cross Roads 380 502
Denton 630100 830292
Double Oak 1,950 20574
Eastvale 545 719
Plower Mound 11,800 150576
Hebron 111 147
Hickory Creek 20050 2,706
Highland Village 50050 6,666
Justin 1,100 1,452
Krugerville 701 925
Krum 11250 11650
Lake Dallas 31600 4,752
Lakewood Village 197 260
Lincoln Park 38 50
Little Elm 1,150 1,518
Marsheill Creek 507 669
Northlake 169 223
Oak Point 853 1,126
Ponder 325 429
Pilot Point 2,550 30366
Roanoke 1,300 11716
Sanger 31850 5,082
Shady shores 1,050 11386
Trophy Club 20750 _ 3,630
$150,059
Unincorporated Population (County) 27,983 37*618
;187,677
0255x/2
Appendix 1,
July 9, 1986
Pa,ye 3
1986-87 FORMULA FOR DETBIMINING CITIES FUNDING
(AS PROPOSED BY COUNTY) CLINICAL DIVILLA
#275,272 ANTICIPATED BUDGET
- 27x9$2 ANTICIPATED REVENUE
247,290 BASE
;225&948 POPULATION OF COUNTY
1009 PER CAPITA RATE
$ 68,779 ASSESSMENT FOR DENTON
Anticipated budget is determined by separating clinical division from the
85/86 Health Department Budget.
Anticipated revenue includes fees, such as for inoculations, and reimbursement
for administrative costs from WIC.
Population figures were obtained from North Central Texas Council of
Governments and are effective January 1, 1986.
For this 81.09 per person, the cities have these services available to their
residents:
Child Health Clinic
Immunization Clinic
Adult Health Clinic
Maternity Clinic
Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinic
Health Education
Lice Cheek
Gamma Globulin Injections
Miscellaneous Prescription Injections
Diabetes Screening
Blood Pressure CKick
Tuberculosis Skin Test
01690/6
A
r
July I966
Page 4
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR CITIES' FUNDING
CLINICAL DIVISION
BASED ON $1.09 PER CAPITA*
CITIES POPMATION ASSESSMENT
Argyle 1,400 $ 1,526
Aubrey 1, 300 .10.417
Bartonville 805 877
Carrollton 29,934 32,628
Copper Canyon 688 968
Corinth 2,800 3,052
Corral city 112 122
Cross Roads 380 414
Denton 63,100 68,779
Doable oak 1,950 2,126
Eastvale 545 594
Flower Mound 11,800 12,862
Hebron 111 121
Hickory Creek 2,050 2,235
highland Village 50050 5,405
Justin I,1o0 1,199
Krugerville 701 764
Krum 1,250 1,363
Lake Dallas 31600 30924
Lakewood Village 197 215
Lewisville 37,200 400548
Lincoln Park 38 41
Little Elm 10150 11254
Marshall Creek 507 553
Northlake 169 184
Oak Point 853 930
PonAer 325 354
Pilot Point 2,550 21760
Roanoke 1,300 1,417
Sanger 3, 850 4,197
Shady Shores 10050 10145
The Colony 17,150 18,694
Trophy Club 20750 2,998
$215,686
Unincorporated Population (County) 31,604
-10- $2470290
025Se/3
DENTON COUNTY
BUDGET PREPARATION WORKSHEET
EXPENSES 06/19/86
PUBLIC HEALTH FUND HEALTH AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT
ACCOUNT ACCOUNT ACTUALS BUDGET ACTUAL EXPENSE INITIAL REVISED BUDGET
NUMBLR DESCRIPTION 1984-1985 1985-1986 THRU 06/01/86 1906-1987 1986-1987
34-70-10-4010 Sa~ary, Dept. Headn 8 440536.00 8 52,510.00 4 34,333.20 ; 52,986.00
34-70-10-4020 Salary, Assistanta 2310053.00 343,754.00 1770546.86 392,219.00
34-70-10-4021 Part-Time Employees .00 .00 .00 100
34-70-10-4040 Overtime Pay 000 3,810.00 .00 .00
Salaries Subtotal 2750589.00 400,074.00 2110880.06 4450205.00
34-70-10-4110 FICA AdminiscraL•ive .00 40.00 9.00 .00
34-70-10-4120 FICA 390421.00 26,516.00 15,094.69 29,063.00
34-70-10-4130 Retirement. 160163.00 25,166.00 130710.77 28,181.00
34-70-10-4140 Workers Comp 11121.00 30121.00 2,04.52 1,616.00
34-70-10-4150 TEC 157.00 401.00 238.88 747.00
34-70-10-4160 Health Insurance 13,853.00 180720.8,0 10,686.00 18,72040
34-70-10-4170 Dental. Insurance 1,496.00 21007.00 10058.96 21020.00
Benefits Subtotal 52,213.00 770971.00 42,802.82 80,347.00
34-70-10-4210 Car Allowance/Mileage 23,x',',1.00 34,220.00 21,882.50 37,220.00
34-70-10-4220 Office Supplies 2,254.00 2,500.00 1$41.34 2,500.00
34-70-10-4230 Postage 1,911.00 2,500.00 1,752.33 2,500.00
EXHIBIT ONE page 1
DENTON COUNTY
BUDGET PREPARATION WORKSHEET
(Page 2)
EXPENSES 05/19/86
PUBLIC HEALTH FUND HEALTH AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT
ACCOUNT ACCOUNT ACTUAL$ BUDGET ACTUAL EXPENSE INITIAL REVISED BUDGET
NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1984-1985 1985-1966, THRU 06/01/86 1986-1987 1986-,1987
34-70-10-4235 Copier Usage .00 .00 424.60 .00
34-70-10-4240 Printed Material 20428.00 10500.00 20039.20 20000.00
34-70-10-4260 Copier Supplies 334.00 500.00 286.90 700.00
34-70-10-4265 Operating Supplies 21.00 .00 500.92 300,00
Operational Supplies Subtotal 30,405.00 41,220.00 28,227.99 45,220.00
34-70-10-4310 Law/Reference Books 24.00 1,000.00 .00 .00
34-70-10-4320 Medical Supplies 10,197.00 100000.00 5,531.96 13,200.00
34-70-10-4340 Photographic Supplies 994.00 20000.00 1,192.80 1,000.00
34-70-1U-4350 Dues and Subscriptions 142.00 250.00 65000 150.00
Books and Supplies Subtotal 11,357.00 12,250.00 6,789.76 14,350.00
34-70-30-5010 Training/Education Expe 10603.00 20610.00 85100 21000.00
Training Expense Subtotal 1060:1.00 2,610.00 85.00 2,000.00
34-70-10-5210 Contract Labor 673.00 600 000 .00
Contract Labor Subtotal 673.00 000 000 100
34-70-10-5315 Janitorial service 000 40000.00 1,000400 4,000000
34-70-10-5375 Animil Control 000 1,800.00 262.00 1,80000r.
KMIBIT ONE pg. 2
DENTON COUNTY
BUDGET PREPARATION WORKSHEET
(Page 3)
EXPENSES 06/19/86
PUBLIC HEALTH FUND HEALTH AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT
ACCOUNT ACCOUNT ACTUAL$ BUDGET ACTUAL EXPENSE INITIAL REVISED BUDGET
NUS DESCRIPTION 1984-1965 1985-1986 , THRU 00/01/86 1986-1987 1986-1987
Professional Services Subtotal .00 5,800.00 1,262.00 51800.00
34-70-10-5570 Prof, Liability Ins. 10437.00 1,079.00 .00 10800000
Insurance Expense Subtotal 10437.00 1,079.00 .00 1,800.00
34-70-10-5630 Medical Expense 4,513.00 4,945.00 903.36 4,945.00
Misc. Court Expense Subtotal 4,513.00 4,945.00 903.36 41945.00
34-7U-10-6210 Telephone Basic Chgs. 40047.00 71000.00 41130.81 100000.00
Communications Su;--otal 4,047,00 7,000.00 4,130.81 1Or000.00
34-70-10-6500 Utilities .00 4,600.00 11493,27 61000,00
Utilities Subtotal .00 40600,00 10493.27 6,000.00
34-70-10-6650 Remodeling Expense ,00 600 4,780,00 ,00
34-70-10-6655 Misc. Bldg. Maint. 000 4$55.00 30.00 .00
34-70-10-6670 Copier Maintenance 982,00 1,000.00 71.30 10000600
34-70-10-6690 Office Machine Maint, 38.00 500600 365.70 500.00
Repairs/Maintenance Subtotal 11020,00 6,055,00 5,247,00 10500.00
34-70-10-6715 Office Rental Expense .00 37,224,00 20,009,81 490642.00
Rentals Subtotal ,00 370224,00 20009.81 49,64200
EXHIBIT ONE pg. 3
DENTON COUNTY
BUDGET PREPARATION WORKSHEET
(Page 4)
EXPENSES 06/19/86
PUBLIC HEALTH FUND HEALTH AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT
ACCOUNT ACCOUNT ACTUALS BUDGET ACTUAL EXPENSE INITIAL REVISED BUDGET
NUMBER DESCRIPTION l2g4-1985 1985-1986 THRU 06/01/86 1986-1987 198'- 87
34-70-10-6810 Unappropriated Contin. 127.00 .00 460.34 .00
Misc. Services Subtotal 127.00 .00 46004 .00
34-70-10-8010 Office Furn./Equpt. 11529.00 870.00 311.00 00.00
34-70-10-8015 Office Machines 807.00 491.00 490.63 2,000.00
34-70-10-8025 Computers .00 .00 000 000
34-70-10-8055 VCR/Projection Equpt. 21268.00 .00 .00 .00
Office Machines Subtotal 40604.00 ,1,361.00 801.63 20400.00
34-70-10-8130 Operating Equipment 353.00 .00 .00 .00
Machinery Subtotal 353.00 .00 000 .00
34-70-10 Program Total $387094140 $602,189.00 $324,093.85 $685,659.00
34-70 Department Total $387,941.00 $602,189.00 $324,093.85 $685,66940
Total Expenditures $367,941.00 $6020189.00 $3240093.85 $669,709.00 (13.860 Incr.)
34 Fund Total $669,709.00 (Reduce to 80)
16,460.00)
I
0217k
EXHIBIT UNE pg. 4
7117
1 ffY of DMWTON, TWA# MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E, McKINNEY ST. / DEN TON, TEXAS 78201
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 9, 1986
TO: Betty McKean, Asnistant City Manager
FROM: Paulette Owene-Holmes, Program Administrator
SUBJECT: COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT RESEARCH
The County has proposed the following assessments for the City
of Denton with regard to the County Health Department:
Environmental Health $ 83,292
6071
TOTALcal Health 02:
A comparison of the proposed assessments for environmental and
clinical services to calculations generated by the Jamison
Formula* for the same services, is outlined below.
Environmental Health $ 44,038
Clinical Health 79 628
TOTAL $123,666
The total Jamison Formula assessment is $28x405 (or 198) less
than the County's proposed assessment. The Jamison Formula
amount for Environmental Health is 478 less than the proposed
assessments and the amount for clinical Health is 168 more.
(See Appendix II for calculations.)
It appears that we have several options in assessing payment
for the City's share of environmental and clinical health
services for 1986-87:
I. Utilize the proposed formula by the County. The
total assessment would be $152,071 which is fifty
(50) percent higher than the current year's
assessment for the same services.
i
-11-
81715004M D/FW METRO 434-25W
NNK717~1 q,
Betty ]McKean
July 9, 1966
Page 2
II. Utilize the Jamison Formula specifically established
for determining the City's assessment for County
Health Services. The total assessment would then be
$123,666 which is $28,405 less than the county's
proposed assessment.
III. Utilize an inflationary level of 25% over the payment
for health services for the current year. The total
assessment would be $125,000 which is $22,071 less
than the County's proposed assessment.
RECOMMENDA'.I')N: The Jamison formula has been established as
our authority to determine the City's assessments for County
health kervices. The Jamison Formula is more equitable and
adequately addresses the double taxation issue by yielding a
lower per capita rate. I, therefore, recommend that a
counterproposal be submitted to the County Commissioners Court
requesting that the Jamison formula be applied to assess the
City of Denton for environmental and clinical health services
for 1986-87. Payment is not to exceed the amount of $123,666.
a C/
,!~Z
&Qe~(z
Paulette Owens-Holmes
eb
Attachment
0279e
* In our research, we found that the County Health Department
was created jointly with the City of Denton and the County in
1969. It was determined at that time that the operating costs
be divided between the City and a County on a 50/50 basis. In
19808 the Jamison formula was established making allowance for
utilization and double taxation. This formula amended that
50/50 bards for sharing the operating costs to 53% (County)/47%
(City). However, in recent years, the formula has simply not
been applied in aetermining the City's share of operating costs.
..I2_
i
APPENDIX II
(Option II)
"Environmental Health Calculations - Jamison Formula
$31;;677 Anticipated Budget
- 140 000 Anticipated Fees
$18 "IM Base (Funds Necessary)
141,664 County Population
63,100 City Population
478 City's share of the base
478 x $187,677 = $88,208 City's share of the base
$1870677 Base
-008 681,208 City's share of the base
$ , Remaining share of the base
99, 469
$ •70 per capita rate (remaining share of
141,664 base county popu-
lation)
63,100 City population
x 70 per capita rate
44, 0 Adjustment for double taxation
$68,208 City's share of base
44,170 Adjustment for double taxation
Net City share
$44,038 Environmental Services
-13-
APPENDIX II
July 9, 1986
Page 2
Clinical Health Calculations - Jamison Formula
$275,2'172 Anticipated Budget
~277'.~9882 Anticipated Revenue
$147,290 Base (Funds necessary)
225,948 County Population*
63,100 City Population
470 City's share of the ba.ae
47% x $247,290 $116,226 City's share of the base
$247,290 Base
116,226 City's share of the base
$133.1064 Remaining share of the base
$131,064
225,064 $ X56 Per capita rate (remaining share of
base - county popu-
lation)
630100 City population
x X58 per capita rate
136,598 Adjustment for double taxation
$116,226 City's share of base
-36_1 598 '&djustment for double taxation
Net City share
$ 79,628 Clinical Services
$ 441038 Environmental Services
..19,F 628 Clinical Services
$1230666 Toxal ~)eta,:an► ti .~tr~ 1m1~i~t1~k,. grmula)
* includes Carrollton, Lewisville, and The Colony, which have
their own Environmental health Departments, but not their own
Clinical Health Departments.
0279e
-iG-
ice" ,
DATRs July,f, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORM
TO$ Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Farrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Receive a report and consider further action on the holding and
disposition of animals received at the City of Denton Animal
Control Center from non-City residents.
RECOMMENDATIONS
it is the staff's recommendation that the City Council authorize the staff to
discontinue the practice of accepting animals from non-City of Denton residents
effective as of October 1, 1986, and that we notify the county and neighboring
municipalities of our intent as soon as possible.
SUMMARYs
Since the new Animal Control Center opened in July, 1981, the City has been
accepting, holding, and disposing of animals received from non-City of Denton
residents at a nominal fee. This practice was initiated by the City to assist
non-City residents with animal probleme in light of a $51,000 contribution from
Denton County for the construction of the new facility. Over the last few
years, the number of animals received from non-City residents has increased to
the point where the citizens of the City of Denton are subsidizing the opera-
tional and capital costs associated with the holding and disposition of these
animals. In addition, the number of animals received are creating a sfgnifi-
cant overcrowding problem at the Center which is having a negative effect on
enforcement activities and ou: officers' ability to provide services to the
citizens of Denton.
BACKGROUNDS
Over the last two months, the staff has been meeting s-U th representatives of
Denton County and neighboring municipalities relativo to the acceptance,
holding, and disposal of animals from outside the City of Denton. Whila there
has been some headway made in securing a substantial contribution to the
expansion of the Center by Denton County and one or two of the neighboring
municipalities, negotiations have been somewhat stalled relative to formal
agreements with these entities relative to our recovery of all operational
costs associated with the acceptance of these animals. Since a formal agree-
ment in which the City of Denton recovers full costs has not been reached at
this time, we feel it is necessary to inform all interested parties of our
intent to discontinue our present practice of accepting animals from outside
the corporate limits of Denton.
M
CITY COUNCtI, REPORT FORMAT
July 8, 1986
Page 2
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GRWPS AFFECTEDt
City of Denton Animal Control Division.
Residents of the City of Denton.
Residents of neighboring municipalities and of the unincorporated areas of
Denton County.
FISCAL IMPAM
While the elimination of this program will reduce revenues by ~.n estimated
$4,800, there will be a definite improvement in enforcement activities which
should offset, if not exceed, the lust revenue.
Respectfully submitted,
Lloyd V, rell 1
City Ma ger
Prepared bys
Bil ge o
Assistant Director of Public Works
Approved bys
le~x~'V -
Bill Angell J0 z
Assistant Director of Public works
an3
•
MR ~W,117
Ciff of DffAfM, TEXAS MUNICIPAL AUILDINC / DENTON, TEXAS 70201 / TELEPHONE (017) ade-M?
ONIor of the City Afsn&or
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Lloyd V. Harrell
FROM: Rick Svehla, Assistant City Manager
DATE: July _0, 1986
SUBJECT: Review of the Smoke Detector Ordinance
Bob Hagaman, Fire Marshall, and Jackie Doyle, Building
Official have reviewed the proposed ordinance. They have
suggested a few insignificant changes be made concerning
building code and the electrical code. Otherwise neither
division has found any major problems. In fact, they
whole-heartedly endorse the ordinance.
Our concern will focus on the enforcement aspect aspect of
this. Enforcement will be done through the Fire Marshall's
office with help from Building Inspection and the Code
Enforcement people.
We will be at the meeting next Tuesday and will be Nappy to
discuss any other questions you or the Council mignt iadve.
RR If c ve a
Assistant City Manager
ji
2991M
s.'-~1~' ~ f0 Y'r7~*.'P i,._ii",~ M11u iX. ~}:LZ~ ,:.An ~•_:L '~z +r'y'Fa T .f' 3~+~•°~~'`Fa1 OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
/Paul Reed, Acting Fire Chief
Bob Hagemann, Fire Marshal
Jackie Doyle, Building Official
FROM: Debra Adami Drayovitch, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Smoke Detectors
DATE: June 30, 1986
Last month, Councilmember Chew asked that I research whether the
City could enac•r an ordinance imposing a penalty upon apartment
owners who fail to install smoke detectors in each dwelling unit.
An examination of the Texas Property Code reveals that a tenant is
entitled to the following statutory remedies if a landlord fails
to install a smoke detector in his apartment:
(1) obtain a court order directing the landlord to install
a detector;
(2) judgment for damages suffered because of the violation;
(3) udgment against the landlord for one month's rent plus
1100;
(4) judgment against the landlord for court costs and
attorney's fees; and
(5) unilateral termination of the lease.
The law provides, in Section 91.252 of the Property Code, that a
City may adopt an ordinance that ;.mposss additional enforcement
provisions s) long as the ordinance conforms to the state law.
Accordingly, attached is a draft ordinance which conforms to the
state law and imposes a penalty of up to $1,000 if a landlord has
failed to install the required smoke detectors. Please review
same and advise as to .,tiy suggested changes you might have,
especially with respeti.t to the provisions in our Building Code,
If you find the ordinance acceptable, please schedule it for
consideration at the next council meeting.
~tGxf 1
B
DAD:js
cc: Councilmember Mark Chew
Attachare
~'n 7-,g.'A 4T:e: , -f ^ 4-fc IS' r
N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 10
(FIRE PROTECTION) OF THE CDDB OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
DENTON* TEXAS BY THE ADDITION OF ARTICLE V THERETO TO BE ENTITLED
'tALARM SYSTEMS"; REQUIRING THE INSTALLATION OF SMOKE DETECTORS IN
CERTAIN
OF DWELLING $1,000 UNITS; 00 FOR PROVIDING
VIOLATIONS RTHEA PENALTY REOF; AND INPROVTHE IDMAXIMUM AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THZ CITY OF DENTON HERESY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
That Chapter 10 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Denton, "'nxas is hereby amended by the addition of a new Article V
which said section reads as follows;
ARTICLE V. ALAD., SYSJE. i$
Sec. 10-62 Definitions
(1) Bedroom means any room which is designed with the
nrI"'ent that it be used for sleeping purposes.
(2) Corridor means a passage which connects parrs of the
dwelling unit.
(3) Dwelling Unit means a home, mobile home, duplex
unit, apartment unit, condominium unit, or any
dwelling unit in a multiunit rssid';cial structure.
It also means one or more rooms which are subject to
a single rental agreement and which are rented to a
tenant of tenants for use by persons as a permanent
residence.
(4) Landlord means the owner, lessor, or sublessor of a
3wlTing unit. A managing agent or leasing agent,
whether residing or officing an-site or off-site,
shall be considered the agent of the landlord for
purposes of notice and other communications required
or allowed under this section. Otherwise, a manager
or agent of the landlord shall be considered a
landlord under this section only if the manager or
agent purports to be the owner, lessor, or sublessor
in the rental agreement,
(S) Smok De
e tect r means a device which is (1) designed
to etect visible or invisible products of combus-
tion, (2) designed with an alarm audible to the
bedrooms it services, (3) powered by either battery,
alternating current, or other power source, (4)
tested and listed for use as a smoke detector by
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc„ Factor; Mutual
Research Corporation, or United States Testing
Company, Inc.. and (S) in good working order.
(6) T n nt means an; person who is entitled to occupy a
we ng unit to the exclusion of others and who It
obligated to pay rent for the dwelling unit under a
written or oral rental agreement.
V 3T .ems 47W 1 'fyan „ c `w Fy r +k r'^ C cF *p
.wi
(7) 7e~r of Lake Detecror evaas the performance of the
act or acts w IC The manufacturer of a smoke
detector recommends for that particular model of
smoke detector as a simple test of whether or not
the smoke detector is in good working order.
(8) Units Constructed After Se tomb*r LL 1981 means any
unit for which a u naa pets, tT' i ssued after
September 1, 1981, or, if no building permit is
issued, any unit which is occupied as a residence
for the first time after September 1, 1981,
(9) Units Constructed on or be or September 1, 1981
means any un t €or wFi'lc a u Iris peter t was bl 'd Issued on or before September , 191, or which was
occupied as a residence after r f8irst time on or
before that date.
Sec. 10-63. Duty to Install Smoke Detectors in Certain
Dwelling Units
(a) New units constructed after September 1, 1981, at
least one smoke detector shall be installed by the
landlord outside of each separate bedroom in the
immediate vicinity of the bedroom, except that:
(2) where the dwelling unit is designed with the
intent that a single multipurpose room be used
for dining, living, and sleeping purposes, the
smoke detector ;hall be located inside the room
rather than outside;
(2) where the bedrooms are served by the same
corridor, at least one smoke detector shall be
installed in the corridor in the immediate
vicinity of the bedrooms; and
(3) where one or more bedrooms, are located on a
level above the cooking and livin area, the
smoke detector for the bedrooms she I be placed
at the center of the ceiling directly above the
top of the stairway,
(b) A smoke detector required by this section shall be
installed prior co commencement of possession of the
dwelling unit by the tenant in accordance with
manufacturer's recommended procedures, subject to
the following;
l) a smoke detector shall be installed on a ceiling
or wall;
(2) if installed on a ceiling, the smoke alarm shall
be installed no closer than six inches to a wall;
(3) if installed on a wall, the smoke detector shall
be installed no closer than 6 inches to the
ceiling and no farther than 12 inches from the
ceiling;
(1) a smoke detector may be located elsewhere if
permitted by the 3uilding Code; and
PAO$ 2
~Ly$': yWEt 'YIY i'i 'yd'[t`f'~iy e.4Y'.F_g,RriMTY1.i.-~{R gv ~cs!W.+ F °rc,'.:_ ~`_f aGC?Y.t ?4i.>b,~yi L;2=
(5) if a smoke detector is electrically operated
rather than battery operated. the power system
and Installation procedures for the smoke
detector shall comply With the Building Code.
(b) Bxistin Unit For ell dwelling units constructed
on or a ore eptembex 1, 14$1, at least one smoke
detector shall be installed by the landlord in
accordance with Subsection (a). A smoke detector
required by this subsection shall be installed in
accordance with the lor.ation and installation
procedure requirements of Subiattlon (a).
See. 10-61. Duty to_Inspect an 9 IF.
(a) Upon commencement of a tenant's possession of a
dwelling unit containing a smoke detector, the
landlo.td shall .s vs a duty to test the smoke
detector to verify that it is in good working
order. Upon installation et a smoke detector by a
landlord after commencement of the tenant's
possession of a dwelling unit, the landlord shall
have a duty to test the smoke detector at that time
to verify that it is in good working order,
(b) During the term of the rental agreement or any
renewal or extension thereof, the landlord shall
have a duty to inspect and repair a smoke detector
only if the tenant has given notice to the landlord
of malfunction or made a request to the landlord for
Inspection
in repair.
writing The
unless i` written the landlord
lois
required In the written rental agreement. The
landlord shall comply with the tenant,. to uest for
inspection and repair within a ro&ooa,b1o time,
considering the availability of motorist, labor, and
utilities.
•
(c) A landlord shall not have a duty to inspect or
repair a smoke detector if the damage or malfunction
uusts~,ssor Invites tenant
g
d;ring or h term tenant's of the frental
agreement or any renewai or extension period of the
rental agreement, Provided, however, a landlord
shall have a duty to repair or replace a smoke
detector covered by this subsection if the tenant
pays In advance for the reasonable cost of the
repair or replacement, including labor, materials,
taxes, and overhead.
(d) A landlord shall have satisfied his duty to inspect
or repair a damaged or malfunctioning smoke derecto,
if, after a test of the smoke detector If, after a
test of the smoke detector, the test indicates that
the smoke detector is in good working order.
Sec. 10.6x,
(a) A person commits an offense if as landlord of a
dwelling unit he:
(1) fails to install a smoke detector in compliance
with Section 10.63; or
PAG1 3
i
7W "T4"I
(2) fails to test or repair a smoke detector in
compliance with Section 10.61,
SECTION II.
Any person who shall violate a provision of this ordinance,
or fails to comply therewith or with any of the requirements
thereof, or of a permit or certificate Issued thereunder, shall
be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding
One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00). Each such person shall be
deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or
portion thereof during which any violation of this ordinance is
committed, or continued, and upon conviction of any such
violations such person shall be punished within the limits above.
SECT 0 Ill.
That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (11)
days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is
hereby directed to cause the capt'.an of this ordinance to be
published twice in the Denton Rocord-Chronicle, the official
newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of
the date of its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1986.
1s' a . , MkYOK
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
u
CHARLbTT1 MEN CITY SECUMT
CITY OF DENTON,,TEXAS
APPROVED A3 TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
PAGE 4
5
DATE: July 15, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Zoning Requests - 214.48 acres south of Hickory Creek Road
and west of Teasley Lane (FM 2181).
Z-1x22, Z-1823, Z-ld24, Z-18250 Z-1826
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission will consider these items
at public hearings on July 23, 1986 (tentative schedule).
SUMMARY: The property was annexed cy the City of Denton on April as 198u.
Three other properties on Hickory Creek Road have beers zoned
this year.
N.ACK aOUND: The petitioners have requested five {5} zoning changes. The
staff had suggested a planned development. The petitioners are
zoning, not developing, the property and therefore were concerned
about doing a layout before a aeveioper could view the property.
The requests for zoning are outlined below:
Z-1822 - Single Family (SF-10) - 29.356 acres
Z-1823 - Single Family (SF-10) - School - 13.41 acres
Z-1824 - Single Family (SF-'/) - 15b.044 acres
Z-1825 - Multi-Family (MF-1) - 10.999 acres
Z-1826 - General Retail (GR) - 4.683 acres
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
All departments involved in the development process.
FISCAL _IMPACT: No impact can be determined at this time.
Respectfully suomittea:
oy re
CI ty, alter
Prepared by:
~c rlc
Cecile arson
Urban Planner
Appr e
e
Director of P1 anni nSt
al)d kVelopalent k,
iiyl .y -.,y ~i le , "_rf 1.'.' v5 fir. , F U: n ti4'•>., r
I~~~as rej.. --aa.`.~~„9-~ i ..lf li' a'. -~.~:~6 ~ v ¢ e hk..~ir. 4 r .~i,. s r~,.°t'$
A r
T AIL I I I
ia.41 a4; E MULTI. _ rAHIV
I
'5V- 7
Y4,
15 (o. U'd ap, .
-lot /
sr - to
dii
•y- wY 4N
.`4. wI IaM
ft*bLft y,
S Tut
t.
~vr~NNr s.ar'1p
i
. I .
r. Ir~Vt WMN.h)Ck. 111/IWlILII M Ni71ANM "KNiN
--K BIME EWffEE
R',twk;)C>
'S xr~r 'rive. nM1Y'J flllrl'1
y ~rt MMwl, lfflN lOMr~+ll'YM Jiq
i
F
i1 i , • , J r r y^Vr (xf{. Rq
3 1 IJf . d~ •`'1r~ , t1
7. Furnish the City with three (3) copies of the preliminary report,
drawingt, and cost estimate.
8. Prepare answers to Federal Aviation Administration questions or
i concerns in preliminary design report.
8. In the Design Phase (for Work as Authorized by Cif)
1. Furnish engineering data necessary for the City to prepare permits
required by Local, State and Federal authorities, and advise the City re-
garding coordination of project with Federal agencies.
2. Preparation of detailed contract plans and specifications for
construction$ furnish all necessary plans, specifications and proposal
documents to the City for advertising for bids, (City estimates a maximum
of sets of advertising documents will be required.)
j 3. Preparation of estimates of quantities and costs.
4. Assist City in securing bidsi prepare bid tabulation sheet.
l
5. Analyze bids and make recommendation concerning award.
6. In the event the lowest bid exceeds the project budget cost, confer
w';h City and make revisions as is necessary and satisfactory to City for
the readvertising of the project for bids.
C. In the Construction Phase
1. Review material submittals.
2. Review and make recommendations baseJ on laboratory test reports
and job mix formulas for hot mix asphaltic concrete.
3. Consultation with the City and advise during construction,
4. General observations of the work and interpretation of the plans
and specifications by periodic visits (a. distinguished from the continuous
services of a resident project representative) to the site by a qualified
inspector. Poriodic visits shall mean a minimum of one project visit weekly
of a one hour duration during the Construction Phase. In performing these
services, the Engineer will endeavor to protect the City against defects and
deficiencies in the work of the Contractor, but he rannot guarantee the
performance of the Contractor nor be responsible for the actual supervision of
construction operations or for the safety, measures that the Contractor takes
or should take.
Engineering Services Contract - Airport Paving Improvements
W. P, Will$ Consulting Engineers
Page 3 of 9
r, ?r