HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-16-1986
A~tina~
C~ os~~~.N+o~
Coo
1
AGENDA
C1'PY OF DENTUN CITY COUNCIL
September 16, 198'6
Work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday
September 16, 1986, at 3:00 p.m. at the intersection of
Denton-Oak Streets.
3:00 p,m.
1. This session will be a walking tour of the proposed
Uak-hickory Historic District with Council and staff
convening at the corner of Denton Street and Oak
Street. Ir the event of rain, convene in the City
Hall parking lot, 215 East McKinney,
Work Session of the Gity of Denton City council on Tuesday,
September 16, 1986, at 5:30 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room of
the Municipal Building at which the following items will be
considered:
5:30 p.m.
11 Receive a report regarding airport improvement
projects.
2. Receive a report and consider a recommendation
regarding Capital Recovery Fees.
3. Receive a performance report from the Customer Service
Division - Finance Department.
4. Executive Session:
A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17
V.A.T,S.
B. Real Estate Under Sec, 2(f); Art. 6252-17
V. A. T. S,
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(g),
Art 6252-17 V.A.T,`~,
Regular Fleeting of the City of Denton City Cou,acil on Tuesday,
September 16, 1986, at 7:00 p,m, in the Council Chambers of the
Municipal Building at which the following items will be
considered:
City of Denton City Council Agenda
September 16, 1986
Page Two
7:OU p.m.
11 Present a proclamation for the Daughters of the
American Revolution.
2. Receive a report on TMPA activities.
3. Public Hearings:
A. Hold a public hearing un the Oak-Hickory Historic:
Zoning District, Petition of the Denton Historic
Landmark Commission requesting a historic
landmark district designation in the West
Oak/West Hickory street area. The boundaries of
the proposed district are as follows:
The north siae of Oak Street from 610 West Oak
west to the intersection of Oak and Fulton
streets.
The south side of Oak Street from 609 Wezi' Oak
west to the intersection of West Oak and Welch
streets.
The north side of Hickory Street from the
inttersection of Hickory and Welch streets to the
intersection of Hickory and Williams streets.
The east side of Denton Street from the
intersection of Denton and Oak streets to the
intersection of Denton and Pearl streets.
The -_uth side of Pearl Street from 607 Pearl
west to the intersection of Pearl and Denton
streets.
The property is more particularly described as City of
Denton block numbers 32a, 329, 330, 336, 476, 488 and
part of block 475. (The Historic Landmark Commission
and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.)
B. Z-1827. Petition of Oak Hill Joint Venture
requesting a change in zoning from the
agricultural (A) district to the planned
development (PD) classification and approval of a
concept plan on an 80.801 acre tract located on
the south side of East McKinney Street (FM 426)
approximately 3 miles east of Loop 288. The
property is further described as a tract in the
Giueon Walker Survey, Abstract 1330, if
approved, the planned development will permit the
following land uses:
City of Denton City Council Agenda
September 16, 1986
Page 3
Single Family Attached - 13.94 acres
164 units with a density of 11.7 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 11.25 acres
62 units on 5,000 square foot lots
with a density of 5.51 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 45.9 acres
187 units on 6,000 square foot lots
with a density of 4.09 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 9.87 acres
17 units on 7,000 square foot lots
with a density of 1.72 units per acre (The,
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.)
1. Adoption of an ordinance approving a change in
zoning and approval of a concept plan on an
80.801 acre tract located on the south side of
East McKinney Street (FM 426) approximately 3
miles east of Loop 288.
C. Z-1829. Petition of Metroplex Engineering
Corporation requesting a change in zoning from
the single family (SF-7 and SF-10) districts to
the planned development classification and
approval of a detailed plan, including the
preliminary plat of Westgate Heights, Phase III,
on nn 18.446 acre tract located on the south side
of Payne Drive approximately 2,300 feet west of
Bonnie Brae Street. The property is more
particularly described as a tract in the Francis
Batson Survey, Abstract 43. If approved, the
planned development will permit the following
land uses;
Single Family Detached - 4.9 acres
15 units on minimum 10,000 square foot lots
with a density of 3 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 13.4 acres
64 units on minimum 7,000 square foot lots
with a density of 4.7 units per acre (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.)
1.. Adoption of an ordinance approving a change in
zoning and approval of a detailed plan on an
18.446 acre tract located on the south side of
Payne Drive approximately 2,300 feet west of
Bonnie Brae Street.
City of Denton City Council Agenda
September 16, 1986
Page Your
D. Z•11831. Petition of Bob Tripp, Trustee,
requesting a change in zoning from the
agricultural (A) district to the single family
(SF-7) classification on a 59.14 acre tract
located at the southwest corner of North Locust
Street (FM 2164) and Hercules Street. The
property is further described as a tract in the
B.H.B. and C.R.K. Company Survey, Abstract 186.
It approved, the zoning will permit the
development of single family detached units on
minimum 7,000 square foot lors. (The Planning
and Zoning Commission recommends approval.)
1. Adoption of an ordinance approving a change in
zoning on a 50.14 acre tract located at the
southwest corner of North Locust Street (FM 2164)
anO Hercules Street.
E. Hold a public hearing regarding the 1986-87
Annua: Program of Services.
1. Adoption of an ordinance approving the
1986-87 Annual Program of Services.
F. Hold a public hearing concerning the funding of
new street name signs.
1. Adoption of an ordinance amending Appendix A
of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Denton, Texas, to provide for the cost of
furnishing and installing street name signs.
4. Variances:
A. V-31. Petition of Harry T. Riney for a variance
or special exception of Article 4.07 of the City
of Denton Subdivision and Land Development
Regulations which establishes certain minimum
capacities or gallon per minute water flow
requirements for fire protection purposes for all
developments prior to connection to the city
water system. Additional development is proposed
on commercial (C) property located at 520 South
Elm. (The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends denial.)
City of Denton City Council
September 16, 1986
Page Five
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 purchase orders to be
approved for pavment under the Ordinance section of the
agenda, Detailed back-up information is attached to the
ordinances (Agenda items At 6.B,), 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 Urders:
1. P.O. 09647 - Water Meters
21 Bid 074967 - Advanced Control Systems -
$179.274.00
3. Bid 075002 - AG-Chem Equipment Co,, Inc,
412,000.00
B, Plats and Replats:
1. Consider approval of preliminary plat of the
New Place Addition, Block A. (The Planning
and Zoning Commission recommends approval.)
2. Consider approval of preliminary and final
replat of the Owsley Park Addition, Lot 10R,
block 91 (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends approval,)
C. Contracts
1. Consider an annual software maintenance
contract for $310875 with American
Management Systems for financial system
known as "LGFS" and associated sub-systems.
(Data Processing Advisory Board recommends
approval.)
• 2, Consider an annual software maintenance
contract for $20,000 with TRES Systems, INC.
for payroll /personnel system known as "EIS"
and associated tax modules, (Data Processing
Advisory Board recommends approval.)
City of Denton City Council Agenda
September 16, 198b
Page Six
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 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.
C. Consider adoption of an ordinance adopting the
1985 Edition of the Uniform Building Code with
amendments.
U. Consider adoption of an ordinance altering the
speed limit on F.M. 2181 (Teasley Lane) between
Dallas Drive and Ryan Road.
h. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the
Mutual Aid Agreemint between the Denton State
School and the City of Uenton.
F. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a
contract with the County Health Department for
fiscal year 1986-87.
G. Consider adoption of an ordinance dealing with
one-way traffic on Highland Street,
H. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting the
bid of Arthur J. Gallagher $ Co., for certain
insurance coverage.
I. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending the
1985-86 budget.
7. Resolutions:
A. Consider approval of a resolution approving year
end budget adjustments for FY 1985-86.
B. Consider approval of a resolution authorizing the
City manager to submit to the Department of
Housing and Urban Development an amendment to the
Final Statement of Objectives and Projected Use
of Funds.
City of Denton City Council
September. 160 1986
Page Seven
C, Consider approval of a resolution appointing a
Municipal Judge and authorizing the Mayor to sign
an employment agreement with the judge.
D. Consider approval of a resolution accepting a
grant in aid from the Federal Aviation
Administration.
8. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
91 New Business;
This item provides a section for Council Members to
suggest items for future agendas.
10. Executive Session;
A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17
V.A,T.S.
B. Real Estate Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17
V.A.T.S.
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(g),
Art 6252-17 V.A.T.S.
11. Official Action on Executive Session Items;
A. Legal Matters
B. Real Estate
C, Personnel
L, Board Appointments
C E R T I F I C. A T E
1 certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the
bulletin boar at the Cit Hall of the City of Denton, Texas,
on the, 4 day of 1986 at ) o'clock
p.m./
w- \ 2374C
AGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
September 16, 1986
Work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
September 16, 1986, at 3:00 p.m. at the intersection of
Denton-Oak Streets.
3:00 p.m.
1. This session will be a walking tour of the proposed
Oak-hickory Historic District with Council and staff
convening at the corner of Denton Street and Oak
Street, In the event of rain, convene in the City
Hall parking lot, 215 bast McKinney.
work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
September 16, 19860 at 5:30 p.m, in the Civil Defense Room of
the Municipal Building at which the £011oi4ing items will be
considered:
5:30 p.m.
1. Receive a report regarding airport improvement
projects.
2. Receive a report and consider a recommendation
regarding Capital Recovery Fees.
3. Receive a performance report from the Customer Service
Division - Finance Department.
4. Executive Session:
A. Legal Flatters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17
V,A,T.S.
B. Roal Estate Under Sec, 2(f), Art. 6252-17
V. A. 1'. S.
C. Personnel/Boa r.d Appointments Under Sec. 2(g
Art 6252-•17 V.A.T.S.
Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
September 16, 1986, at 7:U0 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the
Municipal Building at which the following items will be
considered:
City of Dentrin City Council Agenda
September 16, 1986
Page Two
7:0U p.m.
1. Present a proclamation for the Daughters of the
American Revolution.
2. Receive a report on TMPA activities.
3. Public Hearings;
A. Hold a public hearing on the Oak-Hickory Historic
Zoning District. Petition of the Denton Historic
Landmark Commission requesting a historic
landmark district designation in the West
Oak/West Hickory street area. The boundaries of
the proposed district are as follows;
The north side of Oak Street from 610 West Oak
west to the intersection of Oak and Fulton
streets.
The south side of Oak Street from 609 West Oak
west to the intersection of west Oak and Welch
streets.
The north side of Hickory Street from the
intersection of Hickory and Welch streets to the
intersection of Hickory and Williams streets.
The east side of Denton Street from the
intersection of Denton and Oak streets to the
intersection of Denton and Pearl streets.
The south side of Pearl Street from 607 Pearl
west to the intersection of Pearl and Denton
streets.
The property is more particularly described as City of
Denton block numbers 328, 329, 330, 336, 476, 488 and
part of block 4750 (The Historic Landmark Commission
and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.)
B. Z-1827. Petition of Oak Hill Joint Venture
requesting a change in zoning from the
agricultural (A) 6istrict to the planned
development (PD) classification and approval of a
concept plan on an 80.801 acre tract located on
the south side of Hast McKinney Street (FM 426)
approximately 3 miles east of Loop 288. The
property is further described as a tract in the
Gideon Walker Survey, Abstract 1330. if
approved, the planned development will permit the
following land uses:
City of Dentun City Council Agenda
September 160 1986
Page 3
Single Family Attached - 13.94 acres
164 units with a density of 11,7 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 11.25 acres
62 units on 5,000 square foot lots
with a density of 5.51 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 45.9 acres
187 units on 6,000 square foot lots
with a density of 4.09 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 9.87 acres
17 units on 7,000 square foot lots
with a density of 1.72 units per acre (T tie
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval,)
1. Adoption of an ordinance approving a change in
zoning and approval of a concept plan on an
80.801 acre tract located on the south side of
Bast McKinney Street (FM 426) approximately 3
miles east of Loop 288.
C. Z-1829. Petition of Metroplex Engineering
Corporation requesting a change in zoning from
the single family (SP-7 and SF-10) districts to
the planned development classification and
approval of a detailed plan, including the
preliminary plat of Westgate Heights, Phase 111,
on an 18.446 acre tract located on the south side
of Payne Drive approximately 2,300 feet west of
Bonnie Brae Street. The property is more
particularly described as a tract in the Francis
Batson Survey, Abstract 43. If approved, the
planned development will permit the following
land uses:
Single Family Detached - 4.9 acres
IS units on minimum 1U,U00 square foot lots
with a density of 3 units per acre
Single family Detached - 13.4 acres
64 units on minimum 7,000 square foot lots
with a density of 4.7 units per acre (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
approval.)
1. Adoption of an ordinance approving a change in
zoning and approval of a detailed plan on an
18,446 acre tract located on the south side of
Payne Drive approximately 2,300 feet west of
Bonnie Brae Street.
City of Denton City Council Agenda
September 16, 1986
Page Four
D. Z+1831. Petition of Bob Tripp, Trustee,
requesting a change in zoning from the
agricultural (A) district to the single family
(SF-7) classification a 59.14 acre tract
located at the southwest corner of North Locust
Street (FM 2164) and Hercules Street. The
property is further described as a tract in the
B.B.B. and C.R.R.^,ompany Survey, Abstract 186.
It approved, the zoning will permit the
development of single family detached units on
minimum 7,000 square foot lots. (The Planning
and Zoning Commission recommends approval.)
1. Adoption of an ordinance approving a change in
zoning on a 59.14 acre tract located at the
southwest corner of North Locust Street (FM 2164)
and Hercules Street,
h. Hold a public hearing regarding the 1986-87
Annual Program of Services.
1. Adoption of an ordinance approving the
1986-87 Annual Program of Services.
F. Hold a public hearing concerning the funding of
new street name signs.
1. Adoption of an ordinance amending Appendix A
of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Denton, Texas, to provide for the cost of
furnis4ing and installing street name signs.
4. Variances:
A. V-31. Petition of Harry T. Riney for a variance
or special exception of Article 4.07 of the City
of Denton Subdivision and Land Development
Regulations which establishes certain minimum
capacities or gallon per minute water flow
requitements for fire protection purposes for all
developments prior to connection to the city
water system. Additional development is proposed
on commercial (C) property located at 520 South
blm. (The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends denial.)
City of Denton City Council
September 16, 1986
Page Five
51 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 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.B,). 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 Urders:
1. P.O. 09647 - Water Motors
21 Bid #7490 - Advanced Control Systems -
$179.274.UU
3. Hid 075UU2 - A6-Chem Equipment Co., Inc, -
$12,000.00
b. Plats and Replats:
11 Consider approval of preliminary plat of the
New Place Addition, Block A. (The Planning
and Zoning Commission recommends approval.)
2. Consider approval of preliminary and final
replat of the Owsley Park Addition, Lot 10R,
Block 96 (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends approval.)
C. Contracts
11 Consider an annual software maintenance
contract for $31,875 with American
Management Systems for financial system
known as "LGFS" and associated sub-systems.
(Data Processing Advisory Board recommends
approval.)
2. Consider an annual software maintenance
contract for $20,000 with TRES Systems, INC.
for payroll /personnel system known as 'IBIS"
and associated tax modules. (Data Processing
Advisory Board recommends approval.)
City of Denton City Council Agenda
September 16, 1986
Page Six
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 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.
C. Consider adoption of an ordinance adopting the
1985 Edition of the Uniform Building Code with
amendments.
]1. Consider adoption of an ordinance altering the
speed limit on F.M. 2181 (Teasley Lane) between
Dallas Drive and Ryan Road,
h, Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the
Mutual Aid Agreement between the Denton State
School and the City of Denton.
F. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a
contract with the Cos.inty Health Department for
fiscal year 1986-87.
G. Consider adoption of an ordinance dealing with
one-way traffic on Highland Street,
H. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting the
bid of Arthur J. Gallagher $ Co., for certain
insurance coverage.
11 Consider adoption of an ordinance amending the
1985-86 budget.
7. Resolutions:
A. Consider approval of a resolution approving year
end budget adjustments for FY 1985-86.
B. Consider approval of a resolution authorizing the
City Manager to submit to the Department of
Housing and Urban Development an amendment to the
Final Statement, of Objectives and Projected Use
of Funds.
l .
City of Denton City Council
September 16, 1986
Page Seven
C. Consider approval of a resolution appointing a
Municipal Judge and authorizing the Mayor to sign
an employment agreement with the judge.
D. Consider approval of a resolution accepting a
grant in aid from the Federal Aviation
Administration.
81 Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager,
9. New Business:
This item provides a section for Council Members to
suggest items for future agendas.
10. Executive Session:
A. Legal Maters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17
V.A.T.S.
B. Real Estate Under Sec. 2(f), Art, 6252-17
V.A,T,S.
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(g),
Art 6252-17 V.A.T,S,
11. Official Action on Executive Session Items:
A, Legal Matters
B, Peal Estate
C. Personnel
D. Board Appointments
C E R T I F I C A T E
I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the
bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Denton, Texas,
on the day of , 1986 at o'clock
(a.m.} p.m.
23740
cirY of AFNTON, rEXA$ MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 18201 / TELEPHONE (817) 5ee-8307
M E M 0 R A N D U M Offlos of the City Monapar
TO: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
FROM: Rick Svehla, Assistant. City Manager
DATE: September 12, 1986
SUB a ur : Airport Improvements
The Airport Advisory Board met last. Tuesday and discussed
improvements to the airport. They discussed the airport grant
as well as funding other improvements to vork hand-in-hand with
the grant. We have been advised that the grant will be
offered. In fact, we have a resolution on the council agenda
for such action Tuesday night. In conjunction with that, the
board felt that they should recommend to the council that
additional financing be provided to provide access to the grant
facilities. They felt that this would enhance the development
capabilities of the airport and they also felt that in two or
three years, it would make the airport self-sufficient.
Finally, they felt it would help us in persuading the FFA on
future grant money. These improvements would also help us
market our facilities to industrial prospects and help enhance
our industrial development capabilities.
As you can see from the minutes, they suggested that the
Council consider $500,000 which would enable us to do all the
access roads and utility lines and develop all the new taxi-way
areas. It would also allow us to make improvements to the
terminal building, buy a small amount of equipment, and provide
us with some funds to extend tax).-ways so that our leasing
activity incentive can remain strong. If the coe'.ncil feels
that a more conservative approach is needed, then they would
recommend a minimum of $400,000 be funded through C.O.'s.
If you or the council have any further questions, we will be
happy to t.ry and answer them for you at the study session.
Rick vehl
Assistant City Manager
sj
3075M
4~
rr
K) I
9 TAXIWAYS
- 4 ROADS
l' 1Itt,k KIi,C)
f3FACON
,
q 3 1
.._..._.__.,..r..,.M.,.................~..., . ~...,...,........._......M..,._....... ~ U 1. (~131~~ U G, l1 _
S C A L E 1"w 4 r)
DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
Table 1
LAND USAGE BY ACREAGE
(August, 1986)
AREA ACREAGE BASED AVAILABLE
ITEM I - FLIGHT ACTIVITIES (Acres) REMAINING AIRCRAFT SPACES
as Runways, Taxiways,
Clear Zones 398.0 638.0 0 0
SUBTOTAL I 398.0 240.0 0 0
ITEM II - DEVELOPED ACREAGE
at Ramp space 7.5 28 81
b. Hangar areas 6.2 65 65
c. Property leased, but
not developed 17.70 0 0
d. Roads, parking, other 3.5 0 0
SUBTOTAL II 34.9 205.1 93 146
ITEM III - UNDEVELOPED ACREAGE
a, west side of Airport 122.0 0 0
b. East side of Airport 8340 0
SUBTOTAL III 20510
GRAND TOTAL 638.0 93 146
The Denton Municipal Airport is comprised of 638 acres, of that total,
approximately 398 acres are dedicated to flight activities, 34.9 acres
have been developed and/or leased, and 205.0 acres remain available for
development. (The flight activities total includes approximately
55 acres which have been reserved for a future 4,000-foot utility runway
1,000 feet west and parallel of the existing runway). There are 93 based
aircraft and, with the opening of the new ramp in late August, 1985, 146
available tie-down and hangar spaces. All aircraft hangars remain full
with a waiting list.
Table 2
LEASE PROPERTY AND REVENUE SUMMARY
(1985/86 Fiscal Year)
GROUND GROUND HANGAR
AREA LEASE LEASE TIE-DOWN
ITEM I - AVIATION LEASES (Acres) RATE REVENUES 6 FUEL FEES TOTAL
as City hangars .62 - - 5,040 $ 5,040
b. City Tie-down 5.50 - - 11,520 110520
c. Maverick Aircraft 23.90 00.0084 91809 13,050 22,859
d. Fox-51 E.B.O. 1.29 0.035 1,970 1,500 30470
e. Fox-51 Commercial 0.76 0.07 2,310 - 2,310
f. Jay Rodgers .3.77 0.07 61696 6,696
SUBTOTAL I 35.84 0.016 0200785 031,110 51,895
(CTS/SF avg.)
ITEM II - OTHER REVENUE
as Agricultural lease 305.00 0.00003 40916 - 41916
b. Special events - 30500 3,500
SUBTOTAL II 305.00 0.00003 8,416 - 8,416
GRAND TOTAL 341.02 $29,201 29,843 0160,311
Figures for City Hangars and Tie-downs are annual revenues based on full
occupancy of six hangars at 070 per month and 24 tie-down customers at 040 per
month. Maverick and Fox-51 hangar and fuel fee estimates are based on 1985/86
totals. Ground Lease Rates represent cents per square foot per year.
Table 3
AIRPORT EXPENSES
(1985/86 Fiscal Year)
ITEM I - AIRPORT OPERATIONS AMOUNT
a. Personal services $48,223
b. Supplies 21985
c. Maintenance 81450
d. Services (Telephone, Electric, etc.) 130087
e. Insurance 601
f. Sundry 700
g. FixeP Assets (vehicles, machinery) 7,200
SUBTOTAL I $81,246
ITEM II - DEBT SERVICE
a. 1979 Runway overlay $11,475
Project ($170000 balance of city's
101 matching share of FAA Grant)
SUBTOTAL II $11,475
GRAND TOTAL $920721
TOTAL AIRPORT EXPENSES - $920721
TOTAL AIRPORT REVENUES - 600311
BALANCE ($320410)
Airport Operation Expenses based on 1985/86 Fiscal Year budget. Airport
revenues from Table 2.
Table 4
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES PER TYPE OF SUPPORT FACILITY
(August, 1985)
ITEM I - RAMPS & TAXIWAYS
300000 lb. Pavement 15,000 lb. Pavement
(3" asphalt, 10" (3" asphalt, 6"
rock, 6" lime) rock, 6" lime)
6.00 sq, yd. Asphalt 6.00 sq, yd.
7.50 sq. yd. Rock 5.00 sq. yd.
.81 sq* yd. Lime .81 sq# yd.
1.40 sq. yd. Lime Prep. 1.40 sqv yd.
1.22 sq. yd. Excavation 1.22 sq. yd.
1.70 sq. yd. Eng. a Inep. 1444 sq, yd.
.93 sq. yd. Cont. (51) .79 sq. yo.
$19.56 sq. yd. $16.66 sq, yd.
ITEM II - ROADWAYS
24' WIDE PAVEMENT
(2" asphalt, 6" lime)
$4.00 sq, yd. Asphalt
.81 sq. yd. Lime
1.40 sq. yd. Lime Prep.
1.22 sq. yd. Excavation
.74 sq. yd. Eng. 6 Insp.
.40 sqa yd. Cont. (58)
$8.57 sq, yd.
ITEM III - WATER 6 SEWER LINES
8" Water main - 20.00 per ft.
6" Water line - 18.00 per ft.
10" Sewer line - $20.00 per ft.
ITEM IV - MISCELLANEOUS
Street lights $1,200 each
Underwood road improvement - 3" asphalt @ $6.00 per sq. yd.
Ramp and Taxiway estimates are based on per square yard costs of
constructing u 30,000 pound weight bearing capacity ramp and taxiway in
August, 1985. Roadway and water and sewer line construction costs are
working estimates used by city street and water department.
Table 5
TAXIWAY COST ESTIMATES
FOR FULL DEVELOPMENT OF SOUTH EAST SIDE OF AIRPORT
N
TAXIWAY DIMENSION WEIGHT BEARING TAXIWAY TAXIWAY
NUMBER (LENGTH & WIDTH) CAPACITY TYPE COST
11 750 x 30' 30,000 lbs. Access $ 48,900
2. 725 x 30' 30,000 lbs. Access 47,270
3, 1,180 x 30' 30,000 lbs. Access 76,936
4, 650 x 30' 30,000 lbs. Access 42,380
5. 650 x 20' 15,000 lbs. Hangar 240064
6. 650 x 20' 15,000 lbs. Hangar 24,064
7. 650 x 20' 15,000 lbs, Hangar 24,064
80 650 x 30' 30,000 lbs. Access/Hangar 42,380
Total 170516 ag, yde. 03300058
Estimates of costs of City construction of all taxiways in the south east
section of the airport. Access taxiways are main entrance taxiways to hangar
areas which would remain public easements. Hangar Taxiways sre secondary
taxiways within a hangar area.
I
Table 6
ROADWAY COST ES'T'IMATES
TO SERVICE FULL DEVELOPMENT OF EAST SIDE OF AIRPORT
N
ROADWAY DIMENSION ROADWAY TYPE
(LENGTH 6 WIDTH)
1. 1,300' x 24' Entrance (John Carrell Road) 290709
2. 1F200' x 24' Hangar access roadway 27,620
3. 644' x 24' Fuel Farm roadway 14,700
4. 1,300' x 24' South entrance roadway 29,709
5. 200' x 241 Hangar access roadways 41571
TOTAL $1060309
Automobile Parking
Area
10 230' x 50' East of New FAA ramp $ 101:40
2. 230' x 50 East of New FAA ramp 10,940
TOTAL $ 21,880
GRAND TOTAL $1281189
Roadways are of standard City design, two lanes, twenty-four feet in
width. Roadways include the main entrance road (John Carrell Road), the
south entrance road and secondary hangar access roads* the fuel farm
road is designed to allow fuel truck ingress and egress to the fuel farm
without the need for backing or turnaround.
Table 7
WATER, SEWER, AND MISCELLANEOUS COST ESTIMATES
TO SERVICE FULL DEVELOPMENT OF EAST SIDE OF AIRPORT
N
ITEM I - Water Lines
1. 2,600' B• water main with fire hydrants
located parallel to Roadways 1 and 4 42,000
2. 31930' 6' water main with fire hydrants
encompassing areas S and D 70740
TOTAL WATER LINES $112,740
ITEM IT - Sewer Lines
1. 1,300' If)* sanitary sewer line
located north of and parallel to Roadway 1 260000
2, 1,150' 10" sanitary sewer line
located adjacent to hangar access Roadway 2 25,000
TOTAL SEWER LINES $ 51,000
ITEM III - Miscellaneous
1. Street Lights - 12 Standard street security Lights 14,400
2, Fencing Material - Security chain link fencing 10,000
3. Underwood Road Improvements - 3" asphalt overlay 17,066
4, Architect Design Standards Package 11,300
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS $ 52,766
GRAND TOTAL $2161506
water and sewer lines to service FBO (fixed base operator) and largo
commercial hangars, Street lights to be placed alony entrance roadways and
adjacent to aircraft and vehicle parking areas. Fencing to be a chin link
fence around aircraft parking areas and improvement to wire fence elong
airport boundary. Underwood road to be improved to support weight of fuel
trucks and additional traffic.
Table 8
TOTAL COST ESTIMATES OF FULL
DEVELOPMENT OF EAST SIDE OF AIRPORT
ITEM I - TAXIWAYS (Table 5)
Total cost of taxiways 330,058
ITEM II - ROADWAYS & PARKING (Table 6)
Total cast of roadways and parking 128,184
ITEM III - WATER, SEWER & MISC (Table 6)
Total Water, sewer & Misc 216,506
GRAND TOTAL 06740753
Grand total for the full development of the southeast side of the airport.
Figures reflect City construction o all taxiways, roads water and sewer lines.
Table 9
POTENTIAL ANNUAL GROUND LEASE REVENUES
FULL DEVELOPMENT OF SOUTHEAST SIDE OF AIRPORT
AREA A - 200 x 700 a 140,000 sit ft (3.2 acres) 14,000
ground lease rate - 104! aq ft
AREA a - 400 x 650 - 260,000 aq ft (5.9 acres) 26,000
ground lease rate - 100 sq ft
AREA C - 460 x 775 a 479,160 sq ft (11 acres) 33,541
ground lease rate - 070 aq ft
AREA D - 325 x 775 • 271,450 aq ft (6.2 acres) 190002
ground lease rate - 070 sq ft
AREA E - 145 x 620 - 80,600 ■
175 x 590 130,250 ■ 184,440 sq ft (4.2 acres) 12,910
ground lease rate - 070 aq ft
TOTAL 113350050 aq ft (30.65 acres) 105,453
Figures reflect potential revenues from airport land leases. Areas A through
E are outlined on the attached layout plan. Table illustrates dimensior.n of
each area, size in square feet and acres, and suggebted ground lease rate, in
cents per square foot per year.
I
t
Table 10
PROPOSED IMMEDIATE DS'VELOPMENT PLANS
I, Taxiways
Taxiway 1 48,900
Taxiway 2 470270
Taxiway 3 76,936
One-Half Taxiways 5, 61 57,286
7 and 8
TOTAL 'Taxiways r 230,392
II. Roadways
Roadway 1 290675
Roadway 2 270600
Roadway 4 34,280
TOTAL Roadways 91,575
III, Auto Parking
Parking Lot 1 100940
TOTAL Auto Parking 10,940
IV, Water Lines with Hydrants
8' Water Line 42,000
6" Water Line 70f740
TOTAL Water Lines $1120740
V. Sewer Lines
Sewer Line 1 260000
Sewer Line 2 25,000
TOTAL Sewer Lines 510000
VI. Miscellaneous
Street Lights 140400
Security Fencing 100000
Underwood Road improvements 17,066
Architect Design Standards 11,300
Package
TOTAL Miscellaneous 52,766
GRAND TOTAL 4549,413
Proposed initial or immediate construction for development of southeast side
of airport. Plans call for construction of five Access Taxiways, Access
Roadways 1, 4, and Hangar Roadway 20 one Auto Parking lot, Water and Sewer
lines serving the commercial Areas and Security lighting and fencing.
Table 11
COST PROPOSED IMMEDIATE DEVELOPMENT PLANS
WITH FAA PARTICIPATION
TOTAL CITY
COST SHA RE
1. Taxiways
Taxiway 1 48,900 41 890
Taxiway 2 47,270 4,727
Taxiway 3 76,936 7J6.93
One-Half of Taxiways 5, 6 57,286 17,310
7 and 8
TOTAL Taxiways 230,392 $ 74,590
Ii. Roadways
Roadway 1 290675
Roadway 2 270600
Roadway 4 34,280
TOTAL Roadways 91,575
III. Auto Parking
Parking Lot 1 10,940
TOTAL Auto Parking $ 10,940
IV. Water Lines with Hydrants
8" Water Line 42,000
61 Water Line 70,740
TOTAL Water Lines $112,740
V. Sewer Lines
Sewer Line 1 26,000
Sewer Line 2 25,000
TOTAL Sewer Lines $ 510000
VI, Miscellaneous
Street Lights 14,400
Security Fencing 10,000
Underwood Road Improvements 17,066
Architect Design Standard 110300
Package
TOTAL Miscellaneous, 52,766
GRAND TOTAL $393,611
The Airport has received federal assistance in the cost of constructing
Taxiways 1, 2, and 3. Such assistance in the form of an Airport Improvement
Grant normally provides for 908 federal funding. The City of Denton's share
in this case would be 10% or $17,310. This would reduce the cost of the
roposed immediate development plans by 155,796 leaving a grand total of
393,611.
Table 12
(PRESENT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED)
AIRPORT TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS
Terminal Upgrade:
Frame and Support Post Replaced 500
Insulation 936
Paint Exterior 850
Carpet 500
BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL $ 2,766
Terminal Porch:
Enclose porch TOTAL 4,022
AIRPORT TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL $ 6,808
The building improvements total represents funds to be used to upgrade the
building's interior and exterior and extend its useful life into the late
1990's when major expansion will be needed. The terminal pcrch will provide
shelter to the public during hours the terminal is closed and to increase
insulation around the building to reduce utility cost.
RUNWAY IMPROVEMENTS
7500000 ft,2 of surface
Two coats of sealer 4,000
Survey and Repaint Runway 14,400
(80,000 Ft.2 at $0.18 per sq. ft.)
RUNWAY IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL $181400
The runway has deteriorated to the point that excessive aggregate is loose on
the surface. This must be vacuumed up on a regular basis to prevent damage to
aircraft using the field. Also there are numerous finger cracks that will
only become mire serious with the coming of another winter. The runway needs
to be repainted in any case. The sealer will prevent a multi-million dollar
overlay to be needed prematurely,
GRAND TOTAL $25,208
TABLE 13
(PRESENT AIRPORT EQUIPMENT NEEDED)
AIRPORT GROUNDS MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT
Jacobsen CW224 Turfcat S 90539
72" Rotary Deck 2,304
Caster Wheel Option 230
TOTAL $12,173
There are zn acres on the airport that must be mowed on a regular basis to
promote safe operation on the airport. The present mower is six years old and
cannot be expected to last another season.
AIRPORT CONTINGENCY FUNDS
FOR MAINTENANCE, DEVELOPMENT AND EQUIPMENT
Contingency Fund $69,008
While we are constantly seeking other funding alternatives, there are several
problem areas at the airport which may require significant funds to resolve.
One such problem involves the Northeast corner drainage channel which is
rapidly erroding away and will eventually endanger the hangars in that area.
We are attempting to secure federal funds for this work; however, we are
uncertain relative to the FAA's ability to finance these improvements in an
appropriate time frame. A second problem area involves the sweeping of the
airport runway which must be done on a daily basis to ensure that no accidents
occur due to debris on the runway. Since our present equipment is over 20
years old and th,j City is liable for accidents caused by runway debris, we must
be prepared to address this issue in the near future. There are several other
smaller projects, such as security fencing, lighting, etc., which may require
attention in the next few years. Additionally, future development needs and
federal grant offers requiring local matching funds will occur in the near
future which will necessitate City funding.
""r t®a-ar rr ,....t..r-r'R~vr.., yrr --"W -*.s. `
TABLE 14
(TOTAL PACKAGE A)
I. Immediate Southeast Corner Development 3930611
(TABLE 11)
II. Immediate Airport Improvements $ 25,208
(TABLE 12)
III. Immediate Airport Equipment Needs $ 12,173
(TABLE 13)
IV. Contingency Package $ 69,008
GRAND TOTAL $500,000
Table 15
(TOTAL PACKAGE 8)
I
i. Immediate sdutheast Corner Development
(TABLE 11) 03930611
Ii. Immediate Airport Improvements
Terminal Upgrade (TABLE 12) 2,786
III. Contingency Package 0-32J1.0-3
GRAND TOTAL $400e000
0073e
DATE: $eptember 16, 1986
CITY COUNCIL AGED?DA ITEM
TO : MAYUK AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
RE: Update Report on Capital Recovery Fees
RECOMMENDATION
The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of August
200 19860 recommended to the City Council consider-
ation of the following report on capital recovery
fees. The Board further recommended that should
Denton decide to implement capital recovery fees, a
consultant should be retained to assure that cost,
methodology, and fee schedules are designed to meet
legal requirements and constraints. The Utilities
Staff also recommends that a seven member
committee of citizens/developers be established to
guide and work with any consultants on capital
recovery fees.
SUMMARY
October 1, 1984: An agenda item was presented to the
Board to "Consider Policies Regarding Extensions and
Oversizing of Water and Sewer Llnes" (See Attachment
I). This item was presented to give the City of
Denton's present policies and ordinances for 8uard
consideration only. Various questions were asked to be
answered at a followup meeting.
November 28 1984: A similar agenda item was
presented 4'o the Board with considerable detail and
answers to previous questions (See Attachment II).
Rationale and analysis are herein given at arriving
for cost recovery fees for City of Denton.
December 13, 1984: A draft :resolution was presented
to the Board proposing to the Council capital recovery
tees (See Attachment I11).
January 91 1985: The City Manager presented this
tina-- 1 z d resolution to the City Council for their
consideration (See Attachment IV). The City Council
wanted additional consideration and input as to what
other cities are doing with capital recovery fees. No
action taken by Council at that meeting.
4467U:1
Update on Capital Recovery Fees
Page 2
Februar 21, 1985: The Director of Utilities presented a
memorandum and ,utility Cost Planning" study to the Board
from Steve Fanning, Consultant for the City, in which he
recommended the developers pay for all improvements with a
pro rata pay back (see Attachment V).
September 9 1985: The Utilities staff attended a North
en ra exas ouncil of Governments (N CPCU(;) Planners
Group Program on capital recovery tees (See Attacament
VI). This program presented attorney and planners from
flower Mound and Plano and representatives £.om the Home
and Apartment Builders Association. Pros and cons were
discussed.
September 18, 1985: The Utilities staff again presented
documentation for review by the Board. This additional
documentation consisted of NCTCOG program (Attachment VI)
and a telephone survey as to what other Texas cities are
doing with cost ,•~jcovery fees (See Attachment VII), Board
minutes reflect ►io further action taken (See Attachment
VIII).
April 18, 1986: Utilities staff attended a Capital
Recovery Fee presentation by the Water an Wastewater
Management Advisory Committee of Dallas Water System (See
Attachment 1X). This program presented attorneys,
planners, developers, and representatives from the Home and
Apartment Builders Association. Pros and cons were
discussed.
August 11 1986: Utilities staff attended a City Council
Meeting a isville, Tx. (See Attachment x.) At this
meeting, a previously adopted CRF ordinance was repealed.
Comments and questions were accepted from developers and
citizens. Lewisville plans to finally adopt their
ordinance in about three weeks. Water ■ $773 per living
equivalent unit (LLU), Sewer w $668 per LBO!.
August~12 1986: Ordinances obtained by inquiry were
received from:
11 Argyle Water Supply Corporation- $708.16 per developer
or customer (See Attachment XI.) Water only.
2. Town of Flower Mound, TX - Water m $6S8 for 3/4"
meter, Sewer ■ $1,324 per corinectio:i equivalent. (See
Attachment XII).
4467U.2
. ,,.x v-.vrs„ ale y. .x:°'r', F'. rk-• r. r x
Update on Capital Recovery Fees
Page 3
31 To, of Corinth, TX - Water $81S per connection,
Sewer ■ $240 per connection. (See Attachment XIII)
4. Ft. Worth, Tx.- Graduated scale, basis 1000 sq. ft.
Residence, 3/4" meter, Water a $330, Sewer ■ $67. (See
Attachment X1V.)
5. Au tin Tx- Water a $1,286 per fee unit per top~ , Sewer
. 1656 per fee unit per tap. (See Attachment XV-)
August 19, 1986: Received Texas Attorney General's opinion
Ole re n cities are prohibited from charging cappital
recovery fees for State of Texas facilities. (Exhibit XVI).
August 20, 1986: Public Utility Board reviewed latest
Information on CRF's and recommended to the Council to hire
a consultant to develop a capital recovery fee. (Exhibit
XVII.
BACKGROUND
Attachments I through XVII.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED
City of Denton, Denton Municipal Urilities, Public
Utilities Board, City Council, Developers, Citizens.
FISCAL IMPACT
Unknown until cost recovery fees established and operated
for approximately one year,
spectfully submitted,
OM& Z/
a
Prepared by:
David Ham, Asst. Director
Water/Wastewater Utilities
APPE~O ~k
e son, F,E,
Director of Utilities
ATTACHMENTS I tnru XVII
4467U:3
ATTACHMENT I
October 1, 1984
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD AGENDA ITEM 01
SUBJECT:
Consider Policies Regarding Extensions and Oversizing of
Water and sewer Lines.
SUMMAR Y:
I. HISTURICAL
Since the mid-19SO's the City of Denton has required
developers to install the local water distribution and
sewer collection system. Denton has primarily required
developers to install 6" or 8" water lines and 8" sewer
lines. The developers were required to provide offsite
extensions to their developments and receive a pro rata
contraci in return. Denton paid all oversize of the lines
within and exterior to the development. Denton did not
greatly restrict tying into existing lines, and generally
programed in a capital improvement plan to parallel
overloaded linos that were offsite of the new
developments. The sizing of lines was based upon a broad
roaster plan concept and, in the absence of any master plan
detailing sizing, was based on near term requirements for
the area. The city had not paid oversize on and, lines
outside the city limits as these were verl, rare.
II. PRESENT ORDINANCES AND POLICIES
The city presently requires the owner/developer to provide
all necessary water distribution and sewer collection lines
within the development with the water lines being 8" and
the sewer lines teing 10". Denton requires tine
owner/developer to provide all offsite extensions to the
site. Dent,)n requires the sizing of lines to meet an
overall master plan, and where the master pla.: is not well
defined, an engineering analysis is made and the line is
sized to accommodate a moderate growth for the service
area. Denton presently has been paying for oversize of the
lines within and exterior to the development. At the
Board's direction, the staff has begun requesting
owner./developers outside of the city limits to pay all of
the cost of the oversizing. The oversizing of a line is
determined based u n the developer's requirements and a
moderate growth protected over the next 20 years.
Since the new subdivision rules and regulations have been
implemented, the City of Denton is requiring the owner to
provide some offsite water transmission and/or sewer line
improvements or construction where existing facilities are
already loaded or are committed to other developments.
This is creating concerns in the following areas:
3234U:5-8
A. What property owners get first call on any spare line
capacity?
8. Preliminary plats are primarily used to identify the
"first come-first serve" criteria, but some
owner/developers get a preliminary plat approved and
then do not develop on the property and this ties up
the capacity for other developers who have funds
available and are beginning to develop.
C. Requiring a developer to do offsite
transmission/interceptor line construction or
improvement is a major upfront cost for a developer
which must be passed on to the new home or business
owner, This requirement becomes, in a sense, an
indirect impact-type fee,
D. Allocating capacity to developments on a "first
come-first serve" basis may be a poor use of capital
resources, since some existing lines may not be full,
but they are committed to a developer who does not
intend to develop in the near term. This may require
another developer to run a new line pariillei to one
that is far from reaching its capacity.
III. PRFSENT PHILOSOPHY OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGES AND RATES
The present policy follows the "postage stamp" rate and
charges philosophy with the exception of requiring
developers to install some offsite interceptor/transmission
lines. This concept essentially states that all customers
of the same customer class, i.e., residential, commercial,
etc, I. should pay relatively the same for the development
of their property and for rates regardless of their
location in the city or the time in which they became a
cus-f~ior e'T or a resident in C'ne city. By requiring the
owner/developer to install the local 8" water lines and 10"
sewer lines, the basic needs of water and sewer facilities
in the neighborhood are met. With the city paying oversize
of tnese lines, both within the development and offsite of
the development, places the burden for the
transmission/interceptor lines on the capital improvement
or g by rates whichnaaredthenrpaiduefornby wallh rP,sidents
regardless of their location.
If the owner/developers were required to pay for the entices
oversize of the line, those customers living closest to the
water plant or sewer plant would be paying for transmission
capacity that benefits customers who live srveral miles
from the plants. The concept of paying the same rate
regardless of when a resident moves into the city is
TB'2fv^: ° P ty. q. n,.... eT,. t~~ t.. . ~,...~'.c.^rtT
consistent with Denton's paying for major sewer lift
station improvements, water transmission lines, water
towers, major sewer interceptors and water and wastewater
treatment plants with revenue bonds. All of these
facilities are paid for by revenue bonds which are, in
turn, paid-fur by rates by all customers at the same rate
and does not differentiate whether the customer is a new
customer or has been a long-term customer/resident of the
city.
Impact fees used to pay for new treatment capacity or major
water transmission line or major sewer interceptor lines
causes the new residents/customers of the city to pay
higher charges than the longer term customers/residents.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Denton could continue with its existing policies which will
continue to place a heavy burden on the city's capital
improvements program. This is necessary ia; order to build
new major water transmission lines, sewer interceptor
lines, water towers, sewer lift stations, eti;. These bonds
will be paid for by the utility rates charged uniformly to
all customers.
Some cities have instituted impact fees which range
anywhere from $750 per residential unit as in the case of
Grapevine, Texas, to $1000 per residential unit in Co
Texas. The City of Austin has implemented such impact p fees
and the City of Dallas has given consideration to impact
fees.
Another north Texas city pays for the oversizing of lines
within the development, but does not pay any on the
oversizing of any offsite extensions until other
developments tie on to that line and oversizing is paid the
same time the pro rata fee is paid. Phis policy encourages
development close in to the existing system.
Another city actually installs the offsite extensions and
charges the developer on an equivilent per residential
basis for the debt service to pay for such facilities. As
each new customer ties on to the line, the annual fee to
the developer is reduced by the corresponding amount.
Instituting impact fees or requiring the developer to make
major upfront expenditures ultimately increases the cost of
new homes, businesses and apartments to the city's new
residents who occupy those facilities. It also substitutes
privately provided capital which has a much higher interest
rate tnan publicly provided capital such as the city's
. revenue bonds. An owner/developer paying impact fees of
$1,000 or $2,000 per lot will ultimately have passed on to
the homeowner who will then have to pay higher mortgage
P&Yments (which probably will have a higher interest rate
than utility revenue bonds), plus slightly higher taxes due
to the greater value of the homy
profit that the developer will ~makeusonththisditionoo
increased cost of the home plus the 71 realtor,s fee on top
of this added $19000.
ttaching iss a decision analysis that might be helpful in
A
riome of the
deliberation on this questions and issues in the
to be comprehensive butsratherhia cs me no means intended
some of the issues that exist, came work to identify
Also attached is a commentary from a magazine on land use
law, dated July 1964, regarding the law, economics and
equity of sewer and water connection policies. This is a
very interesting article on how the law views extension of
water and sewer lines and what happens when sewer lines are
full or when water lines or sewer lines are used to direct
growths
Respectfully,
R. E. Nelson
. Director of Utilities
EXHIBIT I Decision Analysis
II Magazine Article
3234U
November 28, 1 584 ATTACHMENT IT
PUBLI; UTILITIES BOARD AGENDA ITEM #I
SUBJECT:
onsider Policies Regarding Extensions and Oversizing of
Water and Sewer Lines.
S UMMARY:
At the October 1, 1584, Public Utilities Board meeting, the
Board requested a report answering the following questions:
1. Explain ramifications, costs, ordinance changes
required, etc., wherein,
d) new residents pay for new
transmission/interceptor costs,
b) all customers pay for next incremental cost of
plants.
2. Explain ramifications, costs, ordinance changes
required, otc. , wherein,
a) new residents pay for new
transmission/intercepto_r costs
b) new customers pay for plants
3. List of policies/ordinances for :grater/sewer extensions
that would control or direct growth and liscourage
"leap frog" development.
4. Report on pros and cons of caarging developer for
oversizing inside city limits.
S. Report on the effects of zoning on utility
developments,
6. What is the political effect of some of the
alternatives.
To explain the ramifications of the vari,ius alternatives,
it is necessary to develop per householu costs for water
plants, v4ater towers, water transmission, sewer plant and
sewer interceptor/pump stations. The following is such 3
tabulation of estimated costs prepared by the Staff. For a
more thorough and more precise estimate, it may hi
• appropriate to nire a consultant such as Hogan and Rasor or
Freese 8 Nichols.
33410;2
r_
! Per capital water Use ISO GPD,Person I
I
I Overhead Water Towers SS GPD/capita !
! l
Per Capita Sewer l~S GPD/Person j
I Persons per Household 2.5 Persons/nousehold
I
I Water Plant costs $1,50 I
I per GPD I
I Water Transmission Lines $ .SO per rPD
I I
1 Overhead Storage +
; .SO per gallon
Sewer Plant $2,00 per GPD I
Interceptor/Pump Stations $1.00 l
per GPO I
I Water Production Plant +
I Costs Per Housenold 1SOGPD/Capita x 1,5
j
i personS/Household
I ■ 37S GPD/Hse
it _.0/GPD I
i COST,,,,..., se
+ S57S,OO/Hse" I
I Water Transmission 1SOGPD/Capita x 1.5 j
I costs Per Household persons/Householl +
37S GPD/Hse +
I x SO/GPD I
I COST H se
+
S200.00;Hse
I Overhead Water Storage 3Sigal/Capita x 2,5 I
I Costs Per Household Persons/Household I
l • 137,5 Gdl,Hse
I x 3'S I
{ COST..,,.,,,, MT. 13, Hse I
$100.00/H3e. I
I Sub-To_tal•Wtr, Trans, 3131,50
I Water Towers $103,13
I
$ 1a4.63/hse
COST..,,,,
I rr.....r.._.r._...ru_.......r 3300.00/hso I
I SEWER PLANT .......'---rr......•.
I1S GPD/Ca ita x 2.S
I Costs per Household persons/Household I
= 312,S GPD/Hse I
x 2,00/GPD l
I COST...,...., ;615/Hse
I
I INTFRCEPTOR/PUMP STATIONS 135 GPD/Capita x 1,5 j
I (;Osts per Household persons/Household
! L 312.5 GPD/Hse
~ x 1.00/GPD
se
I COST......,., ;325/Hse"
I"rounded up to nearest ;1S
To compare the difference between Gpply1nq a capital
recovery fee to the developer or the now resident and the
payment of new capacity by use of city revenue bonds, the
following assumptions are made:
1. Bonds would be issued for 1009 Of the project cost.
20 Bond debt service is $10/$100 of bonds per year.
3. Present equivalent househr~.;;s are 25,000.
4. Growth rate Is 5% per year, therefore 1250 new
residential equivalents next year.
5. Developers' profit range i-a 25%.
6. Real estate broker, closing coats, loan applications,
etc-, coats *10%.
7. Home interest rates are 13% and 30 year mortgages for
annual mortgage payment of $12.00 per $100.
8. Taxes are City- 59¢/$100, school- 88¢/$100, county-
22¢/$100 for total of 169¢/$100 evaluation.
The methodology for calculating the comparison between
capital recovery fee and bond/rate financing per each $100
of capital costs is as follows:
Apr t o r! to c o v e r y r e e T---------------------- ---T
Jev Paxs Bldr_Pers I Bond ?ate financed
1 - I
Ilnitial Cost $100 $100 ! Initial Cost $100 I
! I I
IJeveloper Fee $ 25 0 I Tot Bonds Req'd/$100 $125,000 I
I (25%) 3125 $100 I (1250 new hse)
I I _ 1
[Real Estate, $ 12.50 $10 I Annual DS Cost $ 2 I
I etc,, Fees 1 Y $12,500 I
I I,, c
IAnnuil Mort. $16.50 /J _ tifr li'},~l'
I (;~12/$100 /Yr $13.20 f Coat to all custome><s ~
1 (26,OOU cuat) 748.¢I_yr..
ITaxes $ 2.32 $1.861
1 ($1.69/$100) 4¢/mo I
I TOTAL A14L AL 1' 1
ICOST/$100 $18.82 $15.06
r u___r_-_--_._Lr II .l
G U
341 2Ui 1
0-1 Ile
Analysis of iULY% capital recovery fee (C)i'F) on monthly mortgage payrr►ents;
and carp&rison with the effect on rates if reverwe bond II,ioncIng were used for new
facilities.
Cost to tJcw i-trrwomw for IU" tea- Cost to Each Custuywr
Developer Ilui;der i For Bond f=inancing" I
I C'w _ Pays Fee * - Pays Fee* I IPer Year Per VnrrrWe!
Water Linea $ 3UU $ 601yr $ 5/ID $ 45/yr $ 4/mo $1.44/yr 3.12/rm
`ewer Lines $ 325 60 r 5 nu 5U r $ 4 Sl.56 yr 15r Art)
Total Linea $ bl3 20/yr 1 rm 95 yr " no
Water Plant $ 575 $1iU/yr $ 9AM $ 85/yr $ 7/rm $2.76/yr $.23/rm
Sewer Planl 625 $1ZLkjLyr $10/f ro S 951yr $ 8 rro $ 3. 00r '$.25 irr►
total Plante $1200 $230/yr $19/rro $1801yr $15/rro $5.76/yr .481"m
total for All $1825 $350/yr $29/rro $275/yr $23/frn $8.76/yr $.73Ano
*rnunfled ul► to nuuruat $5
*"Assums 1250 i►uw custprwre per year
34111Jr2
f . ; a~ -rye.: -~r.r..•,n-r-a-.+e7v.~in
RESPONSE, ANALYSIS AND RAMIFICATION OF
IMPACT FEE ALTERNA ME
1.(a) Cost co new resident to pay for new water
sewer interceptor, transmission Ynd
The c6st to a new homeowner for water transmission would be AN
INITIAL COST OF $300 or $30 to $40 per year, For sewer
interceptors the initial cost would be $32S or $SO to $60 per
year. For water and sewer lines the
or $80 to $100, initial cost would be $425
1,.
If pond funds are used, the cost to each Denton customer would
be Se/month for water transmission and 13i/montn for sewer
interceptors to service 1150 new homes or a total of 214/month.
(b) Cost for all customers to pay for next the incremental cost of
plants.
The cost to a new homeowner for water
plant capacity would be
an initial cost of $S7S or $8S to $110 per ,plant capacity the initial cost would be year, For sewer
$120/month. Tne combined initial cost would be $1200 or95 180
to $22S per year. $
If pond funds are used, the cost to each Denton customer would
be 231 per month for a water plant and 25e per month for a
sewer plant to service 1250 new customers or a total o•f
4U /month.
Note: Please recognize that it is not normally possible to
install plant capacities incrementally to only serve 1250
Homes. It plant capacity
4MGD, the increases would be approximately 10 times as great. of
great.
(c) Prior to approximately one year ago, the City accepted the
responsibility for all water transmission and seW*
interceptors and if reasonable capacity was available for the
immediate or first phases of development, the developer was
allowed to tie to the line. If reasonable capacity was not
33220:20
available for such initial development, the City denied the
developer access to the line and the developer could either
• wait for a city capital improvement project or could install
U* capacity tnemselves. During the past year after paage
of the new' subdivision rules and regulations, the Citysshas
required that capacity for the entire project be available
prior to allowing plat approval. Several agreements have been
made with developers wherein they have agreed to install
necessary capacity for tneir entire project in order to get
plat approval for the project.
To change from the present policy wherein the City accepts
responsibility for oversizing and installation of water
transmission and sewer trunk lines, an ordinance, which would
be an amendment to the subdivision rules and regulations,
would be required to establish a fee of;
a)- $300/housenold equivalent for water transmissions and,
b) $32S/iousehold equivilent for sewer interceptor/lift
stations.
Such an ordinance would probably require the review of the
Planning and Zoning Commission prior to submitting a
recommendation to the Council for approval.
The fee could either be collected at the time of platting from
the developer or at the time the builder requests a tap. A
front end cost to the developer of $625) per lot krould probabl•+
cause the cost of the lot to be higher (our analysis assumes
ZS1 higher) to the ultimate resident than if the fee was
charged to the builder. However, if the developer pays the
impact fee, the City would receive the funds in larger
increments and could perhaps begin construction of the water
transmission and interceptor lines sooner.
332ZU421
Upon receiving suci► impact fees, the City would incur
certainly an ethical obligation, if not a legal obligation, to
commit to the construction of water transalssion lines and
sewer interceptor lines on a timely basis to support the
development chat have paid the impact fee.
Implementation of impact fees for either lines or plant, but
perhaps more so with plants, places the burden for new
incremental cost capacity on the new customer. The new
customer also must continue to pay a proportional cost of
previously built capacity in their utility bill just the same
as existin customers, From a legal rate making basis, this
is possioly the issue of greatest concern. However, since
developers are rarely also the rate payer, and since most rate
payers who are also new homeowners or renters rarely know
exactly wuat went into determining the cost of their homes
(lots) or apartments, this issue of paying twice for lines and
plant capacity, etc., is not explored,
2.(a) New residents pay for new transmission.
This is the same as 1 (a)
(b) New customers pay for plants.
This is the same as the first paragrapn of 1 (b) wherein the
cost to a new homeowner for water plant capacity would be $575
or $85 to $110 per year. For sewer plant capacity, the cost
would be $62S or $95 to $120 per month,
(c) Ramification, ordinances, etc., are explained in 1(c).
3• List of Policies/Ordinances for water/sewer extensions chat
would control or direct growth and discourage "leap frog"
development.
3322U:22
I
a) Require developer to install line sizes adequate to serve
the general service area in which development is proposed
and pay for all offsits extensions and oversize of same.
Pro rata 'rebate payments returned to developer as other
developeents tie on to the line with such pro rata being
based on volume usage of the line. Rebates could be paid
for oversize portion of the line as each customer ties on.
This perhaps should be made to the homeowner or builder
since the developer may have already included this cost in
the lot and such rebate to the developer would merely be a
"windfall" to the developer.
b) Decertify all areas in which the City does not want to
extend service. This may spawn many uncontrolled municipal
utility districts, wells and septic systems that the City
may later be forced to accept,
4. Pros and cons of charging developer for oversizing inside city
• limits.
One of the responsibilities of a utility is to serve all
customers uniformly, regardless of where they live and
generally when they become customers. Charging the developer
for all oversizing may place a greater burden on customers who
will move to the city in the future, and would place the
greatest burden on new customers living closest to the plants
and close to major water and sewer lines.
Not charging developers for oversizing places the burden on
all rate payers uniformly and requires the City to accept the
responsibility to have funds available and to support/approve
payment of such oversize project, If the city does not pay
for oversize, developers may use various techniques to limit
the size of line they place in an arch and then through zoning
or "planned development" citanges place a greater burden on the
. line than previously planned which may require the city to run
a parallel line,
33220:23
S• Effects of zoning on utility development.
Zoning has substantial eifect on water transmission, sewer
interceptor and electric system development, The major
problems arise when an area, shown on the development guide or 10 in toning as "moderate intensity", is increased to
a greater
intensity. This can be done by cummulative zoning wherein an
area zoned commercial can be used either for low use retail
commercial or high density multi-family.
in sewer being undersized and water lines unable otoemeetsfire
hydrant flow requirements,
6• Political effects of various alternatives,
Tne staff prefers not to address the political effects since
the Board is probably more astute to political issues than the
staff. The staff's responsibility is to technically design a
good utility system, operate the system in an efficient and
reliable manner and follow the policies as established by the
Board and C ouncit,
Respectfully,
.R. E. Nelson
Director of Utilities
3341U:3
ATTACHMENT III
*ED
MY OfDENTOIV,TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING DENTON, TEXAS 76201 TELEPHONE (817} 566.821
AE40RAMOLM
DATE: 13 December 1984
TO: THE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
FR04: R. E. Nelson, Director of Utilities
RE: Resolution to the Council Proposing impact Fees
...yr.".a............. ft.r........
Attached please find a draft copy of the resolution which was
prepared for forwarding to the City Council. We were unable to get
this resolution on the Council's December 18 meeting due to an
already overburdened session. Therefore, I have requested that it
be on the Council's next meeting which is January 8, 1985. We have
requested a joint meeting of the Board and Council at the 5:30 Pd
session on that date so that we may present this information to the
Council.
Re spec tfu 11 y
R, E. Nelson
Director of Utilities
c r
Attachment.(Draft'ordinance)
. 336511:4
i
. ,
. RESOLUTION W THE PUBLIC UTILITY BOARD
THE CITY OF DIWON, TEXAS
l
WHEREAS. the City of Denton, Texas, Public Utility Beare has
labored for a number of months over the prabiems AMC,
opportunities of growth and the affects cf growth on
the City of Denton Water and Wastewater unlit...
seryicesi and
WHEREAS, the number of applications for 4001t2onal water and
wastewater line 0%tensians is continuing to grow: and
WHEREAS, the number pf line extensions reouiring or allowing the
la tv to increase line 0120 to servo tar Ci:y s
customers, or :sent and future, is growingi and,
WHEREAS, the inr:reASing number of oversize committmer to is :a..;-g
the ability to orovlde those facilities +itnin, t;.s
orosent rate structural •Ind
WHEREAS, the continuing growth will eventually reouirs increasing
the otant facilities to orovide clean water AMC safe
disoosail of wastewater) and
WHEREAS, the Public Utility Beard finds that new sources of
capital are necessary to meet the present and fu:.re
needs of the City for rater And Wastewater ssrvicee:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PUBLIC UTILITY BOARD OF Tai:
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS,i that
The City of Denton, Texas, Public Utility board recomman,.Js tc -•a
City of Denton, Tomas, City Council a general outline. Attec!"!%.t
1, for fees to offset some of the e•/er increasing .ao.tal c=[ts
through a 6istem of capital rfcvdorv feos: that such 4evs, +-en
collected, be dedicated to specific accr;unts .n1v to ;e used •.r
capital -solacement or expansion and mot bect" a 9dr.:-f :-e
operating structure of the Utilities Department or othar ,i:, :i
Denton, Texas pplratiens1 that the City Council of the t. .f
Denton, Texas provide the Public Utilities Board with as
to whether to continue to explore the opportunities fzr A1,cn ryes
and produce an ordinance setting out and levying such fees: :rat
the Public Utility Board respectfully rams*sts to toot Aia t^v
Council in work se60l0n4 And that the City Council If t-.e zi
Denton direct staff to provide all supoort necessary t'l
and implement such fee structure to insure the continued :LIC21
and physical integrity of the City of Denton, Texas Utility
System.
Rol and Laney, C,~ai r.n~n
Public Utilities Fcarz
ATT$Sti City of Denton. Texas
Edward~Coowes,'Secrstary~--~
Public Utilities Board
City of Denton. Texan
Approved ae to Legal Faroe
`.mss+..rr r.r~~r..r wwr.wr
Jed +~orris~ Attfnq City Attgrney
City 04 Denton. Texas
ATTACHAd:NT
OUTLINE" OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE
ecember 4, 1960
WATER AND SEWER SERVICE CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES
FOA WATER AND SEWER LINES
I. Capital Recovery Fee for Water do Sewer Lines
A. A water and sewer line capital recovery fee of $625 shall be paid
for each single family residential lot, single family residential
living unit or residential equivalent (RE) if the development is a
non-residential commercial or industrial development.
This capital recovery fee is to pay for the Incremental cost of
off-site water transmission lines, overhead water storage facilities,
off-site sewer outfall lines, off-site sewer lift stations and
oversizing of on-site and off-site water and sewer lines.
8. Payment of Fee
Payment of the Capital Recovery Foe for lines shall be at the time
of platting.
11. Capital Recovery Fee for Water/Wastewater Treatment Facilities
A. Fee
A water/wastewater plant capital recovery fee of $600 shall be
paid for each single family residential lot, single family living unit
or residential equivalent if the develo
commercial or industrial development. The capital recovery feosis
to pay for the incremental cost of Water Treatment and
Wastewater 'f reatment Plant capital costs.
a. Payment of Fee
Payment of the capital recovery fee for plants shall be paid at the
time of payment for the water meter. The capita) recovery fez
shall be in addition to the water/sewer tapping fees or water meter
setting fees.
Ill. Calculation of Capital Recovery Fee
A residential equivalent ;RE) shall be based on water usage of 375
gallons per day. Non-residential commercial, governmental and
industrial development AE's shall be calculated by using water
usage standards as listed In the Texas Department of Health Rules
and Regulations for Public Water Supplier Systems, Table A.
• 3361Us1
{
1
IV. Changes in Zoning, Platting, Use or Oenaity.
A. The Developer shall pay an'addltional capital recovery fee for any
changes in zoning, platting, planned development or land use
wherein the density Is increased resulting in an increased usage of
the water and/or sewer system. A credit or payment from
previously paid, capital Improvement fees .41 be made to the
developer if the intensity or density is decreased from the original
pier prior to construction of the originally planned development
and prior to expenditure of funds by the City for any facilities
required to serve the development. No credit or payments will be
made for decrease In the intensity of use of any existing
constructed development.
B. Calculation of payments and credits for changes In density.
Addtional payments or credits for increases or decreases In the
planned use of the development shall be calculated by the follo,ving
formulas
RE Fee x (proposed use RE. platted or existing use RE)
(positive values are payments by developer, negative values are
credits to developer; however, no credits or payments will be made
for n decrease in the Intensity of use of any existing constructed
develop,'nent.)
V. Applicability of Ordinance
. This ordinance shall oe applicable to all new subdivisions receiving final
plats after Marcn 1, 1985, except that Section IV shall apply to all existing
platted subdivisions after March 1, 1985,
V1. Special fund established for capital improvements,
A special fund entitled "Water and Sewer Capital Improvement Fund" '
shall be established in which shall be deposi',ed capital recovery fees and
pro rata fees. The water/sewer capital improvement f~!nd shell be
utilized to make capital improvements in the water and sewer systems for
installation of water transmission lines, oversize water and sewer line,
overhead water storage facilities, water booster pump stations, sewer
outfall lines, sewer lift stations, water plants a:,d sewer plants.
3361Ui2
ATTACEIWT IV
January at 1965
TO: MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROINh G. Chris Hartung, City Manager
SUBJECT:
Consider Public Utilities Board Resolution Regar',inq Capital Recovery Fees.
RECOMMENDATION:
At the Public Utility Board's December 12, 1984, meeting, the 3oard passed a
Resolution recommending that the Council consider Instituting Capital Recovery
Fees as a method to aid the Water and Wastewater Department in financing new
trunk sewer lines, water transmission iines, wastewater treatment and water
treatment plants. The p; oposed Capital Recovery Fees would be charged to each
residential unit (RU) or equivalent usage thereof if the development Is commercial
or industrial. The proposed Capital Recovery Fees are $625 per RU payable by the
developer at the time of final platting and $600 per RU payable by the builder,
homeowner or developer at time of paying for the water meter tap.
SUMMARY:
Analysis conducted by the Staff indicates that each new residential unit in the City
using €50 gallons of water per day per person and having 2.5 persons per household
requires the investment of $575 for additional water plant capacity, $625 for
• additional wastewater plant capacity, $300 for additional water transmission lines
a,id water storage facilities ana $325 for additional sewer trunk lines and sewer lift
stations which represents a total of $1825 of capital costs for each new residential
unit or equivilent thereof. The Public Utility Board's proposal is that the developer
pay for the additional water transmission lines, water storage, sewer trunk lines and
lift stations with the $625 Capital Recovery Feel that the homebulider pay for half
the cost of additional water and wastewater treatment plants with the $600 capital
recovery fee, and that the rate payers pay the remaining 3600, primarily through
revenue bond debt service payments.
The developers would continue to be required to install generally at least 8" water
lines and 10" sewer lines within their developments and extend offsite lines to the
nearest city lines. The Utility would pay ail oversizing, above 8" or 10" or that size
required by the development and the Utility would construct all necessary additional
offsite trunk sewer lines, water transmission iines, etc. The Utility would generally
adopt a policy of allowing service to any development, regardless of its size
(consistant with Planning and Zoning Approval) and regardless of its location.
3408U t32
I
Although the Public Utilities Board has recommended the subject Capital Recovery
Fees, the Staff has not proceeded with the extensive legal research required to
develop an ordinance. Such research will begin after the Council has had an
opportunity to give input and direction In this matter. The $625 Capital Recovery
Fee would become effective on plats approved after some specified date, therefore,
would have no effect, on already platted properties. The $600 portion of the Capital
Recovery Fee paid by the builder would become effective on buildings where the
building permit is issued after some specified date*
i3AkCKGROUNO:
The Public Utilities Board has been studying the concept of Capitfi Recovery Fees
for several months. Public Utility Board agenda information is attached as Exhibit
II and III.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS Ori GROUPS A.7FECTED:
Utility OepartmenL, Planning and Zoning, Developers and Property Owners would be
affected.
FISCAL IMPACTt
In 1984, the Utility connected 3,000 new customers. If all such customerL were
residential units or each equal to one residential unit, Capital Recovery Fees of
$1,225 per RU would have produced revenue equal to $3,675,000. (A side benefit to
the City's General Fund would be $73.50 additional return-on-investment for each
0 RU ($1225 x 6%) or $220,501) for 3,000 new residences.)
Respectfully submitted:
. h riis`He tong
City Po/tanager
Prepared by:
R. L. a son
Director of Utilities
APPROVE
I. -Jr 'l
. E. Nelson
Director of Utilities
EXH181T I- Resolution- Public Utilities Board
II- PU8 Agenda Item 10/11'94
111-PUB Agenda Item I1/28/84 IV -MINUTES PUB Meeting 12/12/84
Related Newspaper items
3408U s 3 3
17
ACSOLUTION
OF TK "LIC UTLITIES 80A110
THE CITY Of JENTcN, TEXA;
WHEREAS, The City of Donlon, Texas, PUWW Utilities Board has labored for
a number of months over the p"Wente and opportunities of
growth and thf effects of growth on the City of Denton water
and Wastowater Utility servicaat snd,
WI-EREAS, The number of sppbications fa additlonal wacsr vial wastewater
line extensions L continuing to growl and
WHEACAS, rho mumbW of line extensions retluiring or allowing the City to
increaser line site to serve the Clty'e customers, present end
future, Is growingt and,
WHEREAS, The increasing number of oversito commlttmenta is taxing the
ability to provide those facilities within the present rote
structures and,
WHEREAS, The rontinuing growth will eventually requu-o increasing the
pumas facilities to provide clean water end safe disposal of
wsaewaterl and
w1CREAS, The, Public Utilities Board finds that new sources of capital are
necessary to meet the present and future needs of the City for
water and Wastewater servicast
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PUBLIC UTILITIES 130ARC
OF lHE CITY OF OENTON, TEXAS, THATi
fhe amity of Denton, Texah Public Utilities Board rocrmmsnds to the City of
Denton, Texas, City council a general outline, Attachment 1, for fee to offset
some of the over-Increasing capital costs through a system of capital recovery
basest that such fees, when collected, be dedicated to specific accounts only to
be used for capital replacement or expansion end not become a part of the
operating structure of the Denton Munlclpsl Utility ('Department or other City
of Canton, Texas, operations{ that the City Council of the City of Denton,
Texas, provide the Puollc Utilities Board with guidance as to whether to
continue explore the opportunities for such fees and produce an ordinance
setting out and levying such feast that the Public Utilities Board respectfully
requests to noset with the Council in worse sooolonl and that the City Council
of the City of Denton direct staff to provide all support necessary to avsiop
and impbement such fee structure to immure the continued fiscal are physical
Integrity of the City of Oonton, Texas Jttllty System,
eL r
PUBLIC UTILITIES dOAAL)
CITY Or MNTON, rt:XAS
ATTESTu
EUW D COOFIEF, RIME 1'
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
CITY OF OENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL r ORMI
\ 1~\
H M ~ACTING CITY A y
t OF LIENTON, TEXAS
w r.
ATTACHMENT V
C/TYo/D&A"N, rEXAS MUNICIPAL WILDING / DENTON# TEXAS 76201 / TELEPHONE (011)5664200
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
PROM: R, E. Nelson, Director of Utilities
DATE: February 21, 1985
RE: Attached Documents
---w
• Attachec please find a memo from Mr, Stephen Fanning outlining a Utility
Cost Sharing plan that we had previously mentioned to you. Please review
this item and we will discuss it at our March 27, 1985, Board meeting.
Also attached is a copy of the /merican Public Power Associ.arion's
"Survey of Administrative and Policy-Making Organization of Municipally
Owned Electric Utilities in the United States", This item is presented
for your information.
We are attaching to Mr. Laney's package, the Open Letter of Appreciation
to Utility Department Persoane;, After affixing his signature, Mr. Laney
will forward this letter to Mr. Coomes, who will then please forward the
letter to Nancy Boyd, We will appreciate Nancy forwarding the letter to
our office.
Regards, I
1
R. E. Nelson, P.E.
Director of Utilities
cc: E, B. TulloR, Asst. Dir. of Electric Utilities
C. David Ram, Asst. Dir. of Wtr/WW Utilities
file
Attachments
, rr
II
CITY OF DENTON
N MOBAK"
DATE: Cebruacy 13, 1904
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission and Public Utilities Board
PROM: Stephen F. FA nniags Comprehensive Planner
David Ellison, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: UTILITY COST SHA81NO
The purpose of this memo is to :rake a recommendation on the utility
cost sharing policies. The intent of this recommendation is to
suggest an alternative to the impact tee which will also help
promote overall city planning objectives, our recommendation is not
from a utility administration standpoint but from the standpoint of
the impact of utilities policies on City-wide development, These
comments are made in response to our responsibility to coordinate
Community Development activities. This responsibility includes:
(1) directing Long Range City planning by coordinating specific
functional area planning into consistent policies and mutually
supportive policies (major functional areas planning includes
transpoctatiort, parks, public facilities and utilities); (2)
directing short range planning through administration of development
review. ThR following are some comments about these two planning
areas.
1' eloomeat Pot ties her are host Dire +l" Impacted
by utittty rvticies
Balanced growth close to City center and in all quadrants of the
city nas been the history of development in Denton. This growth
pattern is very unique for a City as this is not the typical
ca.e. This type of growth provides a more efficient and less
costly utility system, less traffic congestion, and Its* costly
streets, parks, f4 w stations, schools, etc. Balanced growth
also provides a bigger tax base since property values are
relatively higher all over town instead of just one side as is
the case when growth is predominately one direction,
he noted in the Denton Development Guide, the currant policy of
the City of Denton is to promote a continuation of this balanced
growth, between all quadrants of the City &ad for growth to be
in balance with existing infrastructure capacity$
E r'-t a
i Cartsio i utilities bard '
rehewer 134 19$4
Pius x
t.
AARInistrau"
The key objectives of Development Review acs;
o Prolkote 9004 development in all quadrants of the city of
Denton
o Reduce public cost
o Provide fair and consistent administration of development
ordinances and policies.
To accomplish these objectives in regard to utilities typically
includes:
o Requiring adequate size and quality of installation
o Discouraging NLaap ?tog% development. It is more cost
effective to use the current utilities in the ground,
because we continue to pay tot utilities, whether of not
they are used.
o Providing policies that can be administered with as little
interpretation as possible which will insure greater
crynsistancy and equity.
Theta ass numerous options that would be compatible with the above
policy objectives. The current Utilities Board recommendation is
very close to the following recommendation. However, we feel the
following modification would be a good atternativs that promotes
balanced growth can be consistently administered while still
addressinq some of the utility financial concerns.
a Recomaended=ltac a~tiv9 to the taoa t r••
1. Developer pays all actual front end costs Including ovetsize,
new lift stations needed, and present value of estimated 20 year
kaintenance cost, etc, h pro rata agreement tot future tie-ins
will be provided.
This modification puts the burden of speculation on the
developer instead of the City, while not dictating action to the
developer. It also lets a developer recoup some of his
investaent if in fact development does occur in the area.
2. City supports equally ail quadrants of the City by budgeting a
set askunt of CIP amd maintenance funds than will be used (it
nsldad) -
3. Provide a "phase in time," for the above change in participation
policy.
• Stephan IF. Fanning David iY~Iison
so
oe~l9
North Central Texas council of Government's ATTACHMENT VI
Planner's Group Program on
CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES
Se;,tember 9, 198S
1Frank Turner,--Di rector .of Planning, Plano Texas
A. Water/sewer facilities crow most common applic^tion of
capital recovery fees (CRFs).
B. Growing trend to include others--fire stations, parks,
libraries, etc.
II. All en Tay1 jr- Attorneys clients Include tirgyle, Flower Wound
A. Difficult to define what a capital recovery fee
actually is.
B. Most people confuse with internal deve.%lopment
infastructure--this is not a CRF,
C. CRF is a fee placed upon a developer to compensate the
community for the support systems that will be used by
the people in the development, i.e., offsite water and
sewer line capacity, eater and wastewater plants,
water towers, sewer lift stations, libraries, fire
stations, streets, drainage, etc.
.U. CRF is also called an "i"apact fee"- sewer
connection/water connection charge, etc.
E. Basic problem is a need to extract funds from a
developer or somewhere to pay for these facilities.
F. Two ways to do this:
1. Taxing power
2. Regulatory power
a. When fee is used for revenue only,. then tax.
b. When fee is used for service or ~o regulate
development, then impose a regulatory fee.
3. Constitutional Issues- article 1, section 8- all
cax must be equal and uniform for all citizens
and customers.
4. CRF cannot be a tax since it is not equal and
uniform.
S. CRFs have not really been tested in Texas except
slightly by Davis vs Bartonville Water Supply
Corp. but that case was a rural water supply
membership.
3911U:1
G. Regulatory type fee:
1. 1984 City of College Station vs Turtle Rock
Development. This is a park land dedication. A
very sensitive issue.
2. This is a police power mandate and cities can do.
3. CRFs not covered by this case since the required
facilities are generally not located witii-in the
subdivision and, therefore, not totally
attributable and beneficial to the development.
K. Utah cat;e has been used to support CRFs
1. This case Development vs Jordan City, 1981,
was used to support the Colleges Station park
dedication case.
2. Decision of Utah Court ratifying legality of CRFs
includes 7 factors
a. Extraordinary costs incurred due to the
development
b. Relative Impact on exisiting citizens
c. Impact on facilities in future
d. Nature of facilities
e. Cost of required facilities
f. ?
9. ?
3. First litagated CRF in US was Daniel vs Burrow of
Pt. Pleasant, NJ, 1956.
a. $200 iee to build schools.
b. NJ Supreme Court denied, stating it was an
invalid and unfair tax.
4. Florida, 1976 case was lst utility CRF
a. $375 water, $475 sewer
III. Concerns with Water/Sewer CRFs
A. Double taxation- maybe triple
1. All customers, including new customers, must pay
existing water fees that collect revenue to
retire existing debt on common facilities; and
2. New customers are required to pay the CRF; and
31 When new common facility is begun, bonds are
normally sold to pay for facility and additional
water fees are established to pay new debt
service, to pay for retirmenet of new debt for
new common facilities, all customers new and old
must p y this since CRF is normally not
sufficient to pa_y__fo!_all__of n:.. fjatilirv_
MOPE"
IV. Steve Lew-is, City Manager, Flower Aound
A, Reason for impact fees
1. Increased cost to keep up with growth
2. Concerns over general ad valorem tax increases
a. local policies to limit tax and rate
increases
b. State Law limiting percentage tax incrases
without elaborate public notice
c. Threats of roll back elections
d. Decrease in federal/state aid
e. Concern over infrastructure
B. All cities need the revenue to tinsnce the new
facilities.
C. Existing citizens oppose additional costs.
D. No one argues in behalf of the new citizen that must
pay the CRF except the developer who normally has
jittle credibility with Council or existing citizens.
V. Flower Aound has CkF to help build WWTP. Previously had a
$300 sewer tie on charge, generally to pay actual cost to
tie on.
A. CRF collects a land use develo
residential connection development fee based on
(RCEs).Non-residential units used MetcalfegandilEddy
publication to develop the residential connection
equivilent.
B. Flower Mound is considering a water impact fee and
road impact fee.
C. Flower Mound plans to collet.t enough fees for
facilities identified and from only a designated area,
then rebate to property owners of record a pro rata
amount of any over collections.
VI. Bob Benedict Director of Govt Affairs, Home and Apartment
u ers ssoc a_tioon_
A. Builders/developers don' t
new homeowner or business actualle CRF, the ultimate
> pays.
B. Costs of new homes already high.
3911U;3
C. A 41000 fee to a home buyer will cost $4,000 over life
of home
V. With 101 Down, 121 of potential buyers can't afford a
new home
E. Typical home cost of 1500 sq. ft. home
Lard $28,000
Labor $11,200
Matt 22 5S0
$61,800 Sub-total
2,300 2.51 closing/financing
10500 mortgage placement fee
500 permits
5,500 realtor fee
4 600 UN S-101
Other
$22,800 Sub-Total
4,615 Builder profit
4 630 Builders corp. tax
_T~3,84_S Total cost of new 1500 sq ft home
G11. Impact of Development in a Community
A. For 1000 new homes built, it represents 1700 worker
years to the community.
`l. $34 M wages.
• C. $i- S M new taxes per year.
L. Developers will no longer go along with unfounded CRFs
and will litigate.
Vill. Adrienne Leonard, Attornev with Ray Hutchison Law firm
A. Legal authority for CRFs:
1. Subdivision development statutes in state law
2. Cities home rule and general law authority.
3. Article 11.0580 street development
4. Article ll0.C, Water improvements
B. CRFs muse' only be based on capital recovery
3911U;4
G. Adoption of a plan is a requirement
I. must set a uniform policy
2. must be based on sound engineering
3. must have uniform administration
v. Ordinance required to adopt fees
E. Should have workshops to develop a work plan to
implement.
F. Identify services that are needed
1. Can be all or separate for water, sewer, parks,
library, etc.
2. Note type of growth, density, etc,, for area in
the plan.
3. Identify the geographical area,
4. Flower Mound covers only part of town.
5. Farmers Branch has plan only to the industrial
area.
G. Identify capital facilities required
1. Must have a professional engineer to identify
types of facilites, cost, schedules
2. Should be a S to 10 year program
3• Will need to review annually so that can change
facility plan, increase or decrease fee.
H. After capital facilities are complete, then need to
analyze receipts vs expenditures and have provision to
rebate if over collected. Should be paid to property
owner of record at time of rebate.
1. Will need to put all money in a special fund
1* need to audit annually
2, need to use money only for stated capital facility
IX. Other Comments
A. Homebuilders believe that the best time to collect fee
is when homeowner or business closes the purchase,
B. Farmers Branch is for a specific plan for one specific
area. Developers pay for whatever percentage of
project is complete at time of platting.
3911u;5
CCan get around legal problems of new rate
payers
paying both debt service and CRF by dedicating that
portion of the water/sewer rate targeted for common
facility debt service to maintenance for the customers
that paid the CRF,
i
i
39110;6
ATTACHRENT '.III
IMPACT/AVAILABILITY FEES
WATER AMID SEWER AVAItABrLM SLFitVZy Pm am
CITY Fm
Bedford No
Colleyvilye No
Ft. Worth Working
survey
Arlington
n Y"s ($600 aatat and sewer)
Houston Yes ($900 water and sewer)
McAllen Yes ($500 wear)
Crowley
Saginaw Ye► Working 46 water &w sewer)
Southla)ce Work ng an s ~ unit)
Senbrook Yes ($1,700 water and sewer)
Plano Yes ($100 water and sewer)
Dallas Working on per apt. unit)
Azle NO survey
Richardson ($7 Per foot water)
Lancaster NO r" foot sewer)
Rockwall Yes AU water and sewer)
Hurst NO
Richland Hills Working on survey
white Settlement
Farmers Branch No
Seagoville NO
Watauga I
cieorgetown ($1,500
Rausdrac~.k water - $750 se+►+er)
($650 water and $650 sewer)
Bastrop No (Working on survey - looks
like $600 waiter and $600 sewer)
CAPITAL RECOVERY CHARGES
CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS
2,500 for S/811 Meter (multipliers 1.U)
O's $ 3,750 for 3/4" Meter (multiplier. 1,5)
$ 6,250 for 1" deter (multiplier. 2.S)
$ 12,500 for i-1/2" 'deter (multiplier. 3,0)
$ 20,000 for 2" Meter (multiplier= 8.0)
$ 37,S00 for 3" 'deter (multiplier= 13,0)
$ 62, 00 for 111 Aeto r (multiplier. 25.0)
$200,000 for 6" Meter (multiplier. 80.0)
33500:1
ATTACHMENT VIII
September 11, lVAS (cont'd1
• 7, CONSIDER BID OPENING FOR ISTERIUR PAINTING OF MCKEN,NA PARK
STORAGE TANK AND OSE ; M6 GROUND h kATER
PLANT. U OV513.
Thompson made a motion to recommend the Council accept a
bid to the amount of $60,390 for ppainting the interior of
the NicAenna Park tank and $s3,04 Eor painting the interior
of the 2 million gallon ground storage tank at the
Wastewater Treatment Plant by G$S Sandblasting.
Second by Frady. All ayes, no nayes, motion carried.
n. CUNSIUER BID OPENING FOR MCX£SNA PARK BOOSTER PUMP, BID
Boyd made a motion to recommend two contracts: one with
W. F. Harrison for pump installation, valve installation and
otner work in the amount of $2S9,26o.40, the other with
Precision Powered Products for two pumps and motors at
$3a,9uo.
Second by Thompson. All ayes, no nayes, motion carried.
9. CONSIDER POLICY ON W ER AND SEWER LINE EXTENSION'S AND
Cooties made a motion to postpone acttoo and requested the
statf to draft a separate policy for extension of water and
wastewater lines. Second by Frady. all ayes, no ayes,
motion carried.
lU. REVILIN CAPITAL RhC01:RY FEES.
• Board discussed the resolution on Capital Recovery Fees
approved by the Board in December, 1984, The Staff advised
of recent developm-ents in Capital Recovery Fees and
recommended that if the City does decide to have a Capital
Recovery Fee tnat additional Energy and Legal assistance be
obtained, No action was taken.
11. CONSENT .AGENDA:
a. Consider P_rro_po_sed Oversize Agreement with 'nINL50R NEST
AVUIYTuiL T. R RTC I33TLCb, tor a new
Water line.
Tliompson made a motion to recommend approval of oversize
agreement with Wimcisor West Addition.
Second by Frady. All ayes, no nayes, motion carried,
b. Consider ro osed Water Line Pro Rata A reement with
or=
K[ N U3il~ ~'S S A U U
+totion was made by Coomes to approve the Pro Rata Agreement
with Windsor West Addition. Boyd seconded the motion. All
ayes, no naves, motion carried.
C. Consider Participation cost (CERTIFICATE OF FINAL COST)
for Water Line and Sewer Line Oversize Agreement,- MEADUWS
+16tTTL HUM E PARK, fi0LI UA, YELUF?i11 N I - -
Thompson mace motion to approve final oversize
participation cost with Holigan Development for water and
. sewer Lines to the Meadows Mobil Home Park (Now called
S)ut ofIT. Second by Frady, All ayes, no nayes, motion
carried:-
ATTACHMENT IX
CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES
Presented By:
Water and Wastewater
Management Advisory Committees of
Dallas Water System
Place:
. Greenleaf Hotel
Empire Room
1011 S. Akard
(Akard and Griffin West)
Date:
April 18, 1986
i
I
AAGGE_N,QA,
CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES
APRIL 15, 1986
1:30 - 2:30 Leal Perspectives
Mr. Alan Taylor (1:30 - 1:50)
Shannon, Gracey, Ratliff & Miller
2200 Ist City Bank Tower
201 Main Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76102-319
(336-9333)
Mr, John Boyle (1:50 - 2:10)
Jenkens, Hutchison b Gilchrist
3900 Ist City Center
Dallas, Texas 75201
(754-8611)
Questions (2:10 - 2:30)
2:30 - 3:30 Builder/Developers Views
John Papagolos (2:30 - 2:50)
Crow Development
251 O'Conner Ridge Boulevard, Suite 300
Irving, Texas 75038
(594-0505)
Bob Benedict (2:50 - 3:10)
Home & Apartment Builders Association
8730 King George Drive
Dallas, Texas 75235
(631-4840)
Questions (3:10 - 3:30)
BREAK (3:30 - 3:45)
3:45 - 4:45 Consultant Studies
Larry Shaw (3:45 - 4:05)
Peat, Marwick & Mitchell
1601 Elm Street, Suite 1400
Thanksgiving Square
Dallas, Texas 75201
(754-2000)
Dr. David S. Hasson (4:05 - 4:25)
Assistant Director
Water & Wastewater Economics
CH2M Hill
5339 Alpha Road, Suite 300
Dallas, Texas 75240
(980-2170)
Questions (4:25 - 4:45)
4:45 AdJourn
CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES, April 18, 1986
Mike Tubbs (Dallas Director of Utilities) opened comments.
*Mr. Alan Taylor comments (Shannon Grace Ratliff Miller) le alp
Capital Recovery Fees started in New Jersey as a sc ool tax. It failed
in court. Capital Recovery Fees can be a tax or fee to raise revenue
for a municipal purpose. A fee is a regulatory act, Thera is no
regulatory act authorizing Capital Recovery Fees in the State of Texas.
It, therefore, must be a tax. He thinks the Texas Supreme Court will
authorize CRF by the classification of customers, residential vs.
commercial.. After New Jersey, CRF's surfaced in Florida with roads and
utilities. iiollywood, FL, vs. Brouder was case that passed, it passed
because it proved the impact on municipal systems was severe. It
required that these CRF monies be used to solve the impact problem.
John Boyle (Jenkins, Hutchison & Gilchrist) put out a book of what to do
to start CRF's.
*John Boyle comments (Jenkins Hutchison & Gilchrist) le ali
Municipal governments are looking for more revenue - CRF s n lieu of
taxes. With bond market collapse, CRF's look all the more necessary.
Municipalities are looking more to the developers. Fie advocates that
bonds be used to fund CRF's, or just use bonds like we do in Denton.
Develop a Capital Improvement Plan and qualify the items of entry with
0 impact their projects will have on the community. Be nondiscriminatory
in CRF assessment.
*John Papagolos (Crow Development Corp.) government developers
He asked who was going to have children buying homes in the future. He
said we just paid the CRF's for them. He mentioned a trust of 1000
acres they just purchased and had to go to Boston to get the money.
Texas banks won't finance development anymore. Developers with a $1000
CRF in financing would find it increased to about $2500. Developers
don't pay CRF's, The home buyer ultimately pays. Why are CRF's needed?
To correct a poorly prepared City budget? To bail out the citizen so
taxes and rates don't have to be raised. CRF's will stifle growth?
Quality and quantity of development will be influenced by CHF's.
if CRF's are imposed, please give proper notice. He would like to see
that CRF's on parks donated be applied to his development, not his
competition. "Small bites are better than big bites,"
*Bob Benedict (Home and Apartment Builders Association) commentst
As other sources dry up, the CRF's start up. A $1000 CRF would prevent
about 8000 families from buying that house. Developer pays $17,500 to
buy and develop a lot plus construction cost $70,000 plus other fees
total up to $95,000 for house and lot. For every 1000 home built the
tax base increases by $1,500,000.
*Dr. David S. Hasson (CH211 Hill) comments:
He does rate studies and CRF studies. What is the cost of recovery;
How are your going to collect? Inflation, land cost, time, City
endoruement A insured cost of a house. Cost of delays cost developer
interest on carrying charges.
Questions from audiences
What is an acceptable review tir.? to Developer? Answer, 10 working
days from (John Papagolosl)
How would you reduce review time or costs? Through better communication
with City staff! (John Papagolosl) Answer. Better plans by developer,
better review by staff, better inspection by city. Sometimes city
inspector never show up on job sites. Contractor needs to do quality
work for developer.
Name you never gone forward with a development due to a CRF? Yes, some
projects have fallen through and passed to another city without CRFI
if you are going to have a CRF, it has to be nondiscriminatory and a
studied approach and resonable fees directed at a true impact. (Joe
Holmes, Dallas Utilities)
*r,arry Shaw (Peat, Marwick & Mitchell) commentsi
. He stated that CRF's have been around for a long time (tap fees,
inspection fees, pro rata fees, etc.) Uti.lites have to finance its
operation. Rate increases were not common until 1970's. Rate increases
are now about yearly. The consumer now asks questions, why every year?
The customer puts pressure on the city council. Councils are reluctant
to pass rate increases. Plus factors of EPA and development inflation
also puts pressure on Council. How do we finance growth? You must have
CRF's so that you do not impact the rate structure to the detriment of
the citizens. Some communities simply cannot pay the cost of new water
and sewer systems. Some other communities may have such a good
financial posture that CRF's are not needed. Austin, TX, had a variable
CRF to encourage development in areas the city wanted development rather
than a large money fee. Financial problem must be solved first.
Communities need to have inventory control of fixed assets to determine
increased costs of fixed assets to determine CRF's. Otherwise,
litigation will result.
CDHrbw
ATTACIDIENT X
q~ CITY OF DENTON
U71L1't~t! M E M 0 R A N D U M
rrr.r.rr...rw-rr..~rarrrrr..rwrrrr....~rwrwrrrwr rr.~rw.r r.~wrrrr.rrrrrw+.rr r.-.~rwwrr
TOi R. F. Nelson, P.E., Director of Utilities
FROMi C. D. Ham, P.E., Assistant Director of Utilities
Water/Wastewater
DATE; August 11, 1986 600 to 900 p.m.
PLACEr Lewisville City Council Work session
City of Lewisville, TX
SUBJECTS Capital Recovery Fees (CRF)
The work session was called to,order by Mayor Ann Pomykel. Council
members presents David Pemberton, Tracey Clinton, John Peveto, and
Donny Daniel. Member absent was Marvin Jackson. City Manager present
was Charles Owens. Director of utilities present was Steve Backus and
other staff members, legal, CFR consultant, etc.
The City Council chambers were filled with developers, engineers, and
contractors. There was also a representative from the Home and
Apartment Builders Association (Bob Benedict) present. Joe Holmes from
the Dallas Utilities Wholesale Water Department was present.
For background information, the City of Lewisville adopted an ordinance
for Capital Recovery Fees in July 1986. At their next meeting, there
was considerable attendance by developers who claimed that the newly
adopted ordinance was inequitable and that they had not had an
opportunity to suggest alternatives. At that meeting, a work session
was called for this date, August 11, 1986.
At opening, Mayor Pomykal called for a motion to repeal the previously
approved CRF ordinance and to refund all fees raid since its adoption
last month. Motion was approved unanimously.
Steve Backus, Director of Utilities, made the presentation nn Capital
Recovery Fees (CRF's). (See attached agenda and ordinance.) He started
by explaining the scope of their Capital Improvements Program. Thcre
are plans to upgrade and add to the water plant, the sewer plant, new
lift stations, new water distribution mains, oversizing, new sewer
collection mains, and to tap into a finished waterline from Dallas
feeding "The Colony." The cost of this 1986-1990 program is estimated
at $54,000,000. Lung range estimates for CIP 1990-1995 is $701000,0001
and 1995-2000 is $108,0001000.
The rata consultant, Willis, Graves, and Morgan, Inc., in April, '1986,
found that water and wastewater rate increases would far exceed
acceptable levels in the coming years and advised the city of Lewisville
to adopt CRF's as a means of keeping rates acceptable and funds
available for CIP projects. An important point mentioned is that CRF's
do not cover operations and maintenance, only new construction debt
service. The consultant mentioned that for every 90 days delay in
adopting CRF's, the rate structure could increase 53 without CRF's. The
consultant mentioned a 35% plus increase in rates each year from now on.
Several developers made comments in summary as follows
1. CRF'a were inequitable. Restaurants were being charged different
fees even though they were the same size.
2. CRF's would adversely impact sales and make businesses
unprofitable.
i
30 Why was there not a committee established in the beginning with
various developers, contractors, and business people allowed to
work out these fees? The developers requested this committee to be
established.
4. Why not buy additional water from Dallas rather than build a new
water plant?
5. Why not give the developers a pro rata agreement to return CRF's as
people tie onto lines they must construct?
6. Was any consideration give to the amount of water being used by an
establishment?
After the comment or questions were heard, the Mayor again mentioned
that this was a work session only and that comments and questions would
be taken into consideration for inclusion into the proposed ordinance
attached. The Mayor did mention t1rat a reduction had already been made
to the proposed ordinance based on the last council meeting comments by
developers (See lined through corrections in ordinance).
The Mayor said that developers should put all comments in writing and in
three weeks they would present ordinance for re-adoption.
Meating adjourned.
CDHjbw
trrr w
UW Alki[
. L
151 West Church St. • Lewisville, Texas 76067 • 2141436-2591
CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES
Mork Session
Monday, August 11, 1986
6:30 p.m.
1. Consideration of repeal of Capital Recovery Fee Ordinance,
2. Review of financial and operating information which resulted
in Capital Recovery Fea (CRF).
3. Review of current CRF structure and its effects.
4. Alternative CRF structures.
5. Alternative sources of paying for capital expansion due to
growth.
6. Timing of effective date of CRF for planned
projects/buildings.
1. Timing of collection of CRF.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LEWISVILLE$ TEXAS
ESTABLISHING CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES FOR WATER AND
WASTE WATER UTILITIES; PROVIDING METHOD OF
DETERMINING SUCH FEES; PROVIDING TIME OF PAYMENT;
DISTINGUISHING SAID FEES FROM PRO'RATA CHARGES;
PROVIDING CITY LIABILITY LIMITS; SETTING TIME
LIMITS AND PROCEDURES REGARDING SUCH APPLICATIONSt
PROVIDING FOR APPEALS; REQUIRING SEPARATE ACCOUNTS
FOn FEES; PROVIDING FOR COUNCIL REVIEW; CONTAINING
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
WHEREASt the need exists for a comprehensive financial plan
for the City's water and wastewater utilities so that new projects can
be financed; and
WHEREAS, the citizens of Lewisville will best be served if
new developments and projects pay for a portion of the cost associated
with providing water and wastewater services to such developments and
projects; and
• WHEREAS, a capital recovery fee assessed to and collected
from owners of residential property and property other than residen-
tial property will collect a portion of the cost associated with pro-
viding utility services; and
WHEREAS, the utility rate study prepared by Willis, Graven
and 11organ, Inc., Utility Rate Consultants, in April, 1986 recommends
the implementation of such fees;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LEWISVILLT, TEXASs
Section 1. "Living Unit Equivalent" (LUE) is defined herein as
a measure of equivalent system capacity as related to the capacity to
serve a single family residential water or sewer service customer.
Section 2. That a capital recovery fee for water and
wastewater is hereby established per living unit for all property
served by the City of Lewisville with such util.ity services in the
sums stated in the attached exhibit A, which is incorporated into this
ordin at nce.
Section 3. In the event an extraordinary structure or use is
proposed, which does not fit into any category set forth in section 2
hereinabove, the City Manager or his designee shall determine the
appropriate fee for such situation.
Section 4. The fees established herein shall be collected at
the time of issuance of a building permit except when a permit is
issued for a shell building, then the fees shall be collected at the
time the interior finish permit is issued. If a permit is requested
for plumbing unrelated to building finish out, then the fee shall be
paid at the time of issuance of the plumbing permit. if a use or type
of occupancy changes after payment of the initial fee, fees in accor-
dance with Section 2 herein shall be paid prior to the issuance of a
new certificate of occupancy, but, credit in the amount of the initial
capital recovery fee shall be given to the new occupant or user.
Section 5.1 No such fees shall be paid where a structure is
being replaced because of demolition, fire or other natural causes
and where the replacement construction is composed of the same number
of LUE' s .
Section 6. The payment and collection of the fees established
and levied by this section shall in no way obligate the City of
Lewisville to provide any specific utility service and shall in no way
guarantee any specific level or quality of service.
Section 7. The right to connect a structure to the City of
Lewisville Utility System shall remain valid for a period of 120
days. Such right may not be transferred nor assig;nad to any other
site. In the event of permit termination, the sumr paid shall not be
rafundable. The owner of the tract involved may reapply for such per-
mit at a later date and in such event all sums previously paid shall
be credited toward such reapplication.
Section 6. Section 2-4-2 of the Lewisv ._j City Code relating
to pro rata charges is hereby repealed.
Section 9. If pro rata charges in accordance with Section
2-4-2 of the Lewisville City Code have been collected by the City on
the effective date of this"ordinance, a credit for a proportionate
share of such charge shall be given to the owner of the property at
the time of payment of the fees established in this ordinance.
Section 10, All water capital recovery fees generated by this
ordinance shall be deposited in the Water Capital Recovery Fee Account
of the Water and Sewer Fund and all said fees and interest accrued in
said account shall be used to finance Water Capital Improvement
Projects. All wastewater capital recovery fees generated by this
Ordinance shall be deposited in the tastewater Capital Recovery Fee
Account of the Water and Sewer Fund and all said fees and interest
accrued in said account shall be used to finance Wastewater Capital
Improvement Projects.
Section 11. The City Council of the City of Lewisville or a
Board designated by the City Council shall serve as an Appeal Board in
the event one affected by this Ordinance wishes to file an appeal from
its application. All expenses incurred in connection with such appeal
shall be paid by the Appellant. Written notice of appeal shall be
given within 10 days from the date of action or decision by the city
staff, and a decision shall be made by the appeal board within 30 days
thereafter, which decision shall be final.
Section 12. This ordinance and its administration shall be
reviewed by the City Council of the City of Lewisville no less fre-
quently than annually.
. Section 13. ,
The City Council of the City of Lewisville may
waive the collection of such fees for construction performed by the
tax supported entities.
Section 14. If any provision, section, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance, or the application of sama to any person or
set of circumstances is for any reason held to be unconstitutional,
void or invalid, or for any reason unenforceable, the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance or this application to other per-
sons or set of circumstances shall not be affected thereby, it being
the intent of the City Council of the City of Lewisville in adopting
this ordinance that no portion hereof nor provision or regulation con-
tained herein become inoperative or fail by reason of any unconstitu-
tionality or invalidity of any other portion, provision or regulation.
Section 15. This Ordinance shall become effective from and
after its adoption.
Section 16. It being for the public welfare that this
ordinance be adopted, creates an emergency and public necessity, and
the rule requiring this ordinance be read on three separate occasions
be, and the same is hereby, waived and this ordinance shall be in full
force and effect from and after its passage and approval .
PASSED AND APPROVED by vote of to ~i on this
the -Z.2 day of C , 1986.
KAYOR, I ►SS
ATTEST:
• ty ecretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
My Atto •y
• fit, ,i
t
Wit
16 Vx
Y
•
AP 0-57~0e4,9
EXHIBIT A
The City of Lewisville shall assess a Capital Recover Fee
for water and sewer regarding new development snCconstruc ion.
If modification of an existing unit increases the potential for
use of water and sewer services, a fee shall be assessed. The
fee shall be calculated by the Living Unit Equivalent Method or
LUE in which water and sewer usage is determined by a factor
relative to one single family residence. The Capital Recovery
Fee for water is $773 per LUE. The Capital Recovery Fee for
sewer is $668 LUE. The following guideline has been established
to provide a standard for the Capital Recovery Fee determination.
if a particular development or specific use is not indicated, the
City of Lewisville shall review the use and determine said fee.
Mixed use categories shall be calculated separately.
OVER
.
. CITY OF LEWISVILLE
CAPITAL RECOVERY PROGRAM
REVISED EXHIBIT A
AUGUST, 1986
TYPE OF STRUCTURE UNIT LUE/UNIT
1. RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE 1
DUPLEX DUPLEX 2
TRIPLEX TRIPLEX 3
MULTIFAMILY
ONE/TWO BEDROOM UNIT 0.75
THREE OR MORE BEDROOM UNIT 1
MOBILE HOME PER SPACE 1
RESTAURANTS: PUBS, LOUNGES
FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS
u.~+r 3B
DRIVS 44
•41~w6$~
•
G 'MPllti~4-+
PoR'
ALL FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS
PUBS, AND LOUNGES ( 0.5(# DRIVE IN/CARRY OUT
WINDOWS) + 0.132 (M SEATS)
3. SCHOOLS AND INSTITUTIONS
DAY CARE PER STUDENT/
EMPLOYEE 010086
DAY OPERATION W CAFETERIA PER STUDENT/
EMPLOYEE 0.047
DAY OPERATION W CAFETERIA PER STUDENT/
AND SHOWERS EMPLOYEE 04066
BOARDING OPERATION/ PER STUDENT/
NURSING HOME/CONVALESCENT RESIDENT/
EMPLOYEE 0.283
0
TYPE OF STRUCTURE UNIT LUE/UNIT
40 THEATERS/CINEMAS PER SEAT 01011
5. ASSEiYCBLY HALL/CHURCH/AUDITORIUM
FIXED SEATS PER SEAT 0.0075
FOLDING SEATS PER 1000 SQ.FT.
GROSS AREA 0.7
6. EXHIBITION CENTER
PER 1000 SQ.FT.
GROSS AREA 0.75
7. OFFICE/RETAIL
oneso PROM
0-1000 SQ.FT. GROSS AREA MINIMUM 0.16
GREATER THAN 1000 SQ.FT. MINIMUM + (0.16 PER 1000
SQ.FT. GROSS AREA IN
EXCESS OF 1000 SQ.FT.
GROSS AREA
0.16+(0.16(SQ.FT.-1000/1000)1
8. SELF SERVICE LAUNDRY
PER MACHINE 0.35
9. ENTERTAINMENT/ AMUSEMENT CENTERS
0-1000 SQ.FT. GROSS AREA MINIMUM 1
GREATER THAN 1000 SQ.FT.
GROSS AREA MINIMUM+0.16 PER 1000
SQ.FT. GROSS AREA IN
EXCESS OF 1000 SQ.FT.
GROSS AREA
1+(0.16(SQ.FT.-1000/1000))
10. CAR WASH
SELF SERVE PER BAY 1
AUTOMATIC WASH ONLY PER UNIT 1.5
AUTO GASOLINE SERVICE
STATION W CAR WASH MIN+PERBAY 1+145(MBAYS)
AUTO GASOLINE STATION ONLY MINIMUM 1
1. HOTEL/MOTEL
pop A,00"wrv"%~- 006.
PER ROOM 0,23
Now
TYPE OF STRUCTURE UNIT LUE/VNIT
.2. MEDICAL/DENTAL/VET CLINICS
0-1000 SQ.FT. GROSS AREA MINIMUM 1
GREATER THAN 1000 SQ.FT.
GROSS AREA MIN+0.16 PER 1000 SQ.FT
GROSS AREA IN EXCESS OF
1+(0.16(SQ.FT-I000/1000)) 1000 SQ.FT. GROSS AREA
13. HOSPITALS
PER LIC BED 0.29
14. WAREHOUSE
MINIMUM 0.5 + 0.08 PER
0.5+(0.08(SQ.FT/1000)) 1000 SQ.FT. GROSS AREA
15. MINI STORAGE PER OFFICE 1
16. MALL
eliby FOR ftow 0.1-34
0-1000 SQ.FT GROSS AREA MINIMUM 0.16
GREATER THAN 1000 SQ.FT. MINIMUM + {0.16 PER 1000
SO-FT. GROSS AREA IN
EXCESS OF 1000 SQ.FT,
GROSS AREA
0,16+i0.16(SQ.FT.-1000/1000))
FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS 0.5(f DRIVE IN/CARRY OUT
AREAS)+0,132(NSEATS)
0 TYPE OF STRUCTURE UNIT LUE/UNIT
17. IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, WATER ONLY -I
EXCLUDE SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING
METER EQUIVALENT FACTOR
SEE METER EQUIVALENT
FORMAT
18. MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL PROCESS
LUE SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY OF LEWISVILLE AFTER
SUFFICIENT INFORMATION HAS BEEN OBTAINED REGARDING THE
PROCESS. THE LUE DETERMINED SHALL INCLUDE BOTH THE
DOMESTIC AND PROCESS WAFER AND SEWER PROJECTIONS.
CITY OF LEWISVILLE
CAPITAL RECOVERY FEE CALCULATIONS
Meter
Current Adjusted Size
Residential
Single Family 1441.00 1441.00 3/4*
Duplex 2882.00 2882.00
Triplex 4323.00 4323.00
Multifamily
lit Bedroom 1080.75 1080.75
3 Bedroom 1441.00 1441.00
Mobile Home 1441.00 1441.00
Restaurants
100 seat 19021.20 19021.20
50 seat 9510.60 9510.60
10 seat/drive 6657.42 2622.62
50 seat/drive 14265.90 10231.10
Chili's 39944.52 39944.52 2*
Golden Corral 27961.16 27961.16 3/;-'
McDonald's . 33287.10 29252.30 3/4*3/4*
Donut Palace 6086.78 2051.98
0 Fletcher's 4755.30 2161.50
Al Vera's 34238.16 34238.16 3/4*
E1 Chico 37281.55 37281.55 3/4"
Clyde's 16168.02 12133.22 3/4*
Baskin/Robbins 5896.57 1861.77 3/4*
Braum's 18070.14 14035.34 1*
Mrs. T's 13314.84 9280,04
Purr's 56302.75 56302.75 3*
Schools
Day Care * 6772,70 1239.26
Day Operation
With Cafeteria
100 students 6772.70 6772.70
Day with Cafeteria
+ shower per 100
students 9510.60 9510.60
Boarding
Operations/
Nursing Home 40790.30 40780,30
*Based as Day operation w/Cafeteria 100
**Proposed as Day Care only category 0.0086 per person
^ITY OF LE'WISVILLE
kPITAL RSCOVZRY FEE SCHEDULE (continued)
Meter
Current Adjusted Size
Theater
cinema/800 seats 12680.80 12680,80
Assembly
Church/200 seats 2161.50 2161,50
Office/Retail
FCB-Main 6282.76 5072.32 2*
MM-Main 4299.94 3089.50 3/4*2*
MBank-Stemmons 10202.28 8991,84
Sherman Williams 8350.60 1336.10
Tackle Shop 1556.28 249.00
Trisha's Boutique 1441.00 230.56
FM 407 Print Shop 1441.00 230.56
Decarator Shop 1492.18 281.74
3000 SQ.FT. Office 1902.12 691.68
1000 SQ2FT- Office 1441.00 230.56
Laundry
Heath's 17868.40 15634.85 2*
Speed Queen -
Old Orchard 24785.20 21687.05 2*
Fox Ave/K Mart 20750.40 18156.60 2*
0 Gibson's Center 24208.80 21182.70
Lakeland Plaza 21903.20 19165.30
Entertainment
3000 Sq. Ft. 5619.90 5619.90
Car Wash
Selfserve-Mill 10807.50 10807,50
Selfserve 1-35 8646.00 8646.00
Selfserve-Fox 7205.00 7205.00
Hotel/Motels
Holiday Inn 98708.50 45405.91 4*
+Restaurant
Ramada 63404.00 29165.84 2*
+Restaurant
La Quinta 93665.00 43085.90 3*
Spanish Trails 69168.00 31817.28 3/4*
Hampton Inn 93665.00 43085.90 4*
Medical/Dental Clinic
1000 Sq.Ft. 1441.00 1441.00
5000 Sq. Ft 2363.24 2363,24
Hospital
FTM 106634.00 61847.72 3/4*2
i
OF LEWISVILLE
c ;TAL RECOVERY FEE SCHEDULE (continued)
Meter
Current Adjusted size
warehouse
3000 Sq. Ft 1066.34 1066.34
15000 Sq.Ft. 2449.70 2449.70
50000 Sq. Ft. 6484.50 6484.50
M!.ni Storage
1 office 1441.00 1441.00
2 offices 2882.00 2882.00
Mall
0-1000 Sq.Ft. retail 1441.00 230.56
1500 Sq.Ft. retail 1556.28 345.84
Restaurant w
three windows 4755.30 2161.50
Actual Mall area
irrigation Systems,
10,000 Sq.Ft 4406.10
* Adjusted program relates to Meter Equivalent factors only.
See Muter Equivalent schedule
Gustrial/Manufacturing LUE to be determined by the City of Lewisville
Elfab 236888.17
Texas Instruments 448796.35 10*4*4*4
Krestmark 71523.17 2*1*1*3/4
Inca Metals 31606.35 2
United Resins 21909.52 2*2
McCormick 52524.76 2
Texas Summatek 6258.89 3/4
ATTACHMMT XI
7fie7`re9u)= Board meeting of the Argyle hater supplY Corporation oomw-ad
nary 10, 1985, and was attended by the followings
Pr sident............N. L. Smith Director........D. L. Morris
Vior PresidW*s ........~A, Lam./~Utes_ch.. Director........ ll DDaavis.
Director, .............stew Denning Asst............Russel Matheson
Mr. Smith called the meeting to order. Mr. Smith asked for a motion to
apps on the Mias tm of last mcmths meetings Mr. Utesch trade the motion,
Mrs Lynch 2nd the morns Motion carried.
Mr. Utesca presented the new &VIS ,opaor fee for 1985 as figured by him at
$708.16. the boo discussed changing policy on ths dsftloper fee to figure
it cn a quarterly Vasis rather than yearly, Mr. Morris neds a motion that
w
e atmend the policy on developer fees to calculate them on a quarterly rather
then
made ~ntotiort toy Denning 2nd the m~ticni Motion Carried: Mr. Lynch
for the first accept the $708.16 develeixrr fee as calculated by Mr. Utesch
quarter of1985. Mr. DetvdM 2nd1 Motion carried. The Board
6111 P t=Wted JW astd Matheson to change the service requirement
accordingly policy regarding developer fees.
Moving
r into new business, the board reviewed a request by Mr. Jenkins to buy
legal size file cabinet and a new adding machine. Mr. Denning made a
motion to approve the purchase of a new file cabinet and adding machine; Mr.
Davis 2nd the motions Motion carried.
Mr. Jenkins requested hiring, a part time girl to stay in the office and
. answ'er the phone. the board tabled the issue until rAxt month and asked Mr.
Matheson to check on beepers, cellular phones, answering services or any-
thing else that might improve caunriaations and report back next month.
The Board dimnased automated rents controlling and monitoring of the
stations in the office using pzngrameble controllers. The Board went
into eooscutivt) session.
Hoard Meeting adjourned.
I
ATTACHMENT XII
yy L"v I
ORDINANCE NO..a_.L.-2w
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF FLOWER MOUND,
TEXAS, ADOPTING PRO RATA CHARGES FOR THE
CONNECTION TO 20" WATER TRANSMISSION MAIN
WEST OF THE WESTCHESTER SUBDIVISION,
SPECIFICALLY PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE 20"
WATER MAIN; PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY PLATTED;
PROPERTY TO BF PLATTED; PROPERTY TO BE
PLATTED NOT ADJACENT TO THE 20" WATER LINE;
COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND INDUSTRIAL USERS TIE
ON FEES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PRO-
VIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE
SUM OF TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200,00) FOR
EACH OFFENSE, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FLOWER
MOUND, TEXAS;
SECTION 1. Whereas the Town of Flower Mound has constructed a
20" water transmission main from the west property line of the Westchester
Subdivision (Fox b Jacobs), west to the ground storage facilities on Ada
Street In hidden Valley Country 9states III, the Town of Flower Mound deems
it necessary to pro rata the cost of providing water service to the service
• area desginsted by Attachment 81. The cost of construction for the water
transmission main Is $809,181 and the total linear footage for the project being
20,837 feet. The total cost of the project including the Interest over the Ufa
of the bonds Is $1,343,29-S. The pro rata charge shell represent a portion of
the costs of providing water to serve the property on which the pro rata Is
paid.
SECTION 2.
a. Property adjacent to the 20" transmission main: When a developer,
builder, subdivider or a company builds a subdivision consisting of residential,
commercial, retail, office or Industrial uses, a pro rata cost of $38.60 per
linear foot shall be refunded to the Town of Flower Mound for the property
fronting on said water line for the cost of the water transmission main.
b. Property previously platted; A payment of the water pro rata on
the property already platted shall entitle the builder of the project or person
responsible for the construction of the building desiring service to acquire a
connection to the water Una, when the One to which' the connection is to be
made Is In the alley or comparable easement adjacent to the property. The
pro rata charge for a connection to the water system served by the 20" water
transmission main shall be $638.00 per lot, or tract of land.
c. Property to be platted; A payment of the water pro rata on pro-
party to be platted shall entitle the builder of the project or, person responsible
for the construction of the building desirlog service to acquire a connection"to
the water Ene, when the In* to which thr connection Is to be made is In the
alley or comparable easement adjacent to the property, the water connection
fee for the water system served by the 20" water line shall be $658.00 per lot
d• Property to be platted not adiacent to the 20" water line:
Property that Is to be platted that Is not adjacent to the 200 water trans-
mission main, shall pay a pro rata fee based upon demand that a new
subdivision places upon the system. The demand and the cast to the system
Is calculated by the following method based upon the following data.
It Usage per connection (Dwelling Unit) ■ 400 gallons/day
2. Total cost of the system including interest . li1,343,2".00
3, Total capacity of the 200 transmission main ■ 7 million gallons/day
For example; if a developer wants to develop 100 residantlal lots,
100 lots x 400 gallons/day a 40,000 gallons/day i• 7 millions gallons/day x
$1,343,295 N 14=
All lots or tracts of land with a water service connection must pay $658.00 as
a water tie on fee In addition to the demand charge to tie onto the system.
e. Commercial retail, office and industrial users: The water tie on
I' fee for commercial, retail, office and Industrial users shall be computed by two
methods and the tie on fee shall be the lesser of the two. One method shell
be computed by the meter size required for the project. For commercial, retail,
office and industrial users connecting west of the Westchester Subdivlslon,
the following meter sizes shall determine the water tie on fee.
314" meter $ 658
III
$ 1,174
1 112" $ 2,641
2"
I # 4,6%
$10, s6s
• $18,783
$42,261
For commercial, retail, office and lnductriai users connection to the existing
system, east of the Westchester Subdivlslon the foilowing shall apply according
to meter sizes and shall determine the water tie on fee,
3/4" meter $ 300
$ 535
1,204
$ 2, 141
t~
3" $ 4,017
4" $ 8,565
BN
268 '
The other method for determining the tie on fee shall be by actual demand the
project places upon the system as a whole. The demand by each project shall
be determined by the average of three months of service when the project is
completed and occupled. An Initial tie on fee based upon demand shall be
determined by the user and the 01rector of Utllltles or his designate. T4 Us
on he will be adjusted when the project Is completed and occupied, and will
reflect an Increase or doers" depending on which of the two methods I% the
lesser of the tie on fees.
i4gw
} 1 ORIDINANCE 1400
67-85 a
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
FLOWER MOUND, TEXAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO, 47-84
BY AMENDING SUBSECTION A AND SUBSECTION B OF SECTION
8 ENTITLED "SEWER TIE ON FEES-PRO RATA CHARGE", BY
AMENDING EXHIBIT "A", PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY NOT TO
EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS (;200.00); PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, numerous public meetings were held, after all legal notice
requirements and prerequisites were complied with, to which owners and
developers of land in the Town could attend and express their views and which
included input from the Town's utility rate consultants and engineering
consultants; and
WHEREAS, a Report on Water and Sewer Rates (the "Report"), a copy of
which is attached as Exhibit "A" and is incorporated herein, prepared by Willis,
Gr.zves A Morgan, Inc., Utility Rate Consultants, was submitted to the Town for
review; and
WHEREAS, the Report and follow-up letter from Willis, Graves &
Morgan, Inc., copies of which are attached as Exhibit "B" and is incorporated
herein, analyze the necessity of Increasing the current pro rata charge
established in Section 8 of Ordinance No. 25-82; and
WHEREAS, it was found that the calculations used in initially determining
the pro rata charge in Section 8 of Ordinance No. 25-82 did not take into
account the debt service on the bonds to be issued to finance the capital
improvements for the Waste Water Collection and Treatment System on which
the pro rate charge is based; and /
WHEREAS, the Town staff and Willis, Graves & Morgan, Inc. recommend
that the pro rata charge be increased to reflect the new debt service based upon
the comptations provided in Secti'n VII of the Report and the letters attached as
Exhibit "S'; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council does hereby find and conclude based on the
studies and findings of Willis, Graves do Morgan, Inc. that an increase of the pro
rata charge to i is fair, reasonable and equitable and is rationally
and reasonably related costs of the capital improvements and represents
a fair, reasonable and equitable allocation of costs; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and concludes based on the advise of
its Engineer, Camp Dresser do McKee, Inc. by letter dated August 23, 1985, a
copy of which is attached as Exhibit "C" and is incorporated herein, that the unit
definition and connection equivalent per connection for Commercial/ Retail
Stores should be amended in accordance with the recomm-ndation of the
Engineer.
. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF FLOWER MOUND, TEXAS:
Section 1. That Ordinance No. 47-84 is hereby amended by amending
Subsection A of Section 8 entitled "Sewer Tie-On Fees - Pro Rata Charge" to
read as follows:
Section 8, Subsection A.
A. All pro rata charges for sewer development of single family
detached dwelling units used solely for residential purposes shall be
A I , All pro rats charges for sewer connections for o 3 2A -nil the development of any other structure or building shall be charged
in accordance with paragraph B or C as applicable.
Section 2. That Ordinance No. 47-84, is hereby amended by amending
Subsection B of Section 8 entitled "Sewer Tie-On Fees - Pro Rata Charge" to
read as follows:
Section 8, Subsection B
B. The pro rata charge for sewer connections for all other types of
development shall be determined by multiplying 112L4. go by the
connection equivalent designated in the table attac reto as
Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein for all purposes for the
respective type of development.
Section 3. That Ordinance No. 47-84, is hereby amended by amending
the unit definition and connection equivalent per connection (C.E./Unit) for
Commercial/Retail Stores as found in Exhibit "A". That the unit definition for
Commercial/Retail Stores as found in Exhibit "A" which reads; 25-front footage
is hereby amended to read 10,000 square foot gross floor. That the connection
equivalent per connection (C.E./Unit) for Commercial/ Retail Stores in Exhibit
"A" which reads 1.7 is amended to read 2.4, An amended Exhibit "A" is attached
hereto,
Section 4. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances of the Town of
Flower Mound, Texas, in conflict or ineonsistent with this Ordinance are
repealed to the extent of the conflict or inconsistency.
Section S. If any section, article, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or
word in this ordinance, or application thereto any person, or circumstance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction such holding
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance; and the
Town Council of the Town of Flower Mound, Texas hereby declares it would have
passed such remaining portions of the ordinance despite such invalidity, which
remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect.
Section B. Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance
shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be
fined in a sum not to exceed Two Hundred Dollars ($240.00) and a separate
offense shall be deemed committed upon each day during or on which a violation
occurs or continues,
Section T. The fact that the present ordinances and regulations of the
Town of Flower Mound, Texas are inadequate to properly safeguard the health,
i
e y, m pe a gene
Plower Mound, Texas, creates an ems o
public business, icy for the Immediate preservation of
Property, health, safety, and general welfare of the public which
re41lires that this ordinance shall become effective from and after the date of
its passage and it U accordingly so ordained.
PASSED AND APPROVED on the,&~'day of 1985.
0~4
MXYOR, Town o ower oun , exas
ATTEST:
own o Flower oun , exas
%
fE AL ~
ROVED FORM:
rEX
Town Attorney, Town of ower Mound, Texas
..low
• Exhibit A
Tye of Structure Being Connected Unit C•EE*/Unlt
Residential Dwelling
Single Family (all sizes/no. of bedrooms Structure I
Duplex (all sizes/no. of bedrooms) Duplex
Triplex (all sizes/no. of bedrooms) Triplex 3
Multifamily 0.73
One & Two bedroom units Unit
Three do more bedroom units Unit H 1
Mobile Home Mobile Home Space 1
Restaurant 100 seating capacity 13.2
School
with cafeteria 100 student capacity 4.7
Day
100 student capacity with cafeteria do showers 6.6
Boarding 100 student capacity 18.3
• Theater 100 seats 1.1
Indoor
Outdoor 100 parking spAces 1.3
Auto Service Station et of 2 or 3 nox le 0v 7.3
Commercial/Retail Stores ~D OOC> 1 we ' ' '
100 occupant capacity 7.9
Country Club (transleni type)
Offices 10,000•sq. it. gross floor 1.6
Industry/Factory (domestic waste only) 100 employees 9.4
Self Service Laundry Washing Machine 1.4
Bowling Ailey Lane 0.75
Public Swimming Pool 1,000 sq.ft. pool do pad area 2.4
Assembly Hall
Fixed seats 100 seats 0.75
Folding seats 1,000 sq. it. seating area 0.73
Transportation Terminals 10006 passenger capacity 9
"Connection equivalent per connection.
9va.{AR++F/ra ,:y. Y,. i_~.. rte- _rY=,
ATTAGIl4fr11T XIII
ORDINANCE N0. jw/ ,.j
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF CORINTH, TEXAS, AMENDING ORDIN,INCE84-11-19-18,
REGULATINC WATER AND SEWER WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE TOWN, CONNECTION_ TO WATER
SYSTEM REQUIRLD; MAKING IT UNLAWFUL FOR ANY PERSON TO MAKE ANY CONNECTION TO
THE WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM WITHOUT FIRST MAKING APPLICATION TO THE TOWN; ESTA-
HLISHINC RATES FOR SEWER SERVICE; PROVIDING REGULATIONS TO CONTROL EXTENSION OF
WATER LINES INTO SUBDIVISIONS OR TO INDIVIDUALS; PROVIDING IMPACT CHARGES AND
FRO-RATA CHARGES; PROVIDING FOR PRO-RATA REFUNDS; ESTABLISHING TAPPINO FEES FOR
WATER AND SEWER CONNECTIONS; REQUIRING ALL OWNERS OR OCCUPANTS OF BUILDING TO
CONNECT TO THE TOWN SEWER WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE LAND ON WHICH SUCH
BUILDING IS SITUATED APPROACHES OR EXTENDS TO WITHIN ONE HUNDRED FEET (100') OF
ANY TOWN SEWER MAIN; PROVIDINO REGULATIONS FOR EXTENSION OF SEWER LINES TO SUB-
DIVISIONS AND INDIVIDUALS; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORLI-
NANCE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF
THIS ORDINANCE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUN OF TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS (;200) FOR EACH DAY
OF OFFENSE; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CORINTH, TEXAS:
SECTION 1-WATER. REGULATIONS
1.OIA--CONNECTION TO WATER SYSTEM REQUIRED: All owners or occupants of build-
ings, or agents for the owners, situated in any section of the Town where a
water lino now exists, or where it may hereafter exist, and where the property
line of the land on which such building is situated approaches or extends to
within one hundred feet (100') of any such water line, are hereby required to
connact the same with the Town water system under the supervision of the Plumb-
ing Inspector and Corinth Utility Inspector,
1,018--APPLICATION FOR CONNECTION; It shall be unlawful for any person to make
any connection to the mains ar pipes of the Waterworks System without first mak-
ing application to the Town, stating fully rho several and various uses for
which water is wanted, giving the name of the property, tlse number or the lot
and block, name of the street and house number, Upon the payment of the tapping
fee, Oirector of Water Utilities shall make, or have made, the necessary con-
nections and furnish a curb stop box and curb cock, the cost of which is in-
eluded in the tapping fee, and every premises not now equipped with the curb
stop box and curb cock and connected with any water main, or being supplied with
any water from the Waterworks System, shall have a separate service connection,
curb stop box and curb cock installed by and at the expense of the owner of the
premises. If application is approved by the Director of Water Utilities, a per-
mit will be Issued. All fees and charges shall be paid for At amounts and rates
fixed by applicable sections of this Ordinance,
1.02--WATER RATESi The monthly rates or charges for survlee furnished by the
Town's Waterworks System shall be the current rates approved by rho Town Council
Residential Rarest
0-3,000 gal, $13.15 Minimum
3001-6000 gal, 1.85/1000 gal,
6001-up 1,75/1000 gal.
Commercial Rates: Same as for residential.
Ouildur's Rates: Same as fur residential,
One Day Service for Testing or Maintenance; $13,15 for loss than 3000 gallons.
Hegulur Residential rates aver 3000 gallonn,
1.03--CONNECTION TO TOWN MAINS:
1,03A--The fens for connection to the Town Waterworks System for each Single
Family Dwelling, detached or attached, served by one master motor shall but
Existing Tape No Existing Taps
3/4" Connection 1290.00 $440,00
1 " Connection 33U,00 480.00
Ili " Connection 395,00 545.00
. 2 " Connection 470.00 620,00
Larger than 2" Connection; Total coot of Materials and Labor.
P. 1 of 6
1,038--Cvnnuction fees for all other facilities served by one master mater mhal
be:
(a) Mobile Home Parkas $50,00 per each mobile home space and total cost of
materials and labor for the master meter,
(b) Apartment Complaxes, Townhouses, Office Buildings, Multi-Family Dwellings,
and other approved facilities listed below, served by one master meter shall bo;
1, $50.00 per each unit of two (2) bedrooms or more shown on Chu plans
submitted for building permit,
2, $45,00 per ouch unit of one (1) bedroom shown on the plans submitted
for building permit.
3. $45,00 par each separate placa of business shown on the plans submitted
for building permit.
1,03C-- When a paved road has to be bored, the builder or developer will be
liablu for all additional boring costs,
1.03D-- The guilder/Doveloper/Individual shall be responsible for locating and
exposing service lines for connection and the Town will set motors or extend
services as needed.
1,04--DISCONTINUANCE OF SERVICE: Any person wishing to discontinue the use of
water supplied irum the Waterworks System must give notice thereof to the Town;
othurwiHU, the charge for service will bu continued until such notice has been
given, The charge for shutting off service where notice has not been given and
where payment is dolinquent shall be twunty-fine dollars ($25),
1,05--REPORT LE,1KS: It shall be the duty cf all employees of the Town, includ-
ing offlcura and members of the police force, to report to the Director of Water
Utilitius, upon forms furnished for that purpose, any leaks or unnecessary waste
of water that may come to their attention; nlso, any violation of this Ordinance
shall be noted,
1,06--METERt All meters whether private or belonging to the Waturworka System
shr.ll bo set by the employees of the Town, If the mutor fails to register, the
consumer will be charged at the average dally consumption as shown by the mater
when In order, Charges shall be made for all water that passes through the me-
ter whether used or not.
1.07--SEPARATE METERS REQUIREDt Each consumer of water living in a separate
house West he a separate connection and meter for each house; provided, that
in cases of hardship, or where a residence is not in reach of Town water main,
arrangements may be made, at the option of the Town, to secure water from ano-
ther user of Town water.
1,08--REPAIR OF WATER LINES: In the interest of water conservation, if, at any
time, water lines and connections from the motor loop connection into the resi-
dence, house, barn, business, yard, or similar places become rusted out, broken,
or in general detertoated, it shall be the duty f the owner of the premises to
place his lines in a good and serviceable condition, The replaced and repaired
lines must meet specifications laid down by the Town Plumbing Cade.
1,09--METER DEPOSITt Each water consumer shall make a meter deposit in at least
the sum o fifty dollars ($50) when service is applied for, Should a fifty dol-
lar ($50) deposit be insufficient to apy an average monthly bill, or, it expert-
ence has proved that a customer does not pay water bills promptly and as due,
the Town may require the meter deposit to be in any sum deemed necessary to pro-
tect the Town. Such meter deposit may be applied to the payment of any water
and sewer overdue to the Town. Any unused portion of the deposit shall be re-
funded to the consumer at any time service is .'iscontlnuad.
1,10--NEW SERVICE AT EXISTING CONNECTIONS1 A charge of Fifteen Dollars ($15)
will be made or turning on a new water service whets a water connection, i.-
eluding tap and meter, already exists.
p, 2 of 6
1,11--WATER RATIONING, The Mayor, or, in hie/her absence, the Mayor pro-Tam o
the TOG-"-
a necessary to do so to protect the citizens of tha Town, Ord,
V rationing system suited to the emergency then existing, by declaring all Omer
Gulley,
1,12--FJCTENS[ON OF WATER MAINS TO SUBDIVISIONS ANA WITHIN SUBDIVISIONS~QR TQ
INDIVlOUAIS KNOWN AS RO-RATgt
1,12A-- Developers of subdivisions shalt boar tha entire costs of water systems
within the boundary of their subdivisions, Adequate size of such water males
aIhnadli be dotorminud by the Tuwn, on any mains larger than twelve inches (12")
iameter, the Town will refund the difforanto between the coat of Chu over-
sized main and n twelve inch (1211) diameter main or the largest size of main
required for the subdivision, whichever Is greater,
I.I;!B-- Whore extension of water mains is required to serve property which has
been subdivided or platted for development and resale, the coats of approach or
off-situ boundary mains fronting on property not owned by the developer but re-
quired and necessary to connect property W be developed shall be borne solely
by the developer. The sizes of all aforementioned mains shall be determined by
Clio Town, j
1.12C-- Upon approval and acceptance of the system by the town, on any main that!
is an approach, or off-site or boundary main, the Town will pay, upon accuptance
if funds are available, or will enter into u pro-rata agreement with the dove
lopes, an amount being the cost of the oversize of any main larger than twelve
inches (12") in diameter or the largest size of main required for the subdivi-
sion, whichever is greater in size, ats oflland shallobeapaidhbygtheosubidvider/individual applicant If water linos have
(f12) per line foot of lot or tract
bean extended by the Town to serve the connections.
1,12E-- The Town shall refund to the subdividur/individual Pro-Rata charges re-
ceived from applicants for water and sewer who wish to connect to the boundary
mains. The total amount of refund not to excood the amount ui the suhdivider's
individual's coat of the improvements.
1.12F-- The maximum period of time for the pro-rata reimbursemunt to the sub-
divider/individual shall not exceed five (5) yere.
1,13--I4PACT CHABCESt The Town may extend water mains in streets, alleys or
easements and make capital improvements such as water storage, treatment faci-
lities or pumping stations within the Town limits in order to permit connections
by those persons desiring water services, A charge known as Impact Charges
shall be made against each lot or tract of land bai,tg developed. The Owner
thereof whose water line shall ba hereafter connected with any water mains in
the Town shall be charged an Impact Charge of Eight Hundred Fifteen Dollars
($815) per connection. The Impact Charge Is in addition to the Pro-Rata charge
In Subsection 1.12D,
1.13A-- A connection shall be considered to bet
1. Single Family Dwellings--Each unit, attached or detached.
2. Mobile Home Parks--Each mobile home space.
3. Apartment complexes, townhouses, multi-family dwellings, etc.---Each
dwelling unit.
4, Office Buildings--Each separate place of business shown on the plans
submitted for a building permit,
1,138-- If a subdivision developer pays the Impact Charge on each lot at the
time of final plot approval, the impact Charge shall be Six Hundred Dollara
($600) per lot. The subdivider shall have thirty days (30) from the data of
final plat approval in which to woke this advance payment. The Impact Charge is
not refundable.
1,13C-- Developers of subdivisions shall pay the Impact Charge before the Town
accepts the subdivision improvements.
1.131)-- In addition to the Impact Charge on general system improvements and
nr.or mains, the property owner must pay the connection fee as established in
Subsectio,; 1.03,
p. 3 of 6
SECTION 2. SANITARY SEWER REGULATIONS
2.01--CONNECTION TO SEWER REOI'.?RED: All owners or occapents of buildings, or
agents for the owners, situated in any section of the Town whore a sanitary
sewer now exists, or where it may hereafter exist, and where the property line
of land on which any such building is situated approaches or extends to within
one hundred feet (1001) of any such sewer, are hereby required to construct or
cause to be constructed, suitable water closets on their property, and connect
the same with the Town sewer, under the supervision of the Plumbing Inspector=
provided, however, that where there now exists a septic tank in proper sanitary
working condition, it may be permitted to remain in use until such time as it
may be found to be unsanitary, and, in this event, it may be ordered removed by
the Plumbing Inspector upon ten (10) days notice to the owner thereof, and all
faciliciea shall be connected to the Town sewer within ninety (90) days after
service is available. It shall be the duty of arty such property owners or oc-
cupants at such property to keep and maintain the water closet and connection
thereof to satisfactory working condition and free from any obstruction, and it
shall be unlawful for any person to build or use any privy vault above or below
the ground in the Town or on any lot or parcel of land. All persona now having
such privies in such locations are hereby required to abate the same within
thirty (30) days after notice by the Plumbing Inspector to do so, and to con-
struct and install water closoce and connect the same to the Town sewer,
2,02--SEWER RATES: Thu monthly rotes or charges for services furnished by the
Sewer System of the Town shall be the currant rates approved by the
m Town Council,
SEWER RATES:
Re.ttdential:
a 0-3000 gallons $9.75 Minimum
. i' 3001-10,000 gallons 2,30/1000 gallons
$25.85 Maximum
Commerciul: Same as residential except no maximum,
c Builders: Same as residential.
° One Day 3ervica for Testing and Mainrenance; $9,75 minimum charge for less than
3000 gallons of water used. Regular rates wnen over 3000 gallons of water used,
,
2,03--CONNECTING TO TOWN MAINS: The fees for connections u(th the Sanitary
: Sewer System shell be:
A. Single Family Dwellings--Each unit, attached or detached:
c Existing 'rap No Tap
4 "Connection $210,00 $310.00
6"Connection 250,00
Larger than 6" 380,00
Total Cost of labor and ma[erlal~i,
u
B. Mobile Nome Parke: $100.00 per each mobile home space and total cost of
+ labor and materials.
u
C. Apartment Complexes, Notels, Townhouses, Office Buildings, Multi-Family
Dwellings and other facihities served by one master water muter;
t
: 1, $100.00 per each unit of two (2) bedrooms or mere as shown on the plans
, submitted for a building permit.
2. $50.00 per each one (1) badroom unit as auown on the plans Submitted
for a building permit,
S
3. $50.00 per each separate place of but,iness shown on the plans submitted
for building permit.
~ D. When a paved road has to bored, the builder or developer will be liable for
t
t all additional boring costs.
E. Sewer ditches, manhole enverq, or cl,anout covert conrulning main sewer
lines or service lines to residences or any other building or structure shall
not be left exposed or uncovered overnight or during bad weather for any reason
whatsoever thereby permittitts infiltration to enter into the Corinth Sanitary
sewer Systtm. The Town shall aut.macically be due Two pandrsd Dollars ($200)
for failure to observe this resuirestent.
2.04--EXTENSION OF SEWER MAINS TO SUBDIVISIONS AND WITHIN SUBDIVISIONS, OA TO
• INDIVIDUALS, KNOWN AS PRO-RATA.
2.04A--Developers of subdivisions shall bear the entire custa of sewer systems
within the boundary of their subdivisions. Adequate size of such sewer mains
shall be determined by the Town. On any main larger than twelve inches (1211)
In diameter, the Town will refund the difference between the cost of the over-
sized main and a twelva-Inch (12") diameter main, or the largest size of main
required for the subdivision, whichever Is greater in a_4o.
2.048--Where extensions or sewer Nair* ore required to serve property which h44
been subdivided or platted for daveL)pmont and resale, the costs of approach of
off-site or boundary mains fronting on property not owned by the developer but
required and necessary to connect p-opsrty to be developed shall be borne metal
by the developer, The sizes of all aforementioned mains shall be determined by
the Town,
2.04C--Upon approval and acceptance of the system by the Town, on any main that
is an approach or off-site or boundary main, the Town will pay, upon acceptance
if funds are available, or will enter into a pro-rato agreement with the deve-
loper, an amount being the cost of the oversize of any main larger than twelve
inches (12") diameter or the largest size of main required for Lilo subdivision,
whichever is greater in size.
2.04D--A Pro-Rata charge of Tan Dollars ($10) par lino foot of lot or tract of
land shall be paid by the subdivider/individual applicant if sewer lines have
[icon extended by the Town to serve the connection.
2.04E--Tha Town will refund to the subdivider/individual Pro-Rata charges ro-
coivud from applicants who desire to connect to the sewer mains. The total a-
mount of refund shall not exceed the amount of the sabdivider's/individual's
cost of the improvements.
2,04F--The maximum period of time for the pro-rate reimbursements to the sub-
divider/individual shall not excood five (5) years,
2,05--IMPACT CHARCEt The Town may extend sewer mains in streets, alloys or
casements and make capital improvements in the system such a.9 lift stations,
force mains, and outfall trunk sewers within the Town limttu in order to permit
connections by those nersonb desiring sanitary sewage services. A charge known
os Impact Charge shall be sanitary sewage services. A charge icnunn as Imp.iot
Charge shall he made aguinst each lot or tract of land being developed, The,
Owner thereof whose sewer line shall be hereafter connected with any sower mainbi
in the Town shall be charged on Impact Charge of Two liundre.! Ferty ($240) per
c,,nnrctIon, The Impact Charge is in addition to the Pro-Sato Charge in Subsec-
tion 2.041).
t
2,05A--A connection shall be considered to but
1. Single Family Dwellings--Each unit, attached or detached,
2 Mobile Home Parke--Each mobile home space,
3. Apartment complexes, townhouses, multi-family dwellings, _
Y inbs, etc.- Each
dwelling unit.
4. Office Bulldings--Each separate place of business shown on the plans
submitted for a building permit.
.05B--If a subdivision developer pays the Impact Charge on each lot at the time
f final plat approval, the Impact Charge shall be One Hundred Fifty Dollars
($150) per lot. the subdivider shall have thirty (30) days from the date of
final plat approval in which to make this advance payment. The Impact Charge Is
of refundable.
.05C--Developers of subdivisions shall pay the Impact Charge before the Town
ceepts the subdivisAon improvements.
.05D--1n addition to the Impact Charge and Pro-Rata Charge, the property owner
oat pay the connection fees as established in Subsection 2.03.
SECTION
.01--GIA31GITY FOR TRR AG 3--GENVAG
•
i Iii Rath property owner or subdivider shell furnish
terin a sods s lasts all water service lines and sanitary sewer laterals
rom the mains to the structure at his own cost and expense to meet the standard
atails and specifications and the approval of the Town, except that the Town
ill furnish the mete-s, necesrary fittings, and hater boxes for the water set.
ice lines and will cuftf~t,ete the after installations and connections.
P. 5 of 6
. 3.02--PAYMENT OF BILLS: The rates and Charges fixed and prescribed for the
waterworks and sanitary sewer systems shall be paid simultaneously by users
to the Town on the billing date shown on the monthly statement, which shall be
the data such rates or charges shall become due and payable unlesa otherwise
indicated, and the Town shall refuse to accept the payment for a part of such
service unless the entire amount due from the respective user or customer for
all services supplied and billed Im paid, in came any user or customer of such
services does not pay tt.e amount due on or before the 15th day of the billing
month, a $5.00 late charpe shall be assessed, It is hereby the duty of the Tow
to issuu a poet due notice with the total "aunt due by the 24th day of the bil-f the ,nonth,~the Town duemcannectbill Is etunpaid by til poidhin2fulldandorequ
irebilling twenty-
five dollar (;25) additional charge, when payment is made, service will be re-
sumed. Any payment made by personal check will be subject to a ten dollar ($10)
service charge if the check is returned by the bank for any reason. Cash pay-
ment may be required when the Town dooms it necessary to protect the Town.
3.03--TRANSFER ACCOUNT: Any person owing water or sower foes who moves to an-
other premises where there are water connections or where connections are there-
after made, shall, before being permitted to use the water, pay all former de-
linquencies. Further, o person's unpaid water and mower fee mty be triinsforred
r^ another promises where water service is currently in use whon two ,2) or more
e,rvlces are boing rendered to the same parson at the same time and one Is dta-
connected.
3,04--REPEALING CLAUSE: All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, inconsistent
or in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance Pre hereby repealed,
3.05--SEVERABILITY CLAUSES If any article, paragraph or subdivision, clause,
phraaa) or pro vision o this Ordinance ahaU be adjudged invalid or hold un-
constitutional, the sane shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance as a
whole or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so determined to be
• Invalid or unconstitutional,
3.06--PENALTY CLAUSE: Any person, firm, or corporation violating any of the
provisions o thIa ordinance shall be doomed guilty of a miadumcanor and, upon
conviction, shall be punished by a penalty of fine riot to exceed the sum of Two
Hundred Dollars (;200) for each offense, and each and everyday such offense is
continued shall constitute shall constitute a new and separate offense.
3•(17--EFFECTI, V_ E DATE: Whereas the Town of Corinth is without relief in this re-
gard and is In need of Immediate financial help in order to help enable the Town
to menL State Health Department requirements for our waterworks and sewer system
for the health, safety and general welfare of the people, of Corinth, any ra-
quiremeni for further consideration of this ordinance is hereby waived and this
ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage and publication in the of-
ficial nerapaper of the Tcwn.
PASSED by the Town Council of the Town of Corinth, Texas this 18th
March, 1985. day of
APPROVED:
Shirley Spel erb g, Mayor
,ATTEST:
Alie Benner, City Secretary
i
p. 6of6
rAlrERnt,i:•1
AC16ouNTINA.2 City of Fort Forth, Texas ATTACHMENT XIV
TRANS ff,r,tnllfvfrilrtl,,4~ In Ll/oU and `rv„~oY.Vncil Communication
'A 4111 A61.11NI11RAT`gT/ .1
v~'
)Aft REFERENCE SUBJECT: PROPOSED ORDINANCE FOR WATER AND PACE
NUMBER WASTEWATER SYSTFM FACILITY ACCESS 1
6-10-86 6-6698 FEES
Recommendet'ion:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance amending
Chapter 37, "Water and Sewer", of the City Code of the City of Fort Worth, by
providing for and establishing Water and Wastewater System Facility Access
Fees, said ordinance to become effective October 1, 1986,
Background:
On August 27, 1985, the Fort Worth City Council appointed an eight-member
Water and Wastewater Capital Cost Recovery Advisory Committee (I.R. No, 7048).
In cooperation with City staff, the Advisory Committee developed a system of
charges to address the capital costa of utility expansion to assure that: (1)
system access fees would be based on cost-of-service principles; (2) the method
of developing the fee and fee schedule itself would enjoy community support;
(3) administrative costs of the eyerem access fee would be minimized; and (4)
the system access fee schedule would allow the water and wastewater utilities
to continue to provide adequate service.
To assist in developing the system access fee schedule, the City Co:,(ncil appro-
ved the execution of a contract (M3C C-9123 and M6C C-9165) with an accounting
firm, David M. Griffith and AssociaLes, Ltd., in conjunction with CH2M-1611,
IItC., an engineering firm.
The Final Report of the Water and Wastewater Capital Cost Recovery Advisory
committee was submitted to the City Council on May 27, 1986, and there was an
in-depth review and discussion at the City Council's workshop Jane 1, 1986.
The attach:+,d ordinance reflects the recommendations of the Committee and the
City Council.
RAM:uwmc
APPROVED BY
CITY COUNCIL.
JUN 10 1986
City 86"efCry of the
City of Fort WotU4 Texas
. S
UBMITTED FOR I MANAGER'S 9 + ) DISPOSITION BY COUNCIL: OPOCESSEO By
CITY
OFFICE 6Y:
ORIO~NATINO C' OTHER (DESCRIBE)
DEPARTMENT NEADr R
P S wee, CITY SECRETARY
Icha
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
CONTACT: $my 82 20, Adopted Ordinance NO ~ ~ DATE
ORDINANCE No.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 37, "WATER AND SEWER", OF
THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, AS AMENDED, BY
PROVIDING FOR AND ESTABLISHING WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM
FACILITY ACCESS FEES; MAKING THIS ORDINANCE CUMULATIVE OF
PRIOR ORDINANCES; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES AND PROVISIONS
OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT WORTH IN CONFLICT Ht4*RE-
WITH; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABI14ITY
CLAUSE1 PROVIDING FOR ENGROSSMENT AND ENROLLMENT; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fort Worth, Texas
deems it necessary and proper and in the best interests of the
citizens of Fort Worth to promote the safe, orderly and healthful
development of land; and
WHEREAS, the continued substantial economic growth within the
region has placed and continues to place an increased burden on the
. City's water and wastewater facilities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fort Worth musty strive
to provide long-range solutions to the water and wastewater reeds of
the citizens of the City of Fort Worth in accordance with the city's
Master Plan.
NOW, THEREFOREp BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TFIE CITY
OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS:
That Chapter 37 of the Cole of the City of Fort Worth is .1ereby
amended by adding Section 37-26.2, entitled "Water and Wastewater
System Facility Acces6 Faes", and shall be as followst
SECTION 1.
DEFINITIONS
When used in this section, these terms shell be defined as
follows:
"BUILDING PERMIT": A permit application required by the
City for the construction of any new dwelling or building.
"CITY": City of Fort Worth, Texas.
"COMMERCIAL": Any customer served by a single meter or
meters that is engaged in any type of business, except the
processing, fabrication, or manufacturing of any goods or
products and any type of dwelling unit.
"COMMERCIAL-MULTIPLE UNIT": Any customer that has a single
meter or meters serving more than one business per metes
and/or three or more dwelling units per meter.
"DIRECTOR": The Director of the Water Department of the
City of Fort Worth, or his authorized representative.
"GENERAL BENEFIT FACILITY": Water and/or wastewater facil-
ities that provide utility services and benefits common to
all customers of the respective utility; for the water
utility, this includes all transmission and distribution
mains sixteen inches (16") and greater in diameter, all
pump stations, all raw water facilities, water treatment
plants, control systems and appurtenances, and all storage
facilities) for the wastewater utility, this includes
wastewater treatment plants, control systems and appurte-
nances, and all major collectors and interceptors that are
eighteen inches (18") and greater in diameter.
"INDUSTRIAL": Any customer served by one or more water
meters that is primarily engaged in the fabrication,
processing, dr manufacturing of any goods or product.
"INITIAL WATER SERVICE": The first water service to be
provided at a specific property location.
"INITIAL WASTEWATER SERVICE": The first wastewater service
to be provided at a specific property location.
"LIVING AREA": The enclosed area of a dwelling that does
not include garages, carports, and outside patios or
porches.
-2-
"METER": A device that measures the quantity of water
used. The types of meters used herein are those described
in the American Water Works Association C700 through C703
and M6 Standards.
"PUBLIC UTILITY": Any person, firm, corporation, coopera-
tive corporation, or any combination of these persons or
entities including a municipal corporation, water supply
or sewer service corporation, or other political sub-
division of the state, or their leasees, trustees, and
receivers, owning or operating for compensation equipment
or facilities for the provision of potable water to the
public or for the collection and treatment of sewage for
the public, but does not include any person or corporation
not otherwise a public utility that furnishes the services
only to itself or its employees or tenants as an incident
of that employee's service or tenancy when that service is
not resold to or used by others.
"RESIDENTIAL": Any customer living in a dwelling having
the necessary living facilities for one unit that is
served by a single water meter. This class also includes a
duplex dwelling where no more than two living units are
supplied water through a single meter.
"YARD METER ADJUSTMENT": The amount of credit granted to a
customer who installs a yard meter simultaneously with, or
subsequent to, the initial eater service.
"YARD METER": Any meter serving an irrigation system only.
SECTION 2.
SYSTEM FACILITY ACCESS FEE
No person, firm, corporation or other entity shall be entitled
to initial water and/or wastewater utility service until payment of
the applicable Water and Wastewater System Facility Access Fee has
been made. The fee is due and payable to the Fort Worth Water
Department upon the request for the issuance of a building permit,
which permit shall not be issued until the fee has been paid. In the
event a building permit is issued without the fee being paid, City
shall have the right to withhold water and/or wastewater service
.3-
until payment of the fee is made, the responsibility for such
payment remaining in the name in which the building permit was
originally issued.
SECTION 3.
SCHEDULE OF FEES
A, The System Facility Access Fees for the Residential Class
using a simple 5/8 X 3/4 inch meter shall be those as set
out in Table I below.
TABLE I
Living Area Water System Wastewater System
(sq. ft.) Access Fee Access Fee
$ $
Under 1000 330 67
1001-1200 383 78
1201-1400 435 89
1401-1600 .168 100
1601-1800 540 111
1801-2000 593 122
Over 2000 646 132
B. The System Facility Access Fees for all other customer
classes and the Residential Class using a simple meter
larger than the 5/8 X 3/4 inch meter shall be those as set
out in Table II below.
• j
-4-
17
TABLE II
WASTEWATER System Facility Access Fee
---METER S I2 E—
5/8 " 1 1-1/2 2 3
Customer Class X 3 4" In^.h Inch Inch _ Inch
Residential See Tbl I $ 247 $ 494 $ 790 $ 10482
Commercial $ 319 798 1,596 20,553 4,787
Comm. Multi-Unit 584 1,461 2,921 41674 80763
Industrial 11792 41481 8,962 14,340 26,887
WATER System Facility Access Fee
---METER SIZE---
5/8 " 1 1-1/2 2 3
Customer Class X 3/4" Inch Inch Inch Inch
Residential See Tbl I $1,212 $ 2,423 $ 3,877 $ 7,270
Commercial $ 832 21080 4,160 6,656 12,480
Comm. Multi-Onit 11183 2,958 5,915 9,464 17,745
Industrial 3,915 9,788 190577 31,323 58,730
Yard Meters 1,064 2,660 5,320 8,512 15,960
Yard Meter
k1justment 261 652 11304 2,086 3,911
C. The System Facility Access Fee for other types and sizes
of meters shall be those as shown in Table III. The water
or waste,yater fee shall be the equivalent meter factor
times the respective fee for the 5/8 X 3/4 inch meter.
-5-
TABLE III.
_Meter Size and Type Equivalent Meter Factor
3/4 inch Simple 1.5
2 inch Compound 8
2 inch Turbine 10
3. inch Compound 1S
3 inch Turbine 24
4 inch Compound 25
4 inch Turbine 42
6 inch Compound 50
6 inch Turbine 92
8 inch Compound so
8 inch Turbine 160
10 inch Compound 115
10 inch Turbine 250
12 inch Turbine 330
SECTION 4.
YARD METERS
When a separate yard meter is installed at the same time as the
potable water service, the total System Access Fee required to be
paid shall be the appropriate yard meter fee plus the difference
between the water system fee for the appropriate meter size and
customer class and the yard meter adjustment for the appropriate
size and class of the yard meter to be installed. when a separate
yard meter is installed subsequent to potable water service, the
customer shall pay the appropriate yard meter fee less the
apijeopriate yard meter adjustment.
CECTION 5.
FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE
No System Facility Access Fee will be required for services
used solely for fire protection. If the City determines that there
is water use for non-fire protection purposes, the Director shall
notify in writing the customer, who shall then be required to pay
the appropriate System Access Fee for the size line and install the
requisite meter within thirty (30) days from date of such notice.
Failure to pay such fee or to remove and/or correct the non-fire
protection usage, shall entitle City to terminate services to such
customer.
SECTION 6.
PRIVATE AND PUBLIC FACILITIES
If any property within or without the City's corporate limits
utilizes a water well, a septic tank, or an individual waste
disposal system and the property owner requests to be connected to
the City's water or wastewater utility system, the customer shall be
assessed the fee established by this ordinance before the property
is connected to the City's water or wastewater utility system.
Should the property owner request only a wastewater connection while
retaining a private well, the appropriate fee to be assessed will be
determined by the Director of the Water Department.
A System Facility Access Fee will not be assessed to any prop-
erty which is receiving service from a water supply and/or a waste-
water treatment plant owned by a public utility when such public
utility is acquired by the City and connected into the City's water
and/or wastewater utility system. However, if the acquired facil-
ities are of only one type (either water or wastewater), the prop-
erty owner shall pay the fee for the type of service not acquired by
the City if the property owner requests such non-acquired service.
- fir ft
SECTION 7.
CLARIFICATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS
Where a question arises as to the classification of a custo-•
mer's service class, the Director shall make the determination in
accordance with the existing City Code as of the date the question
arises. Any customer shall have the right to request in writing from
the Director an interpretation or clarification of the basis upon
which a system facility acciss fee was assessed.
SECTION 8.
INCREASING SIZE OF METER
If a customer requests an increase in meter, size to an existing
service, the customer shall pay the fee difference between the new
level of service and the existing level of service as set out in
Section 2 hereof. The additional fee shall be paid prior to the
installation of the enlarged meter service.
A request for additional sewer connections for improved prop-
erty shall not result in the assessment of an additional System
Facility Access Fee so long as no increase in the size of the water
meter is made.
SECTION 9.
DEDICATED FUNDS
All System Facility Access Fees, together with all interest
derived therefrom, that are generated by this ordinance shall be
deposited into a dedicated fund account for the respective type' of
service, such funds to be used solely for the financing of the
construction, design, inspection, and other related expenses of
p i
r Vr
general benefit water capital improvement projects or general bene-
fit wastewater capital ~,nprovement projects.
SECTIOA 10.
No System Facility Access Fee shall be assessed an application
for initial water service or initial wastewater service provideds
1. Such application for the initial meter installation is
presented to the City prior to the effective date of this
ordinance; and
2. The application for a building permit fee for the same
p•.operty as the initial service application is presented
to the City within twelve (12) months fro- the effective
date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 11,
This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordi-
nancas and of the Code of the City of Fort worth, Texas (1964), as
amended, except where the provisions cf this ordinance are in direct
conflict with the provisions of such ordinances and such Code, in
which event conflicting provisions of such ordinances and such Code
are hereby repealed.
SECTION 12.
It is hereby declared to be the incent'on of the City Courticil
that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses and phrases of
this ordinance are severable, and ii' any phrase, clause, sentence$
i
paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitu-
tional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent
..g..
jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the
remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of
this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City
Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such
unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section.
SECTION 13.
The City Secretary of the City of Fort Worth is hereby directed
to engross and enroll this ordinance by copying the caption of this
Ordinance in the minutes of the City Council and by filing the
ordinance in the ordinance records of the City.
SECTION 14.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect- October 1,
A 1986 and it is so ordained.
APPROVED AS TO ECRM A D LEGADITXr
City Attorney
Dater 6 L
ADOPTEDs_
EFFECTIVE:-,:~
M&C (1-8898, ap?roved 8-10-88
..low
1
CITY OF AUlTIN, TR1I mom ATTACHRNT XV
ORDIIMC NO. 851003 • ? -
AN ORDIIIAN(.'E OF THE CM OF AUSTIN AtiDOW ORDIIiAM NO. $40717-A. AS
AND= BY ORTMANCFS 840726-I1. 840516-H, and 840830•Di 261'AWSHM
CAPITAL RDOO W FEES FOR RFSMECTAL FWPEFaY AM PRAPFltZY on TpAN
RBSIDM'IAL FRMMI MVMIN6 FOR REDWJMM IN C8R3'AIN SMUATIOW
PRiONMINC A SUNSET PROVISION FOR TAPS RMO AW, tZtO+'FALm ORDIIQANCE ND,
821014-BI SE?MMINC THE RULE RWXIRM THE REA DU OF 010]IIQ M= ON TrMEE
(3) SEPARATE DAM AMID PROMINC AN FT E DAZE.
WHEREAS. the City of Austin desires to establish a comprehensive
financial plan for the City's Water and Wastewater Utility so that new water
and wastewater projects can be finw4ed by the City, and
t+1HERFAS, the City desires that new developments and projects pay for
the cost associated with providing water and wastewater services to such
developments and projectal and
WWMS, a capital recovery fee assessed to and collected from onmx-.re
of residential property and property other than residential property will
collect a portion of the cost associated with providing utility services,
Now, Therefore,
BE IT ORDAM BY THE CM COUNCIL OF ME CITY OF AtMMt
PART 1, That Ordinance No. 840717-A as amended by Ordinances 840726-I1,
64016-H and 840830-D be, and is hereby, mended to read as follows:
Section 1. Base capital recovery fees of 91,286 per fee unit for each
water and $1650 per fee unit for etch wastawster tap shall be
assessed mA collected at the time of the purd ase of the taps from the
City of Austin. Said fees shall be collected for taps purchased for
residential property and for property other than residential property
whether such property is within or outside the City's corporate limits.
The phrase "the pxthase of the taps" shall mead the filing with the
Cityty of a written appi tcation for a tap and the acceptance of the
applicable fees. Tile t:rttfl "tap" shall not be applicable to a master
water meter or master wastewater connection purchased from the City by i
a water district or other political subdivision of the State of Texas.
Section 2. The base fees established in Section 1 above stall be
MZN~ or decreased for single family detached residences using 3/8
inch water maters In accordance with Wait "A", attached hereto and
made a part hereof for all purl see.
W TV Of AurIIN. TUAS..
The square footage shown in Edait "A" shall not include garages,
carports, and outside patios or porches. 7N square footage shall be
determined during a review by the City at the time of the tap purchase
of the floor plain of such residences. If a floor plan is unavailable
at the time of tap purchase, the purchaser shall be assessed the
maximum fee shown above.
Section 3. The timber of fee units shall be datermined the size and
ty a of4 waiter meter purchased for the property as follows:
MEM SIZE MID TYPE FEE UNM
57811 s e 1
3/4" simple 1.5
1" simple 2.5
1" simple 5
21 simple 8
2" t~ 10
3 16
3" 24
4" c~ot~t 25
I' 4" turbaned 42
8" compound 50
cmxund so
6' turbine 92
mpound 115
" co
10
8" turbine 160
10" turbine 250
12" turbine 330
For p~u'posee of this Ordburce only the term "Fee Unit" shall mean a
single unit of service ai; defined by continuous duty =Ode= flow rats
in gallons per minute for a 5/8" waster mater using Modem Water Wo*s
Association C700-0703 standards.
If the Water and Wastewater Utility in conjunction with the property's
engineer determines that the water pressure in the City's msiu is low
(less ttun 30 psi) or high (over 60 psi), the Director of said Utility
my a6just the nanber of fee units based an a smaller or, larger sized
meter which more accurately reflects the now rate and the system
pressure conditions. Said number of fee units shall then be used to
detsnmine the fees to be paid.
Section 4. ' If a fire damend meter cxgr ad of a combination of
rat units in separate housings is purchased for. property, the
meter size utilit-I to calculate the Wavier of fee units order section
3 above shall be the damsnsion of the independent unit of the fire
dsmtnd meter which reflects the meter sire which would provide only
domestic service to the property. The mater types in Ssetion 3 used to
caaculate the number of fee units shall be either siapls or OmVoucnd
meters, Said r*dacod motor size "I than be utilized to calculate
the mobsr of fee units and the fee to be assessed under this
Ordimm.
2
{
or AWMK Tax
If the fire protection capacity of the fire demand meter is routlluly
{ utilized for damettic purposes as svidsnced by the registration of
consumption recorded on the City's meter-readint and it rig systamal
the than-owner of the property *411 be sssessA the thm current fee
for the fire protection capacity which has been oonverted to domestic
capacity by its routine user as domestic capacity. The owner of any
property for which a fire demiand meter is purchased shall be required
to execute a restrictive covenant on a form appraued by the City
Attorney, which cmenest shall admom+ledge the right of the City to
assess such fees to subsequent owners of the Said colverant
shall be executed and shall be filed in th~Per~records of the
aPpropriats county prior to the purchase of the fire demand meter,
No fees shall be assessed for the pzthase of taps which shall be
utilized to provide only fire protection capacity.
Section 5. Any Property within Or outside the City's corporate limits I
"Mch ut lizes a water wall, a septic tank or m individual waste
)ater utility which is to be tied into the City's water
or this wastewater for the"4 Abe assessed the fee established by
agppropria tap, for sirmgle family detached
i! residences the fee shall lbxe equal to the fee set " in Section 2
above. phis Section shall not be applicable to any property which is
f receiving service from a central water supply system arwd a person
i or ~an entity other than the City or a wastswatrr trwttment p apt awned
into ~to t person or an entity other than the City and which is to be tied
City's water e wastmater utility system,
Section 6. A previously purchased tap may be exchanged for another
taps "Wthout assessment of the fees established In this Ordinance if
the exchange will result in an eguivalsnt comber or lesser muber of
units Lo be utilized an the property for which the tap was gimily
pp , The m ber of units to be exchanged ShAll be detuu d
Section 3 above and shall not be based on the nuorber of units, whether
fee units or livi% unit equivalents (loss), assigned to the previavly
purchased tap at this time of its Initial purchase,
if a fee was assessed and paid under Section 2 of Ordinance No.
840717-A, as amended, for a tap without reference to a floor plan for
such reesidece, a refund shall be ar&=Izsd where a buil permit is
issued for a floor plan for such resideta and said door plan
demonstrates to the Taps Office that the appropriate capital recovery
fee per fee unit should be less than that which was originally d,
Thee refisnd shall be calculated by subtracting the total of the
appropriate capi:al recovery fee per fee unit for the square footage
set out in 5dsibit A of this ordinance and the 14fumd and ChswW Order
Fee set out in Ordinances No. 840616-D and 830921-L, as may be aamexded
from time to time, from the capital recovery fee which was oar, f ginally
assessed without refe:r+am to a floor plan and paid uWar Section 2 of
Ordinance No., 840717-A, es amended,
3
r
'11'Y W AUSITiN. TRXAGM
If a refund of fees previowly paid is authorized, the rffund will be
10 made by the City after the mater installation is complete unless no
meter(s) had previaw'yy been installed at the property in which csse
said refund will be osace when the taps are exchs±nged.
Section 7. A request for purchase of a second swan connection (tap)
T6F r party shall not zresult in the assesemant of ft fee so 10% as
no increase in the size of the water mater and dw equivalent rnaber of
fee units is requested.
Section 8. If a developer(s) contracts with the City to participate in
the'~i"arncirng of a City water or wastawater facility defined in the
attached Dchibit "8" to provide utility service to property, subject to
revie of said contract and the fiscal iapact of said participation by
the Water and Wastewater Utility, the Water and Wastewater Comeission
and the Planning Caawdssion, and apprival by the City Council, each
developer may be relvinrsed In an a wwt ulsvalent to the developer's
li per fee unit share of the cost of the facility or to the mocim,m
reiabuarssment shown on Exhibit "B", whic3wver is less. Only the
pure of of the fee which is attributable to that particular type and
facility may be reitabcreed.
~I In order to deteredine each developer's per fee unit share of the cost
of the facility, the Etngine Section of the Water and Wastewater
faciiliitty as shall defi~red in Exhibit 'WTI information (2 name of (rm type bet size
agrea between the
he
City and the developer(s), which agreement relates to the financi~n gg of
the facilityi (3) m aber of living unit equivalents =s) cocmitied to
ewh developer under said agromm ntn (4) the dmloper's total cost
share as reflected in said agreement: (s) the number of fee units which
are equivalent to the capacity (UEs) c=vittedi and (6) each
developer's cost per fee unito which cost shall be calculated by
v to ' cost sham by the maber of fee units
which equivalent the capacity (UMs) = nittod in the aVvement.
A developer's reinbb:rs meat shall trot be limited to the Maximum
reitixresmeits t+Wn in the attached exhibits if such developer's
contract with the City to finance a particular iaaprovw=t: providers for
a different method of calculating the relubtwsammt,
Reiaburmwt to the developer shall be mede based on the following
schedule according to the project approval method set forth in A. and
B. below and location of the project set forth in B. 1., B. 2. and B. 3
below:
A. Project is an approved Capital Improvement Program (C. I. P. )
project.
1. Papaymant shall be made annually in srnowts based on the
Cash Flow in the C.I.P. for the fiscal year in
which the project ~ceptad by the Utility.
1 .
4
1 11 OF A> G"o ♦auAe~
8. Pro act is approver! for construction according to Ordinance
810914-D (Cast Participation Ordinance), as my be armWed
from time to time.
1, If located inside the City I.iaelto or in Growth
Maagemsnt Area 3 reimbursement shall be in three wrxal
payments beginning an or before March lot of the second
year following acceptance of all meter, wastewater,
drains and street Installations by the City and
rec of the associated subdivision plat,
2, if located in Growth Management Area 4 reimbursemont
shall be in five annual payments beginning an or before
March lot of the second year following acceptance of all
water, wastewater, drakuV and street installations by
the City and recording of the associated subdivision
plat,
3, If located in Growth Management Area S there will not be
reimbursema nt.
C. Reimbursement for proitcts under the Cost
Partf cipatien Ordinance shall be= by rate r >s from
the sale of water and wastewater services or if the project
is an approved CIP pt ject, reimbursement shall be funded by
one of the following mean as originally planned in the
C.I.P.
1. The sale of revenue bonds i Or
2. The sale of rev nun bonds and CRF funds= or
3. The sale of re mum bonds and transfer of finds
from rate revenue to the C.I,P,t or
4. The transfer of rate revenue to the C.I.P.
Section 9. All taps purchased subsequent to the effective date of this
Ordinance shall became null and void twin years from the date of
purchase unless a building permit hoe been obtained from the City for
property inside the City, s corporate limits axd has not opfired under
its own terms or a plumbing permit has been obtained from the City for
property outside the Cittyy's corporate limits and has not expired under
its own terms. MW holder of a tap which beomes mull axd void under
this section shall not be entitled to receive a refund of any fees paid
under this Ordinance for the purchase of the tap,
Section 10. All taps purchased on or before July 17, 1"40 shall
coma 1 and void an July 17, 1986, finless a buil#A" peTmi has
ton obtained from the City for property inside tte City s corporate
lirl.ts and has not expired under its OW to= id ~ ~iir r permit
ante
. beer obtairad from the city for proprrty outs
S
:TV nr AwmN. TeXAel.e.sra
lindts and has not expired under its own tot The holder of a tap
. which becomes cull and void under this section shall not be entitled to
receive a refund of any fees paid for the paadam of 4e tap. This
section shall have no effect on taps declared null and void under
Section 9 above.
Section 11. All water capital fees generated this
Ordinance shall be deposited in the Water ital Rac vory Fee Fund and
all said fees and interest scamad in said find shall be used to
finance the growth-related portion of water capital
faciiIiV0r a projatsi All westawater capital recovery fees ggenar~atedt
by ce 1 be deposited in the Wastewater Capital Raw"ry
Fee Fund and all said fees and interest accrued is said fund shall be
used to finance the grwth-related portion of weateaater capital
improvement facility type projects.
Section 12. This Ordinance shall be reviewed by the Water and
Sys or Cowdssion on an avml basis, which Commission shall
reca =and to the City Council any wwAmeents to the Ordinance.
Section 13. Ordinance No. 821014-B relating to certain subsequent
user""" mm is hereby repealed.
FART 2. If eery provision, section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
finance, or the application of sane to any person or set of circumstances
is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, void, or invalid (or for any
reason unenforceable): the validity of the ions of this
Ordinance or the application to other persona or sets n c~etances shall
not be affected thereby, it being the intent of the City Council of the City
of Austin in ad~ting this Ordinance, that no portion hereof or provision
contained herein shall become inoperative or fail by reason of any
unconstitutionality or invalidity of any other portion or provision.
PAlrf 3. The male regesiring the reading of des -in three (3) separate
y~'rss is hereby suspended and this Ordinance shall become effective tarn (10)
days from its passage as provided by the City Charter of the City of Austin.
PASSED MID APPPDM: ;
_ October 3 1985 4 l .
ey
Mayor
APPROVE: ATTEST:
FMU1 U, s sores E, Alan
City Attormy City Clerk
030CM5
OLG:Jkg
t~
6
MOM
WITAL AEC/YEAY FEE/ NAM W NASIENATEA UTILITIES
AESl101IAl KI1IM SCALE
!WILE FAMILY SEIACNEI
5146 Wilt
• • • 1 • • •
1061611 FEET on arm NATN 11111E1 04114 1 NASIENATEA WIFI ITEI INTENAIEA NAST1NAIEA SRAIII
9 FLO AREA TAEATNENT TIANSN1SS1111 AESEAYOIAS FIMMINN TOTAL I TAEATNENT INIEACEITNS LIFT STATIONS TOTAL TOTAL
-N NYY N.....-Y-NNY-.NY M Y-NN-YN-YYYYY N YIY • I ♦ M - NY-YY--M-YN---YYY
100 N LESS 030 q5 014 a $401 1 0306 $111 125 0= 19?T
61 -700 211 M III t 400 1 453 131 30 616 11"4
Tel -101 313 111 121 It 533 1 $25 151 34 ?II 1,213
NI -101 354 Ili 145 12 127 1 395 131 31 103 11432
061 -110 NI 131 112 13 711 1 115 191 44 111 11101
INt -110 43? 143 lit 14 713 1 133 211 0 911 1,164
1111 -1264 411 151 Its 11 141 1 103 264 53 Ism 1,932
1211 -1300 521 174 212 11 919 1 lit 2% 5? I,1N 21091
Jul -1464 %1 114 229 It 993 1 942 271 k Ism 21211
101 -1514 113 191 241 21 1,106 1 1,011 291 N 1,311 20433
1511 -1111 644 211 213 21 19139 1 11"1 311 13 1,642 21101
I6l -1111 106 264 206 23 11213 1 1,151 331 75 11556 2,?N
1111 -1111 12? 231 297 24 192% 1 1,264 351 N 1,130 2,936
1001 -1900 ?M 252 394 25 1,351 I 1,206 3?4 is 11144 3,113
1911 -2111 011 215 331 21 19433 1 10351 391 M 11131 30211
201 -2300 151 219 30 n 1/5a 1 1,429 410 44 19913 3,431
2111 12201 193 292 313 21 10519 1 104" 431 91 21121 3165
2211 a WE 934 306 312 :1 11653 1 1,564 451 103 21121 3,114
YN~YYYYYYYNYNNM--6464640664--NMMYMY-NYYYNYY-YNNYYNN MMNMMNMNNNYIYNYM-YY~-NYYYN YYM -YNMWYN
• COLM ON TIN POIAL LM FOR ILLNSTNATIN NOW ONLY IN INAT IM AM SIZE IF FACILIT IF THE SERVICE IS IN A
1INSIE FAMILY MIAMI AESIIENM WIN A 5116 MEIN, 1701-TIN SI.FTs 0 It 101 SANE AS HABIT 1,
IME F11111m T "I MY THE INAL SIMNM IN IN AFIAl1A1A1E TA►I61.
E311Il1 f A
OF AU"IIi, 71)A:
IMM1T 10BOO
1rA~CII.iTY
1. Water Tree MAXD M
water shall include and
treatment Plants to L "sum for $ 727
~ P by the City for systow related j
29 tidatar Tranamissian shall include only
- 'ter
trmuldssion lines 2411 or stn. size 2.18
lines Z4aasmdasion valves and enc"amts fcm.
fttOr
greater in size
3. Water Reserwirs shall include only
Wstar reservoirs $ 297
4 Water RXPAP shall iacluds only
"m plan t facilities (including trwtmmt 4 24
51 Wastewater Trutmsnt shall include only
wutawater tz~"u=t plants to L "Ruud $1,220
for by the
}ity for system-related
6. Wastewater Interslshall include only
'mty mains 18, ar greater In size 8 350
- orce mains 1211 ar greater iz~ size
- cross-town tunnel
- tunnel litters
- special mottles
7, ilsstewater Lift Stations shall include only $ 80
major PeOdnent lift stations
i
N
ATTACRIOMM XVr
s r8'X11~ rt
The Attorney General of Texas
JIM MATTOX July 17. 1986
Attorney General
supreme court Building Mr, Liao B. "Bubba" Stemn
P. o. Box 1264e Opinion No. JM-523
Austin, TX. 70711.2648 Executive Director
6+21476.2601 State Purchasing and General [let Whether the city of At►stin
Team' 21=4•!'!47 services Commission
Teiecopler 5121475-OM P, 0. Box 13047, Capitol Station may seas a capital recovery
Austin, Texas 78711 fee on state construction pro-
714 Jackson, Suite 700 jecta
Dallas, TX, 75202.4500 Dear Mr. Steent
2141742•,914
You ask whether a home rule city may legally assess capital
1624 Alberta Aw., Suits 100 recovery fees against state construction projects, The city requires
91 TX 2M
Paso, Alberta A that the owner of any new construction must pay a capital recovery fee
91,1633.3404 at the time a water tap is purchased. The amount of the foe is deter-
mined by the size and type of water mater required for the project.
The fees are Intended to include both the actual costs of providing
1001 Texas, suite 700 new service to a specific site and the estimated proportional cost of
71ua~Yx' 77002.3111 building and maintainia the
g general water infrastructure to most the
colltctive demands of ail new development, You assert that the city
may not assess these fees against state construction projects.
606 Broadway, Suite 312
Lubbock, TX, 74101.3470 The question presented is one raised but left unanswared in
0,01747•52M Maverick Count Hater Control and Im rovisteat District No. 1 V. state,
456 S."440 ex. Civ. App. .-Sao Antonio 1
4309 M. Tenth, Suite B Attornay General Opinio* MW-551 + writ re and
fMoAnen,TX, 7060t•1,6, (1982), A central question in
Maverick involved the nature of th6 charges whether they consti-
6124112.4541 tuted i tax or a special assessment. Special assessments differ from
general taxes insofar as special assessmonU are levied only on land,
200 Main Plaza, Sufte 400 the amount based on the benefits conferred to the land; a special
San Antonio, TX, 7020,•27Q7 assessment is unique as to time and locality. See ~enerall , 456 S.W. 2d
612/22,419+ 204, note 4 (cases cited therein); Londerholm v.
P.2d 240 (Rea. 1968 ~t of -To eke, 443.
clearly The Maverick court s d at state statutes
An Ours Opporlunityl y exempt state property rou taxation by a water control and
Affirmative Action imployer improvelsent district so long as the state holds full legal title to
the property. 456 S.W.2d at 206 (relying on article )150, V,T.C.S.,
now re laced by Tex. Prop. Code 111611); see also Tex. Coast, art. XI,
19; Cit o Beaumont v. Forrtritta, 415 ,W. 1967) The
court acknowledge that the legal ramificatio f2special assessments
differ, from those of a tax, noting Wichita County Water In rovement
District No. 2 v. City of Wichita Sal s, 323 S.W.2Fd 9 ex. Civ.
App. - ort ors 1959o writ refvd n.r.e,) in which the court held
that a city was liable for spacial assessments levied by a water
p. X403
Mr. Use S. "Subba" Steen - Pap 2 (M-523)
district. The court in Wichita Count reasoned that a special assess-
ment is not a tax within the salag of constitutional and statutory
provisions exempting public property from taxation. 323 S.W.2d at
300. The Mav_ Bari k~ court found it unnetessary to determine whether a
special assessment is a tax for those purposes because it adopted the
comma law rule that a political subdivision of the state cannot levy
a special assessment against state property without express legisla-
tive authority. 436 S.W.2d at 206-07, Attorney General Opinion
MW-351 applied this reasoning to a home rule city and decided that a
home rule city may not legally levy a drainage fee against state-owned
property.
On' the other hand, home rule cities have full authority to do
anything the legislature could authorize that to do. Lower Colorado
River Authorit v. City of San Marcos, 523 S.W.2d 641, ex.
1 Accor ingly, as a genera ru s, it is necessary to look to
legislative limitations on the power of home rule cities rather than
to specific grants of power. Id. The Havartek court dealt with a
water control and improvement district, a pcIR't al subdivision which
holds only the powers granted to it expressly or by necessary implica-
tion by the constitution or statutes of this state. A home rule
city's powers, however, are limited to the area of its jurisdiction.
The issue at hand has state-wide implications. Attorney General
Opinion MW-551 applied the Maverick case to a home rule city but did
not address the different levels a power held by home rule cities and
special districts. The SCIArces cited by the Maverick court, however,
suggest that its holding was intended to be broa . .
~se 436 S.W.2d at
207, note 6 (cases cited thRreia). Levying special assessments
against the state requires authorization from the state legislature.
See id. Accordingly, we conclude that the Maverick rule applies to
aT poMitical subdivisions, including home ru e c t es.
Nevertheleas, the impact of Maverick is limited. The court
stated;
Even if it be asa wed that a county or munici-
pality is subject to special assessments levied by
another political subdivision of the States it does
not necessarily follow that a subordinate political
subdivision can impose an involuntary monetary
obligation on the sovereign. It is goneraiiy held
that, in the absence of clear legislative authoriza-
tion, a political subdivision of the State has no
power to levy a special assessment against State
property. (Footnote omitted). We aroot this view
at least in a case where as hers thta Nov Y i is
Heir er sakia nar coat atin as use of the
al_al_ Iq_dly bone itteaa "`and s Heir er received
p. 2404
Mr. Lice B. "Bubb&" Steen - Page 3 (JM-523)
nor re uestod the services rendered b the sssesain
a enc mpi;as s a •
456 S.W.2d at 207. Similarly, Attorney General Opinion MW-551
emphasized that it did not purport to address a situation where the
state acted in a manner that indicated a willingness to pay a fee. In
the question presented, the state is requesting water service from the
city.
Maverick stands for the proposition that the city cannot impose
an involuntary monetary obligation on the state without express
legislative authorization. Accordingly, the city cannot treat state
property in the same manner as private property with regard to special
assessments for local improvements. It does not follow, however, that
the city cannot charge the state for the a,:tual cost of extending
service which the state expressly requests, As indicated previously,
the fees in question are intended to include both the actual costs of
providing new water service to a specific sits and the estimated
proportional cost of building the general infrastructure. To the
extent that the city can determine the actual costs, both general and
specific, attributable to extending service to the state, we do not
believe that Mav--ve.ick prevents the city from requiring the state to
pay those costs as A condition of extending service. The city may
not, however# assess the state for its pro-rata share of the cost of
local improvements which Erovide benefits that are too general to
specifically apportion to each user.
Further, we emphasize that any "exemption" for state property
from special assessments by political subdivisions is limited to
property used exclusively for public purposes. It is wall-settled in
Texas that the constitutional and statutory exemption of state
property from taxes applies only when the property is used exclusively
for public purposes. See Satterlee v, Gulf Coast Waste Disposal
Authorit , 576 S.W.2d 77T7Tax. tats v, ou ton i t n an
Power o,, 609 S.W.2d 263 (Tex. Civ, App. - Corpus r• n~r~e.)= Attorney General Opinion MW 30 (1982)= seep alwrit
so
Central Appraisal District of Erath Colsnt v. Pecan Valle Fae'lTiti s,
Inc., ex. App. - Eastland
taut the courts of this state would apply similaror, strictions toithe
common law "exemption" from special assessments announced in the
Maverick case. " This conclusion finds support in the so
upO a Maverick, For example, one such source states uthes nerad
rule as 6 ows Seneal
Apart from constitutional or statutory authori-
zation public property , , , used for ublic
"Ur coos is not 11able to specia`ass ascent or
loco improvements. (Emphasis added).
p. 2403
Mr. Liss B. "Bubba" Steen - Page 4 (JM-523)
14 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations (3d, ed „ rev. 1970) 138,73
(cited in Maverick County, 456 5.W.2d at 207, note 6).
S U M M A R Y
Without express constitutional or legislative
authorization, a home rule city may not levy
special assessments against state property which
is used solely for public purposes. This genera?.
ruls► however, doss not prevent a city from
requiring the state to pay the actual costs
attributable to extending service to thr, state
when the state requests the servic .
Very rull yours,
AAA
J IM MA rTOX
Attorney General of Texas
JACK HIGHTOWER
First Assistant Attorney General
MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General
RICK GILPIN
Chairman► Opinion Committee
Prepared by Jennifer Riggs
Assistant Attorney General
IN y
AU G
CITY LE6oF DENT-ON
p. 2406
ATTACIIM:~%r XVII
EXCERPT
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
MEETING OF AUGUST 20, 1986
W 1 w
13. UPDATE REPORT ON CAPITAL RECOVhRY FEES
Has explained that the Utility Staff requests review and
further guidance from the Board, and recommended that
should Denton desire to implement cost recovery fees, a
consultant should be employed to assure that costs,
methodology and rates most all legal requirements. Harrell
of
fees would be challsn course .
action, because very believed likely h such would
Thompson recommended that the back up material contained in
the agenda item be forwarded to the City Council for their
review and consideration0 and that the Chairman make in-
formal recommendation that the cost recovery fees issue be
addressed. Coomes second. All ayes$ no noyso motion
carried unanimously.
cirY of 01TWON / 218 E. McKinney / Denton, Texas 78201
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE; September 11, 1986
TOt MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROMt Ann Bingman, Customer Service Manager
SUBJECTt CUSTOMER SERVICE PERFORMANCE REPORT
Please find enclosed with your agenda packet the August, 1986,
Customer Service Division Performance Report. Also included
with this document is a September, 1986, update.
The report will be presented at the City Council work session.
I look forward to discu8sing our progress and future directions
at that time. Your comments and recommendations will be
appreciated.
Ann Bingman
Customer Service kA~ager
AB/mm
Enclosure
cc; Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
John McGrana, Diroctor of Finance
I
C
boTO ALL TO MM THUS Pk&WrS S/ALL COWn
wmaSAS, Qeptamber 17, 1986, marks the one hundred Wnaty-ninth
anniversary of the drafting of the constitution of the
United Stages of America by the Constitutional
Convention) and
MSSRW, It is fitting and proper to accord official recognition
to this memorable anmlversary, and to the patriotic
IYlralsu that will coamwmorate the occaslon) and
MNSR"S, Public Lav No. 915, guarantees the Issuing of a
proclamation each year by the President of the United
States of Amer/ca deslgnatlnq September 17 through
September 73 as constitution Mahn)
Jwi rMARI1'ORE0 i, May Stephens, by virtue of the authority carted in
me as Mayor of the City of Denton, rexas, do hereby
declare and proclaim the week of September 17 through
September 23, 1986, as
"CONSTITUTION WEEK"
In the City of Denton, Terms, and urge all our cltisens
to pay special attention daring that week to our Federal
Constitution and the advantage of American Citlsenship.
IN wITNSSS MHSRSOF,'I have here-
unto set xy hand and caused the
official seal of the City of
Denton, Tomes to be affixed this
the 16th day of September, 1986.
? °a
'fir S RAY Srt S, NAY
CITY OF 10SNYON. r
ArriSTn
C z4m- ALLEN, CSTY S RITAR
CITY OF DOWN, rxw
"PROVO A3 To L6UAL FORM
DEW AJ)AMt YOVircer, CI Aran ACT.
CI rY dP DOWN, rum
ley
DATE: 09/16/t6
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
70
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECTS PUBLIC HEARING FOR OAK-HICKORY HISTORIC DISTRICT
RECOMMENDATION:
The Historic Landmark Commission considered this item at its°
meeting of July 30, 1986 and voted to recommend approval of the
district by a vote of 8-0. The Planning and zoning Commission
considered this item at its` meeting of August 13, 1986 and voted to
recommend approval of the district by a vote of 7-0.
SUMMARY:
This is a request for the establishment of a historic landmark
district, an overlay zoning in SF-7 and MF-l districts located on
the north side of Oak from 610 W. Oak to the intersection of Oak and
Fulton, the south side of Oak from 609 W. Oak to the intersection of
Oak and Welch, the north side of Hickory from the intersection of
Hickory and Welch to the intersection of Hickory and dams, east
side of Denton from the intersection of Denton and 0 c the
intersection of Denton and Pearl, the south side of ►„arl from
607 Pearl to the intersection of Pearl and Denton Streets.
BACKGROUND:
This area is worthy of historic designation due to its archi-
tecturally significant structures and its. value as part of the
social, cultural, and historical heritage of Lhe City.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Not applicable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact on the general fund.
~Pqctfu ly itt
two
Prepared bys loyd Harrell
City Manager
-n~n~ ..U11u J„ w
Denise Spi ey
Urban Planner
Appr ed:
Jeff Meyer„
Director of Planning
and Development
0292k
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
To: Denton City Council
Case: Oak-Hickory Meeting Date: September 16, 1986
Historic District
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City of Denton
Historic Landmark Commission
215 E. McKinney Street
Denton, Texas 76201
Status of Applicant: City Commission
Requested Action: Request for the establishment of a
historic landmark district, an
overlay zoning, in Single family
(SF-7) and Multi-family (MF-1)
districts.
Location: The north side of Oak Street from
610 W, Oak west to the intersection
of Oak and Fulton stroets, the south
side of Oak Street from 609 W. Oak to
the intersection of P1est Oak and
Welch streets, the north side c`
Hickory Street from the intersection
of Hickory and Welch to the
intersection of Hickory and Williams
streets, the east side of Denton
Street from the intersection of
Denton and Oak streets to the
intersection of Fenton and pearl
streets, the south side of Pearl
Street from 607 Pearl west to the
intersection of Pearl and Denton
streets,
Surrounding Land Use
and Zoning: North - Single family residential,
duplexes; 2-F
South W Single family residential,
apartments] MF-1
Bast - Attorney's office, Single
family residential,
apartments; PD, MF-1
,West - Retail, church= GR, MF-l
Denton Development Guide: Low Intensity Area
(Case: Oak-Hickory historic District)
Page Two
SPECIAL INFORMA'T'ION
Article 28 A-2 of the City of Denton Zoning Ordinance declares
as policy the following purposes of the historical preservation
ordinance:
1. To protect, enhance, and perpetuate historic landmarks which
represent or reflect distinctive and important elements of
the City's and State's architectural, archeological,
cultural, social, economic, ethnic, and political history
and to develop appropriate settings for such places.
2. To safeguard the City's historic and cultural heritage as
embodied and reflected in such historic landmarks by
appropriate regulations.
3. To stabilize and improve property va. is in such locations.
4. To foster civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of
the past.
5. To protect and enhance the City's attractions to tourists
and visitcrs and provide incidental support and stimulus to
business and industry.
6. To strengthen the economy of the City.
7, To promote the use of historic landmarks for the culture,
prosperity, education, and general welfare of the people of
the City and visitors to the City.
Section 28 A-14 (a) of the above referenced ordinance defines a
historic district as "a geographically definable area possessing
sicnificant concentration, linkage, or continuity of buildings,
structures, sites, areas, or land which are united by
architectural, historical, archaeological, or cultural
importance or significance.* Section C of the same article
specifies how the boundaries of a district are to be drawn:
"The boundaries of historic districts shall be drawn so as to
include all buildings, structures, sites, areas or lands which
meet one or more of the criteria set out in Section 28 A-3 or
which directly affect or relate to such buildings, structures,
sites and areas of land meeting one or more of the Section 28
A-3 criteria, provided that at least fifty-one (51) percent of
the total structures within the boundaries are of architectural,
historic, archaeological or cultural importance or value,
ANALYSIS
The West Oak - West Hickory Street Area is one of the most
historically significant areas of the City of Denton. There are
currently fourteen (14) designated historic landmarks within the
boundaries of the proposed district and many other structures
are eligible for designation, This area is the site of many
substantial homes built by the business and civic leaders of
early Denton. This area is eligible for the establishment of a
historic district for the following reasons:
(Case Oak-Hickory Historic District)
Page Three
ANALYSTS (continued)
1. Many structures in the area are architecturally significant.
2. The area has value as part of the social, cultural, and
historical heritage of the City of Denton.
30 The area is Adentified with a person or persons who
contributed to the culture and development of the City.
44 The area has value as an aspect of community sentiment or
public pride.
Rli(:UMMBNDA'1'I0N
The Historic Landmark Commission considered this item at its
meeting of July 3U, 1986 and voted to recommend approval of the
Oak-Hickory Historic District by a vote of 8 - U. The Planning
and Zoning Commission considered this item at its meeting of
August 13, 1986 and voted to recommend approval of the Oak-Hickory
Historic District by a vote of 7 - U. Roth recommendations of
approval excluded the properties located at 903 and 918 West Oak,
ALTERNAT T V E 8
1. Approve petition
2, Deny petition
ATTACHMENTS
1, Location Map
1. Historic District Ordinance
3. District Preservation Plan
4. Architectural Standards For Historic District
5, Reply Form 't'otals
6, Property Owner List
7. Minutes of Historic Landmark Commission meeting
of July 14, 1986
8. Minutes of Historic Landmark Commission meeting
of July 30, 1986
9. Minutes of Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
of August 13 19864
18758
fill
1\ 40
M"T
aLLL~JJ_aI~ILAI~IL_J~a~ I
rw rf ff ~r a-= rt1? ~ ~ ~l l ■ 1 I
- ---1 IF I
L--1j W~~ L
j Ail
Y I y y Y IIr~+ y1II 'I1ww~I1r
~lI I' H~
~
y U
_ "'w J C
I _ Jl
1 u rnr Pi 4"
ii C. J 1 I -1 1 ~
+ , • "1 L 1 L.. -r- Jr 7
Aft.Z PHI ~ Q ~ ~-..1 V~"h
L -JI L
-A LL..~~
. y.. _ 0C30 4. _
- n . IL
1 PROPOSED OAK-'HICXORY HISTORIC DISTRICT
k
L Li
6wu
Eli ~ I I E
f ♦ II
"yew o Y, ~ I ♦d `0♦
1] Mot
g'
;to
` ty council its recommendation as to what actlon, if any,
should be taken on the structure.
(g) Any applicant or interested person aggrieved by a
ruling of the landmark commission under the provisions of this
section may, within thirty days after the date of such ruling,
appeal to the ty council.
Section 28A-13. HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION TO
COEXIST WITH OTHER USE CLASSIFICATIONS,
Usd classifications as to all property which muy be
included in a historic lancviark designation shall continue to
be governed by the comprehensive toning ordinance of the city
and the procedures therein established.
Section 28A-14. HISTORIC DISTRICTS ~BFINED; RESTRICTIONS
IMPOSED THEREIN; CRITERIA FOR DISTRICT
BOUNDARIES ESTABLISHED; REQUISITES FOR
A
PPLICATIONS FOR DISTRICTS SET FORTH;
CRITERIA FOR POVID:
DISTRICT PRESERVATIONTPLANSS DEFINED; MIS-
CELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMDNTS OF
LANDMARK
MODIFICATIONIOOF ORDINANCE ~ PROVISIONS
ESTABLISHED.
(a) DF,EINITION. Districts which may be designated
Historic Landmarks pursuant to Section 28A-1 shall herein be
referred to as "HISTORIC DISTRICTS" and shall mean
geographically definable areas; possessing significant
concentration, linkage, or continuity of buildings, structures,
sites, areas or land which are united by architectural, his.
torical, archaelogical, or cultural importance or significance.
(b) RESTRICTIONS. All buildings, structures, sites, areas
or lands located with a designated historic district, whether
Individually designated historic or not, are subject to these
regulations. No person or entity shall construct, reconstruct,
alter, change, restore, remove or demolish in any way the
extorior features of such building, structure, or site, area or
land until a permit has been grani;ed by the building official
of the City of Denton. Furthermore, no public improvements,
including, but not limited to, street construction, signs,
lighting, sidewalk construction, parking facilities and traffic
PAGE 11
system changes, except, traffic control signs and devices, shall
be made within or affecting a historic district without
approval of the city council after recommendation has been
submitted by the landmark commission and appropriate city
departments,
(cl DISTRICT BOUNDARIES. The boundaries of historic
districts shall be drawn so as to include all buildings,
structures, sites, areas or lands which mast one or more of the
criteria set out in Section 28A•3 herein or which directly
affect or relate to such buildings, structures, sits, areas or
lands meeting on one more of the Section 28A•3 criteria,
provided that at least Sli of the total structures within the
boundaries are of architectural, historic, archaeological, or
cultural importance or value,
(d) ESTABLIWIENT OP HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
(1) Applications for consideration of a historic
district shall be based upon architectural, historical,
archaeological or cultural importance or value and accompanied
by a report to the landmark commission containing the following
information.
(a) A list of specific buildings, structures, sites,
areas or lands of importance or value located -41 thin the
proposed district boundaries and a description of the
particular importance or value of each such building,
structure, site, area or land.
(b) A map showing the boundaries of the proposed
historical district drawn to a scale of 1"w1001; and the
location of each structure of importance or value identified by
a iiuatber or letter designation,
(c) Sufficient photographs of each building,
structure, site, area or land of Importance or value showing
the condition, color, slte and architectural detail of each;
and,
PAGE 13
L
(d) A description of each building, structures site,
area or land of importance or value showing the condition,
color, site and architectural detail of each; and where possible
1. data of construction
2. builder or architect
3. chain of uses and ownership
4. architectural style
S. materials
6. construction technique
y. recoggnnition by State or National Government as
architecturally or historically significant, if so
designated.
(2) Application for establishment of an historic district
on the basis of cultural or archaeological importance or value
shall be accompanied by a report containing the following
information,
(a) A map showing the boundaries of the proposed
district drawn to a scale of 1"x200';
(b) A description of the culture! or archaeological
importance or value of the building, structure, site, area or
land being proposed for historic designation; and
(c) Any evidence which would show recognition by
either the State of Texas and/or the Na.lonsl Government.
(3) Applications to increase the boundaries of an historic
district may be made if one or more of the following conditions
are met;
(a) When buildings, Structures, sites, areas or lands
of importance or value are related to the district are requested
for inclusion.
(b) When facts previously undisclosed to or unknown by
the landmark commission are revealed which indicate that a
particular building or site is possessed of special
architectural, archaeological, cultural or historical importance
or value.
PAGE 19
(4) Applications to reduce the boundaries of an historic
district may be made when one or more of the following
conditions have been met:
(a) When it can be shown that a particular building,
structure, site, area or land has no historic, architectural,
archaeological or cultural importance or value to the viability
of the district.
(b) When exclusion of buildings, structures, sites,
areas or lands Is necessary for major new development that would
support either the architectural, historical, archaeological, or
cultural character or economic viability of the district.
(c) When It can be shown that no degradation of the
district either physical, historical, architectural, archae-
ological, or cultural will result from exclusion of property
from the district,
(5) Application for inclusion or exclusion may be made when
either continued exclusion or inclusion of property within the
district would render it an economical hardhhip for reasonable
continuation in Its present exterior form. In order to
establish such economic hardship, the owner must show that no
reasonable alternative use exists which allows the exterior of
the building to remain in its original style. In evaluating
economic return, the Commission may request the owner to
document the value, rents, returns, tax burden, and/or
contracts, pertaining to the property,
(e) CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS,
In evaluating applications for historic districts, the
landmark commission shall consider Sections 28A-3 and Section
28A-13(d). If the landmark commission recommends the
eatAbllshment of an historic district or districts, it shall
cause to be prepared an historic district designation ordinance
which shall contain, but not be limited to, the following;
(1) A statement of purpose setting forth the
commission's reasons for recommending designation oe the
district; and
FACE 20
(2) A legal description Of - the boundaries of the
district;
(3) Maps, charts and photographs of the buildings,
structures, sites, areas, or lands located within tya district;
(4) Findings that support the criteria required in
Section 28A-3 and 2SA-134 if r.pplicable, that establishes the
particular im,.rtance or value of the district.
(S) Recommendations for the protection and preser-
vation of the district referred to herein as district
preservation plan.
(f) DISTRICT PRBSHRVATION PLAN,
The district preservation plan shall include, but shall
not be limited to the following:
(1f Zoning Classification of Uses, The commission may
examine the uses existing within the district in terms of their
individual and continued effect upon the character, safety,
economic and physical impact of the district and may recommend
such changes in toning, height and area regulations.
(2) Building Code Requirements. The commission may
review and recommend any amendments to the building regulations
it feels nece4sary to preserve the architectural and historic
integrity and authenticity of structures hi thin each such
district.
(3) Sign Regulations. The Commission may review the
provisions of the sign regulations that are permissible within
each such district and recommend such alterations in Bite,
location, type and construction they feel appropriate, In
preparing such recommendations, the Commission shall consider
existing signs as well as criteria for future signs, In the
event that an existing sign or signs are deemed to have a
negative impact on the character of the district, the Commission
may recommend a method of removal or improvement of such sign or
signs, reviewing such sign changes with owners or tenants prior
to such recommendation.
PADS 21
r.:
(4) Parking Regulations. The commission may review
the parking regulations in existence in the district and
recommend any changes in numbers, or location of on-street and
off-street parking requirements It feels necessary to enhance
the district. It shall review the adequacy of parking
facilities in or affecting the district and may offer recom-
mendations for such public and/or private parking lots, garages
or structures it deems to be in the best overall interest of the
district.
(S) Architectural Regulations, As a guide for those
seeking a certificate of appropriateness pursuant to Section
28A-80 the historic landmark commission may, in conformance with
the applicable toning classific.tion, height and area
limitation, and in keeping with the significant architectural,
historical, archaeological or cultural elements of each suen
district recommend regulations affecting the exterior of the
building, including, but not limited to, the following;
(s) Acceptable materials for new construction such as
stucco, masonry, metal and glass curtain;
(b) Appropriate architectural character, scale and
detail for new construction;
(c) Accoptable appurtenances to new and existing
structures such as gables, parapets, balconies and dormers;
(d) Acceptable textures and ornamentation such as
paint colors and types, use of wood, stL)ne, metal, plaster,
plastics and other man-made materials, use ~)f shutters, wrought
and cast iron, finishes of metal, colors of glass, such as
silver, gold, bronze, smoke, and other details or architectural
ornamentation.
(e) Acceptable accessories on new or existing
structures such as light flxtures, gss lights, conuples,
exterior carpentry, tile or wood, banners, flags and
projections; and
ME 22
ff) For those properties which are sites, areas,
lands, Ouildings, structures, or vacant lots which are not of
historical, architectural, archaeological or cultural importance
or value, development or redeve:opment may be at the owner's
discretion as long as there is no variance from the historic
district preservation plan to materials, scale and detail,
appurtenances, textures, ornamentation and accessories, and the
owner complies with existing regulations, In these Instances,
no review by the landmark commission would be required, and no
certificate of appropriateness would apply,
(6) Transit and Traffic Operations, The commission
may review the transit and traffic operations in and through the
district and provide recommendations to the urban transportation
department and city council on routes, schedules, one-way and
two-way street patterns, park and rise, shuttle servitos and
pedestrian facilities that will enhance and preserve the
character of the district.
(7) Public Improvements. The Landmark commission may
recommend to the city council acceptable public architectural
and anginsering designs including street lightthp, street
furniture, signs, landscaping, utility facilits., such as
electric poles and wires, telephone lines; design textures of
sidewalks and streets, such as brick, stone and tile, and such
other elements as deemed necessary for enhancement and
preservation of the district.
(g) Administrative Requirements of Landmark Commission.
(1) When a historic landmark commission considers an
area as a possible historic district, it sh.Ail, prior to
rendering Its final recommendation and report, submit Its
report, including the district preservation plan or any proposed
ordinance amendments to all city departments, boards and
commissions and other public agencies directly affected.
(2) In addition, it shall, and prior to rendering itn
final recommendation, make the plan available to th<i landowners
in the proposed district. In the event the area under
PAGE as
t„,
vs
consideration has established an historic district committee,
the commission may include the comments of such committee in its
final report, If appropriate and desired, the commission should
recommend that the city council adopt the restrictions to assure
that future public investment complies with the term of the
district.
(3) Commission approved medallions for designated
structures within the district shall be prepared and, subject to
the approval of the owners, may be affixed to the Wo designated
structures,
(h) Changes in Provisions herein, Such regulations,
restrictions, and boundaries may from time to tliae be amended,
supplemented, changed, modified, or repealed. In case, however,
of a written protest against such change, signed by the owners
of twenty percent or more either of the area of the lots or land
included in such proposed change, or of the lots or land
immediately adjoining the same and extending 200 feet therefrom,
such amendment shall not become effective except by the
favorable cote of three-fourths of all members of the city
council.
Section 2BA-15. PENALTY
(a) It shall be unlawful to construct, reconstruct,
structurally alter, remodel, renovate, restore, demolish, raze,
or maintain any building, structure, or land in a historic
landmark designation in violation of the provisions of this
ordinance, and the city in addition to other remedies, may
institute any appropriate action or proceedings to prevent such
unlawful construction, restoration, demolition, razing, or
maintenance, to restrain, correct, or abate such violation, to
prevent any Illegal act, business, or maintenance in and about
such premises,
(I') Any person, Firm, or corporation violating any
provisior f this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and
shall be timed S4.Alty of a separate offense for each day or
PAOD 24
portion thereof during which any violation hereof is committed,
continues or is permitted, and upon co
nvictlon of any such
violation shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed two
hundred dollars.
Section 28A-16. NOTICB.
Any notice required to be given under this title, if not
actually delivered, shall be given by depositing the same in the
United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the person or
entity to whom such notice Is to be given at his last known
address, When notice is required to be given to an owner or
owners of property, such notice, delivered or mailed by
certitted or registered mail, may be addressed to such owner or
owners who have rendered their said property for city taxes as
the ownership appears on the last approved city tax roil.
SS ION II.
This ordinance shall become effective from and after its
date of passage and publication as required by law,
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day 'of}.~jt ,G
CITY OF DiNTON, TEXAS
ATTBSTTY OF DINTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM
C. J. TAYLOR JR., CITY
ATTORNEY, CIfy OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
PAGE 2S
,+a
OAK-HICKURY HISTORIC DISTRICT
DISTRICT PRESERVATION PLAN
Presented Pursuant to
Article 28A-14 (f)
Appendix B, Zoning Ordinance
Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton
The City of Denton has declared it to be public policy to protect,
enhance, preserve, and use historic landmarks and declared that such
a policy leads to the culture, prosperity, education, and general
welfare of the people of the city (Article 28A-2). Integral to the
carrying out of those purposes is the creation of Historic Districts,
and the technical requirements for the creation and administration
of Historic Districts is stated in detail in the Code of Ordinances
of the City of Denton.
It should be noted that the Denton Ordinance has been certified by
the U. S. Department of the Intorior.
The City of Denton Historic Preaorvation Plan, adopted by the
City Council in 1985, states thai a major goal of the city is the
creation of Historic Districts, and the pplan singles out Oak Street
as one area in which it would be a esirable to create a Historic
District.
West Oak Street from Williams to Welch is what was referred to by
citizens in earlier years as "Silk Stocking Row," Beginning in
the late nineteenth century, a number of substantial private homes
were built along that five-block stretch, The same situation, to
a slightly less affluent degree, pertained on nest Hickory Street.
As the evolution of the streetscape occurred, some remodeling took
place, and some new construction occurred. As a consequence, that
five block area of West Oak Street, the north side of West Hickory
Street, Williams Street, Denton Street, and part of the south side
of Pearl Street, contains representative architecture from the late
nineteenth and taost of the twentieth century.
Thus, from the origins of West Oak Street and West Hickory Street
and because of their later evolution, the creation of the Oak-Hickory
Historic District will substantially further the goals of public
policy set forth by the City of Denton.
a
Oak-Hickory Historic District
District Preservation Plan
Pagel
1. ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF USES
It must be remembered that inclusion within a Historic
District, like individual Historic Landmark designation,
is an overlay zoning, in which property retains its basic
zoning classification.
The majority of structures on West Oak Street were in place
before the City of Denton enacted its first zoning code. As
a consequence there are several nonconforming uses of land
within the district. In 1968, in a city-wide rezoning, the
area was designated as Multi-Family I (lour density a artments
being the primary land use under that classification). In
19760 at the request of the West Oak Street Association, the
City of Denton began the policy of permitting voluntary back-
zoning on West Oak Street to the Single Family classification
without payment of the customary fees, As a Consequence, the
Oak Street part of the area now is about evenly divided be-
tween Multi-Family and Single Family classification. The
distribution of those two classifications is uneven; however,
several blocks are now, in effect, spot-zoned Multi-Family.
It is recommended that the City Council continue to encourage
back-zoning to Single Family to reduce as much as possible the
inequities of this situation, It is also recommended that the
City Council allow the owners of property within the Historic
District on the north side of Hickory Street and on Williams,
Denton, and Pearl Streets to petition for similar back-zoning
without payment of the customary fees.
It is also recommended that the staff of the Planning and
Development Office of the City of Denton strive to reduce
nonconforming uses within the Historic District as they are
able to revi.ow them.
In any application for construction or remodeling, petitioners
are advised that the City of Denton will be guided by "Archi-
tectural Standards for Existing and Proposed Structures in
Historic Districts," passed by the Historic Landmark Commis-
sion on March 1U, 1986, which is hereby attached by reference
to this Oax-Hickory Historic District Preservation Plan.
Oak-Hickory Historic District
District Preservation Plan
Page 3
II, BUILDING CODE RBQUIR13MENTS
No major revisions of the Building Code are envisioned, except
as they may be indicated by "Architectural Standards for Exist-
ing and Proposed Historic Districts,"
It is recommended that the Building Code Inspector undertake
an examination of the Building Code to recommend changes that
would make it possible to move historic structures into the
Uak-Hickory Historic District, should such an action be found
desirable in the future.
III, SIGN REGULATIONS
The "Architectural Standards for Existing and Proposed
Historic Districts" makes the following remarks on sign
regulation:
A. No permanent or temporary detached sign will be allowed
in the Historic District, except signs announcing con-
struction or the sale of tfie property or political signs
no larger than 18" x 24" at times as allowed by the City
of Denton.
B. Permanent attached signs shall meet the following
guidelines:
1. They must be architecturally integrated with the
structure;
2. Their placement must not obscure significant
architectural or ornamental elements of the
structure;
36 The sign and the size of the lettering on the sign
must be proportional to the size of the building;
40 The color of the sign and its lettering must be
compatible with the structure;
C. Attachments which have the effect of serving as
advertising, including but not limited to banners, flags,
and balloons, must be approved by the Historic Landmark
Commission, except for flags of the United States and the
State of Texas, which shall be of a size and placement
appropriate to the structure,
Uak-Hickory Historic District
District Preservation Plan
Page 4
IV. PARKING REGULATIONS
It is recommended that the City Council examine alternatives
that would have the effect of limiting parking, particularly
on Hickory Street, to minimize the negative effects of the
overflow of vehicles from the large multi-family complexes
south of Hickory Street.
V. ARCHITECTURAL REGULATIONS
In accordance with the Instructions set forth in Article
28A-14 (f) (S), the Historic Landmark Commission has adopted
"Architectural Standards for Existing and Proposed Historic
Districts." In prephring that document the Historic Landmark
Commission was guided by the U. S. Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for 8ehabilitation.
V1, TRANSIT AND TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Both West Oak Street and West Hickory Street serve as major
east-west thoroughfares. in addition to monitoring traffic
intensity of those streets, it is recommended that the City
of Denton bear in mind the need to provide additional east-
west traffic carriers as it undertakes major capital improve-
ments to the City's traffic system.
VII. PUBLIC IMPROVrMENTS
As the City of Denton continues its regular program of
maintenance, it is recommended that it try to bring public
elements of the streetscape into keeping with the nature of
the Historic District, One early priority would be to replace
the fixtures for street lighting with elements more In keeping
with the nature of the Historic District.
VIII, LANDSCAPING
Much of the character of the Oak-Hickory Historic District
comes from its vegetation, especially its old trees. No tree
with a diameter greater than three inches measured one foot
above ground level shall be removed without the approval of
the Historic Landmark Commission, The Historic Landmark Com-
mission shall generally permit such removals only for purposes
of public safety or for specific purposes demonstrable to the
Historic Landmark Commission, and in return for allowing such
removal it will generally require the planting of a comparable
tree at some other appropriate place on th:, site,
Adopted by Historic Landmark Commission
July 14, 1986, Retitled, Jul 30 1986
DbNTON, 'T'EXAS HIS'TURIC LANDMARK COMMISSION
ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS
FOR
EXISTING AND PROPOSED STRUCTURES
IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
1. The existing original qualities or character of a building,
structure, or site and the environment of those buildings,
structures, and sites shall not be destroyed. The removal
or alteration of any historic material or distinctive archi-
tectural features should be avoided.
2. All buildings, structures, and sites shall be recognized as
products of their own times. Alterations that have no historic
basis, particularlyy those that seek to create an earlier
appearance, shall be discouraged,
3. Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are
evidence of the fi story and development of a building, struc-
ture, site, or environment, These changes may have acquired
significance in their own right, and this significance, when
it exists, shall be recognized and respected.
4. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled
craftsmanship which characterize a building, structure,
or site shall be treated with sensitivity,
5. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather
than replaced, whenever possible, In the event that replace-
ment is necessary, the new material should match the material
being replaced in composition, design, color texture, and
other visual qualities. Replacement of missing architectural
features should be based on historic, physical, or pictorial
evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availabil-
ity of architectural elements taken from other buildings or
structures.
66 The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken only
with the gentlest means possible. Sandblasting and other
cleaning methods that will damage the historic building
materials shall not be undertaken.
7. Contemporary design for alterations and additions to existing
properties shall not be discouraged when such alterations and
additions do not destroy significant historic, architectural,
or cultural material, and such design is compatible with the
size, color, material, and character of the property, environ-
ment, and Historic District.
Architectural Standards
Historic Districts
page 2
S. Whenever possible, new additions or alterations to structures
shall be done in such a manner that if such additions or altera-
tions were to be removed in the future, the essential form and
integrity of the structure would be unimpaired.
9. Applicants should be advised that the decisions of the Historic
Landmark Commission on these matters are guided by the Secretary
of the Interior's Standards, as they may be amended from time
to time, and by tht. Natiana1 Trust for Historic Preservation's
Desl. n Review Standards for Historic Districts, as they may be
revised from time to time.
10. Whenever possible, the Historic Landmark Commission will
discourage alterations that affect existing landscaping,
especially any changes that might affect a tree with a diameter
greater than three inches, measured one foot above ground level.
11. Appeals from the decisions of the Historic Landmark Commission
concerning the granting, or the failure to grant, of a Certifi-
cate of Appropriateness, a permit for new construction, or a
demolition or removal permit within a Historic District shall
be referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Appeals
from the decisions of that body shall be made to the City
Council.
EXISTING STRUCTURES
In conjunction with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation, as they may be amended from time to time, the
Historic an wark Commission in reviewing applications for Certifi-
cates of Appropriateness within a Historic District will take into
account the following criteria to ensure that the application is
consistent with the character and historic aspect of the Historic
District:
1. The mass of the structure. The height of the building, its
bulk, and the nature of its roof line.
Z. The proportions between the height of the building, its bulk,
and the nature of its roof line (is its appearance
predominately horizontal or predominately vertical?).
3. The nature of the open spaces around the building, including
the extent of setbacks, the existence of any side yards and
their size, and the continuity of such spaces along the street.
46 The existence of trees and other landscaping and the extent of
paving,
Architectural Standards
Historic Districts
Page 3
5, The nature of openings in the facade, primarily doors and
windows, their location, size, and proportions.
b. The type of roof, whether flat, gabled, hipped, gambrel,
mansard, etc.
7. The nature of projections from the buildings, particularly
porches.
S. The nature of the architectural details and the predominant
architectural style.
y. The nature of the materials.
10. Texture,
11. The details of ornamentation.
12. Provision for additional parking, if the proposed alteration
will increase either occupancy or use of the structure,
NEW STRUCTURES
In con~jjunction with the Secretaryy of the Interior's Standards
for Rehabilitation, as they may be amended from time--6-'t'ime,
the Historic Landmark Commission in reviewing applications for new
structures within a Historic District will take into account the
following criteria to ensure that the new structure is consistent
with the character and historic aspect of the Historic District:
1. The mass of the proposed structure, its height, its bulk, and
the nature of its roof line. Particularly important in this
judgment is the relationship of the proposed structure to the
average height of existing nearby and adjacent structures and
to the character of the Historic District,
2. The proportions between the height of the proposed structure,
its bulk, and the nature of its roof lin.-~. Are those propor-
tions compatible with nearby and adjacent tructures and with
the character of the Historic District.
3. Spacing of buildings on the street,
4. The nature of the open spaces around the building, including
the extent of setbacks, the existence of any side yards and
their size, and the continuity of such spaces along the street.
5, The existence of trees and other landscaping and the extent of
paving proposed.
Architectural Standards
Historic Districts
Page 4
6. The nature of openings in the proposed facade, primarily doors
and windows, their location, size, and proportions, and the
relationship of the proposed construction to nearby and adja-
cent structures and to the character of the Historic District#
7. The type of roof, whether flat, gabled, hipped, gambrel,
mansard, etc., and the relationship of the proposed construc-
tion to nearby and adjacent structures and to the character
of the Historic District.
8. The nature of projections from the proposed structure,
particularly porches, and the relationship of those projec-
tions of the proposed construction to nearby and adjacent
structures and to the character of the Historic District.
9. The nature of the architectural details of the proposed
structure its predominant architectural style, and the
compatibility of those details and that style with nearby
and adjacent structures and with the character of the Historic
District.
1U. The nature of the materials to be used in the proposed
structure and the compatibility of those materials to nearby
and adjacent structures and to the character of the Historic
District.
11. The texture of the proposed construction and the relationship
of that texture to nearby and adjacent structures and to the
character of the Historic District.
1Z. The details of ornamentation of the proposed structure and the
relationship of those details to nearby and adjacent structures
and to the character of, the Historic District.
13. The relationship of landscaping of the proposed structure and
the relationship of that landscaping to nearby and adjacent
structures and to the character of the Historic District.
14. The scale of the proposed structure and the relationship
of that scale to nearby and adjacent structures and to the
character of the Historic District.
15. The directional expression of the front elevation and the
relationship of that directional expression to nearby and
adjacent structures and to the character of the Historic
District.
16. Provision for off-street parking in predominately residential
areas.
Architectural Standards
Historic Districts
Page 5
DbMOLITI(N OR REMOVAL
The historic Landmark Commission will consider the following in
determining the appropriateness of any application for demolition
or removal, including relocation, of a structure in the Historic
District:
1. The architectural significance of the structure.
2. The historic signiic:ance of the structure.
3. The significance of the structure to the streetscape.
4. The significance of the structure in furthering the goals of
historic preservation set forth as City policy and the specific
goals set forth in the City and District Preservation Plans.
5. The significance of the structure in regard to tourism.
b. The probable effect of demolition or removal of the structure
on surrounding properties.
SiGNAGE
i'ne Historic Landmark Commission shall consider the following in
determining the appropriateness of any application for approval of
signs within the .istoric District:
1. No permanent or temporary detached sign will be allowed in the
Historic District, except signs announcing construction or the
sale of the property or political signs no larger than 18"x24"
at times as allowed by the City of Denton.
2. Permanent attached signs shall meet the following guidelines:
a. They must be architecturally integrated with the structure;
b. Their placement must not obscure significant architectural
or ornamental elements of the structure;
C4 The sign and the size of .ettering on the sign must be
proportional t3 the size of the building;
d. The color of the sign and its lettering must be compatible
with the structure.
3. Attachments which have the effect of serving as advertising,
including but not limited to banners, flags, and balloons, must
be approved by the Historic Landmark Commission, e_xc_e_pt_ for
flags of the United States and Texas, which shall-B-6-67 a size
and placement appropriate to the structure.
Adopted by Historic Landmark Commission
March IU, 1986
PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FORMS
CITY COUNCIL
Oak-Hickory Historic District
IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION UNDECIDED
Richard B. Sale Scott Haggard John F. Miller III
1015 W. Oak 700 W. Oak 2127 W, Oak
Denton, TX Denton, TX Denton, TX
John Wright (Mr. Miller is in
912 W. Oak H,T. Riney favor of Oak Street
520 S. Elm
Denton TX - butop--osed to
Denton, TX Hickory Street)
Marian F. DeShazo L.S. Forester
904 W. Oak 4513 Castle Combe Pl.
Denton, TX Ft. Worth, TX
Richard Hayes Leroy Williamson
819 W. Oak 2415 Glenwood
Denton, TX Denton, TX
Mrs. Amos Barksdale Bob Crouch
818 W. Oak 801 N. Locust
Denton, TX Denton, TX
W. A. Barker Sally Hannah Mudd
812 W. Oak 1810 Mistywood
Denton, TX 76201 Denton, TX
J.D. Vann Sharon Kay Sorg
811 W. Oak 7411 Gleneagle Circle
Denton, TX Crystal Lak, ILL
Patrick Carey Paul Davidson
619 w. Oak Delta Sigma Phi Alumni
Denton, TX Control Board
P.O. Box 161854
Alonzo Jamison Irving, TX
616 W. Oak
Denton, TX James Russell and
Terrell King
Maurice McAdow 714 W. Hickory
804 W. Hickory Denton, TX
Denton, TX
Herman W. Lantrip
Paula Carpenter 1005 Gregg
723 W. Oak Denton, TX
Denton, TX
Donald J. Davis
700 W. Hickory
Denton, TX
-717w' -
PROPERTY UWMBR LIST
OAK-HICKORY HISTORIC DISTRICT
City Lot Block / Location Name Address
336/1 1035 W. Oak Bob E, Tripp
6634 Chevy Chase
Dallas, Texas 75225
336/2 1023 W. Oak Randall S. Boyd
P.O. Box 189
Denton, Texas 76101
488/9 1018 W. Oak Delta Sigma Phi Prat Gamma X
4 Paul Davidson
2608 Walnut
Plano, Texas 75015
536/3 1015 W. Oak Richard Barksdale Sale
1015 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
336/4 1011-1009 W. Oak Rollin A. Sininger
1003 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
488/8 lUU4 W. Oak Herman W. Lantrip at al
8 1U05 W. Oak 1005 Gregg
Denton, Texas 76201
33U/1 1OU3 W, Oak Rollin A. Sininger
1003 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
488/7 924 W. Oak Leigh'a;i H. LeClair, Jr.
924 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
330/2.1 923 W. Oak Cynthia Kay Ross
923 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
330/2 921 W, Oak James E. Hundley, Sr.
921 W. oak
Denton, Texas 76201
488/6 918 W. Oak William K. Doggett
918 W. Oak
llenton, Texas 76201
330/3 915 W. Usk Dorothy Frances William.;
915 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
488/5 912 W. Oak John Wright
912 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
488/4 904 W. Oak Marian F. Deshazo
904 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
330/4 903 W. Oak Robert Pearce
903 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
a
West Oak Street (Continued
330/5 819 W. Oak Richard D. Hayes
819 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
488/3 818 W. Oak Antos Barksdale
818 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
488/2 812 W. Oak W. A. Barker
812 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
330/6 811 W. Oak Jerry Don Vann
811 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
488/1 8U2 W. Oak Harry Riney Enterprise, Inc.
Box 414
Denton, Texas 76201
369/1 801 W. Oak Edward Lane
801 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
329/2 723 W. Oak Paul D. Carpenter
723 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
47b/3 722 W. Oak Charlotte P. Montgomery
721 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
329/3 717 W. Oak Barbara H, Jackson
717 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
470/2 716 W. Oak Joe Lair
716 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
329/4 711 W. Oak Wilber D. Buttrill
711 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
329/5 705 W. Oak Murray 4 Diane Ricks
70S W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76101
470/4 7U4 W. Oak Hobert S. Berg
2503 Woodhaven Drive
Denton, Texas 76201
476/1 700 W. Oak Scott Haggard
700 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
328/1 b19 W. Oak Patrick L. Carey
P.O. Box 1665
Denton, 'T'exas 76202
475/14 616 W. Oak Alonzo W. Jamison, Jr.
616 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
3/8/2 615 W. Oak Mike Cochran et al
609 W. Oak
Denton, 'texas 76201
475/13 610 W. Oak Janes Dellis Swanson
610 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
i
r r 1 °
PROPERTY SWNBR LIST
OAK-HICKORY HISTORIC DISTRICT
c_1ty_Lot/Block/ Location Name 6 Address
336/9 1022 W. Hickory Bob B. Tripp
6634 Chevy Chase
Dallas, Texas 7SZ25
336/8 IOIU W. Hickory Galen D. Fanning
1010 W. Hickory
Denton, Texas 76201
336/7 1006 W. Hickory John Franklin Miller III
2127 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
336/6 1004 W. Hickory James J. Brosch
1004 W. Hickory
Denton, Texas 76201
136/5 IUOO W. Hickory Richard Edyvean
IOUO W. Hickory
Denton, Texas 76201
3Su/17 928 W. Hickory John f. Miller III
2127 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
33U/16 92U W. Hickory John F. Miller III
2127 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
33U/15 916 W. Hickory John F. Miller III
2127 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
330/14 912 W. Hickory Leroy M. Williamson
2415 Glenwood Lane
Denton, Texas 76201
330/13 906 W. Hickory Darrell K. Donaldson 11
906 W. Hickory
Denton, Texas 76201
33u/IZ 904 W. Hickory Bobby $ James Morris
918 Anderson
Denton, Texas 76201
330/10 9U2 W. Hickory Arthur B. Sorg
7411 Gleneagle Cir.
Crystal Lake, Illinois 6001
33u/ll 9U2 W. Hickory Jack R. $ Kyla J. Haynes
2816 Foxcroft Circle
Denton, Texas 76201
i
West Hickory Street icontinued)
822 W. Hickory Bruce Balentine
822 W. Hickory
Denton, Texas 76201
330/9 818 W. Hickory Elizabeth Jean Lair Smith
308 Marietta
Denton, Texas 76101
330/8 814 W. Hickory Bob A. Crouch
801 N. Locust
Denton, Texas 76201
330/7 812 W. Hickory Bob A, Crouch
801 N. Locust
Denton, Texas 76201
329/12 804 W, Hickory Maurice C. McAdow
804 W. Hickory
Denton, Texas 76201
329/11 HUO W. Hickory Mike Mizell
800 Bdgewood
Denton, Texas 76201
329/10 722 W, Hickory George N, Plott
1202 Firing Rock
Denton, Texas 76201
329/9 714 W. Hickory Terrell King
1st State Bank Bidg
Denton, Texas 76281
319/8 710 W. Hickory L. S. Forester
4513 Castle Combe Place
Ft. Worth, Texas 76180
309/7 704 W. Hickory Mrs, A. V. Fleming
$ 704 112 W,Hickory 704 W. Hickory
Denton, Texas 76201
319/6 700 W. Hickory Donald J. Davis
616 Northridge Drive
Denton, Texas 76201
328/8 61U W. Hickory Phillip D. Vick
620 W, Hickory
Denton, Texas 76201
328/7 610-614 W, Hickory Brian M. Kruger
P.O. Box 2699
Denton, Texas 76202
318/b bU8 W. Hickory Phillip W. Watkins
17 Ridge Drive
P.O. Box 1092
1
ake Dallas, Texas 75065
. Y
PROPERTY OWNER LIST
OAK-HICKORY HISTORIC DISTRICT
City Lot/Block K Location Name 8 Address
488/1.1 213 Mounts Harry Riney Enterprise, Inc.
$ 213 112 Mounts Box 414
Denton, Texas 76201
488/4.1 9U7 Gregg Marian F, Deshazo
904 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 7620!
488/4.2 9U1 Gregg Marian F. Deshazo
904 W. Oak
Denton, Texas 76201
475/1 619 Pearl Heather Hardy
619 Pearl St.
Denton, Texas 76201
475/2 613 Poari Clarence W. Hefner, Jr.
613 Pearl
Denton, Texas 76201
475/34 6U7 Pearl Kathleen Biggs
607 Pearl St.
Denton, Texas 76201
475/15 3U2 Denton Brandy Lee Stein
302 Denton St.
Denton, Texas 762U1
3YB/5 109 Williams Sally Hannah Mudd
1810 Mistywood
Denton, Texas 76201
RLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 3
Ms. Evans replied that there are enough applicants presently.
She said it was Slott getting started in 1984 but that there
are applicants now who are in the process of getting con-
tractors' bids.
his, Evans stated that the rehabilitation program is a matching
program. The City is given $5,000 and the property owner must
match the $5,000. The property owner has until the property
is sold or 10 years to pay his share at zero percent interest.
The requirement may be changed to put a lien on the property
instead of requiring repayment,
Mr. Cochran asked how much the CDBG office has spent on the
project,
Ms. Evans said between $200,000 and $250,000. She said that
there is $250 000 in the funds now. She stated that the origi-
nal limit on l<unding was $8,500 per unit but that has recently
¢g?n rain d to ffi ,500 She further stated that CDBG was
ores a In m ng the exterior facade look attractive.
Ms. Evans stated that the CDBG office worked in conjunction
with the building Inspection Department on demolition projects.
The Building Inspection Department refers people who cannot
afford the demolitions to CDBG and CDBG will do the demolition
at no charge. She said that written consent of the owner is
required before a demolition will ho performed. She said the
project is not advertised so that people who can well afford
the demolitions will not apply.
Mr. Cochran asked if pictures were taken of the demolition
sites.
Ms. livens said that pictures were taken both before and after
the demolition. She said that a problem with the program was
that some of the owners were hard to locate. Some of the
owners were in nursing homes or had died and the program does
not allow demolitions without written consent of the owner.
She added that she would provide additional information to
Landmark Commission about any project upon request.
III. Discussion of maintenance of historic landmark at
703 Bolivar Street (H-27)
Mr. Cochran stated that 703 Bolivar Street is zoned historic.
He said that the house is owned by Ms, Sandy Taylor who is
presently in Prance and that Ms. Spivey and Mr. Lowry were
concerned that the house needs a new paint job. He advised
that the house Is in the process of being scraped down;
therefore, no action is necessary at this time.
1V. Establish boundaries of proposed West Oak Street Historic
District,
Mr. Cochran said that establishing the boundaries of the
Historic District was the last obstacle before going to the
Planning and Zoning Commission. Photographs of all the build-
ings and a District Preservation Plan have been obtained since
the last meeting,
Ms. Spivey stated that a photo album of possible properties
to be included In the Historic District and a map outlining
the proposed boundaries was available for the Historic Land-
mark Commission's review.
Mr. Lowryy stated that the Sigma Phi Fraternity House may not
wish to be excluded from the Historic District,
Ms, Spivey stated that she had information sheets on each
property with all the details and information required by the
ordinance. She said that she had prepared a sheet for each
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 4
site $o the Commission could vote on which criteria applied to
each individual property to make it ,ligible for Inclusion in
the Historic District,
Properties and criteria were discussed;
1. 613 Pearl - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, Interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d, Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
2, o19 Pearl - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States,
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen,
c. kelationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on schitectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States,
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city,
f. value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride,
3, 302 Denton - Meets the following criteria:
,
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Embodiment of elements of architectural design,
detail, materials or craftsmanship which represent
d, architectural
sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
e. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States,
f. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
S. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride,
7,1 "V- 7 7
t
I
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 5
4. 616 West Usk - Meets the following criteria:
a.' Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architect~iral type or specimen,
c. Embodiment of elements of architectural design,
detail, materials or craftsmanship which represent
a significant architectural innovation,
d. Relationship to other distinctive buildin s, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
e, bxemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
f. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
g, Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
5, 7UO West uak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or valun as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen,
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
tng to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d, Exemplification of the cultural economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States,
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
E. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
6. 704 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen,
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States,
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
E. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1980
Page 6
7. 716 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on arc'itectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
8. 802 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
Ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
b. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
9. 9U4 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b, Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c, Relation,"+.P to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city,
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
10. Rear of 904 West Oak (Lots 4.1 and 4.29 City Block 489)
Mr. Lowry moved that lots 4.1 and 4.2, block 488, be
excluded. Seconded by Mr. Millar and unanimously carried
(8-0).
11. 922 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as Part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristice
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
states.
b. Embodiment of distinguishipg characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Embodiment of elements of architectural design,
detail materials or craftsmanship which represent
a significant architectural innovation.
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 7
d. Relationshlp,to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
e. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
f. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
g. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
11. 918 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, hletorl.; or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
Mr Lowry moved that 918 hest Oak be designated as
eligible for inclusion but not included. Seconded by
Mr. Miller and unanimously carried (8-0).
13. 914 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of 'texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen,
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
14. 1004 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Embodiment of elements of architectural design,
detail, materials or craftsmanship which represent
a significant Architectural innovation.
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 8
d. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
.or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
Ing to r plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
e. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, sorts!,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
f. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
g. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
15. 1018 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, socJal,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of :ommunity sentiment or public
pride.
16. 1U35 West Oak - Meets the followin6 criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen,
C. identification as the work of an architect or ma;rer
builder whose Individual work has influenced the
development of the city.
d. Embodiment of elements of architectural design,
detail materials or craftsmanship which represent
a significant architectural innovation.
e. Relationship to other distinctive ouildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
Ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
f. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
S. Identification with a person or persons who
significantly contributed to the culture and
development of the city, state or United States.
h. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value ro a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
I. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
17. 1009 and 1011 hest Oak D_uylejj - Meets the following
criteria: -
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or P'te United
If;?
H LC Minutes
duly 14, 1986
! Page 9
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
Ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
C, Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
dthnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. Identification with a person or persons who
significantly contributed to the culture and
development of the city, state or United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
18. 9"13 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural typo or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif,
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city,
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
19. 921 West Uak - Meets the following criteria;
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State cf Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other 11stinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are elislble for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based or architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of tts location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
20. 915 West Usk - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
',tites.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites {
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or i
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
77
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
page 10
e, A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
11. 903 West Oak - Meets the folloxit:g criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as par; of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States,
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
Mr. Lowry moved that 903 West Oak be eligible for
inclusion, but not included. Seconded by Mr. Boyd
and unanimously carried (8.0).
11, 801 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on Architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
E. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
13. 717 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimon.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, !1ltes
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
tinted States.
e. 'gilding or structure that because of its location
hr.s become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 11
24. 711 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage or the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure ;hat because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community Fentiment or public
pride.
25. 619 West Oak - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationshi to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
26. 615 west Oak - Meets the following critet.-:
a. Character, interest or value ;,4 part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation a:cord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
27. 601 West Oak
Mr. Lowry moved that 601 West Oak be excluded. Seconded
by Ms. Conrady seconded unanimously carried (8-0).
28, 109 Williams and 602 and 604 West Hickory (one lot)
Meets the following cr ter at
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas. or the United
s g~ i .AMY ! .ar ~ .,c .r 1~'. I• ..I
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 12
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city,
f. Value as in aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
Mr. Marino left the meeting.
29. 608 and 610 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of anton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cul~ural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the cloy, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the ci-y.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
30. 614 Wost Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a, Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
C. Relationship ;o other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
31, 620 West Hickory - Meets the following criterion:
Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites or
areas which are eligible for preservation according to
a plan based on architectural, historic or cultural motif.
S2. 700 West Hickok - sleets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of ohm rity of ilmp+nw Q*.,... .,e P n_:.. ~
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 13
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
a. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
33. 704 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
34. 710 West Hicks - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
in to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
C. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
35. 714 West Hickory - Meets the following criterion:
Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites or
areas which are eligible for preservation according to
a plan based on architectural, historic or cultural motif.
36. 720 and 722 West Hickok - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, Interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States,
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
in to a plan based on architectural, historic or
culture! wntif
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 14
c. Exemplification of the cultural economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage ok the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
37. 800 west Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States,
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage ok the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
38, BU4 West Hickok - Meets the following criteria:
a, Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b, Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c, Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based orn architectural, historic or
cultural motif,
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
39. 812 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of on
architectural type or specimen.
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
40. 814 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States,
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
`z
~r
HLG Hinutes
July 14, 1980
Page 15
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States,
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city,
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
41. 818 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States,
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city,
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
42. 8z2 West Hicks - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characterlstl:s
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
C. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
43. 902 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen,
c. kelatirnship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
,k
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 16
44. 904 West Hickory Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationshl to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. lxempplification of the cultural economic, social,
athnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
4S. 906 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria;
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritnge of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
46. 911 West Hickok - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States,
b, Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to L plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride,
47. 916 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritnge or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
f x v-xr~l r l'r rg .-rxa~vTT . rT' r a?-i9:i.i-r . Yt _ .gig
Hi.C Minutes
July 14, 1944
Page 17
d. bxemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic ot• itilstorical heritage of the city, state or
United Stotts.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
48. 920 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
I
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City c.f Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States,
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
a"chitectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to othr+r distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical neritage of the city, state or
United States,
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
49. 918 West Hickok - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the city of Denton, State of. Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
f. Valuo as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
5U. 1000 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other. distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based an architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural economic, social,
ethnic ox historical heritage o the city, state or
United States.
e. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
of the city'.
f. Value as an aspecf~ of community sentiment or public
pride.
h
HI.C. Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page IS
$1. 1004 Rest Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage, or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other distinctive uuildin s, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif,
c, lixemplifieation of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
52. 1006 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
c. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
d. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
e. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
53, 1010 West Hickory - Meets the following criteria:
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or specimen.
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. Identification with a person or persons who
significantly contributed to the culture and
development of the city, state or United States.
f. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a neighborhood, community area
or the city.
g. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride.
54. 1022 West. Hickory - Meets the following criterial
a. Character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage or cultural characteristics
of the City of Denton, State of Texas, or the United
States.
b. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type or spertwen.
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 19
c. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites
or areas which are eligible for preservation accord-
Ing to a plan based on architectural, historic or
cultural motif.
d. Exeaplification of the cultural, economic, social,
ethnic or historical heritage of the city, state or
United States.
e. Identification with a person or persons who
significantly contributed to the culture and
development of the city, state or United States.
f. A building or structure that because of its location
has become of value to a r.,>ighborhood, community area
or the city,
g. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public
pride,
Mr. Lowry moved for rati'rication of properties and criteria
for properties in the proposed Historic District, Seconded
by Ms. Conrady.
Roll Call vote:
Randall Boyd - Aye
Catherine Conrady - Aye
Gaylen Dickey - Aye
Bu 11 i t t Lowr,, - Aye
Tom Miller - Aye
Sandra Matthews - Aye
Mike Cochran - Aye
Motion unanimously carried (7-0)
Mr. Miller moved that page 1, paragraph 4, of the Oak Street
Historic District Preservation Plan should read "late
nineteenth and twentieth century."
Mr. Boyd stated that the motion should say "late
nineteenth to most of the twentieth century."
Mr. Miller amended the motion to "late nineteenth and most of
the twentieth century." Seconded by Mr. Boyd and unanimously
carried (7-0).
Mr. Boyd moved to approve the Oak Street Historic District
Presorvation Plan as follows:
"OAS' S'PR&8T HISTORIC DISTRICT
D1STRiCT PRESERVATION PLAN
Presented Pursuant to
Article 28A-14 (f)
Appendix B, Zoning Ordinance
Code of Urdinances of the City of Denton
The City of Denton has declared it to be public policy to
protect, enhance, preserve. and use historic landmarks and
declared that such policy leads to the culture, prosperity,
education, and general welfare of the people of the city
(Article 2BA-2), Integrr' to the carrying out of those
purposes is the creation Historic Districts, and the
technical requirements for the creation and administration
of Historic Districts Is stated in detail in the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Denton.
It should be noted that the Denton Ordinance has been
certified by the U. S. Department of the Interior.
The City of Denton Historic Preservation Plan, adopted by the
City Council In 1985, states that a major goal of the city is
the creation of historic Districts, and the plan singles out
oak Street as one area in which it would be desirable to
s create s Historic District.
HLC Minutes
July 1/, 198b
Fags 20
West Oak Street from Williams to Welch is what was referred to
by citizens in earlier years as "Silk Stocking Row." Beginning
in the late nineteenth century, a number of substantial private
homes were built along that five-block stretch. The Same sit-
ustion, to a slightly less affluent degree/ pertained on West
Hickory Street. As the evolution of the streetscape occurred,
some remodeling took place, and some now construction occurred.
As a consequence, that five block area of West Oak Street, the
north side of West Hickory Street, Williams Street, Denton
Street, and part of the south side of Pearl Street, contains
representative architecture from the late nineteenth and most
of the twentieth century.
'thus, from the origins of West Oak Street and West Hickory
Street and because of their later evolution, the creation of
the Usk Street Historic District will substantially further
the goals of public policy set forth by the City of Denton.
I. Zoning Classification of Uses
it must be remembered that inclusion within a Historic
District, like individual Historic Landmark designation,
is an overlay zoning, in which property retains its
basic zoning classification,
The majority of structures on West Oak Street were
in place before the City of Denton enacted its first
zoning code. As a consequence there are several non-
conforming uses of land within the district. In 1968,
in a city-wide rezoning, the area was designated as
multi-Family 1 (low density apartments being the pri-
mary land use under that classification). In 1976, at
the request of the West Oak Street Association, the
City of Denton began the policy of permitting voluntary
back-toning on West Oak Street to the Single Family
classification without payment of the customary fees.
As a consequence, the Oak Street part of the area now
is about evenly divided between Multi-Family and Single
Family classification. The distribution of those two
classifications is uneven; however, several blocks are
now, in effeck spot-coneu Multi-Fa.,ily,
It is recommended teat the City Council continue to
encourage back-zoning to Single Family to reduce as
much as possible the inequities of this situation. It
is also recommended that the City Council allow the
owners of property within the Historic District on the
north side of Hickory Street and on Williams, Denton,
and Pearl Streets to petition for similar back-zoning
without payment of the customary fees.
It is also recommended that the staff of the Planning
and Development Office of the City of Denton strive to
reduce nonconforming uses within the Historic District
as they are able to review them.
In any application for construction or remodeling
petitioners are advised that the City of Denton will
be guided by "Architectural Standards for Existing
and Proposed Structures in Historic Districts " passed
by the Historic Landmark Commission on March 10, 19860
which is hereby attached by reference to this Oak
Street Historic District Preservation Plan.
11. building Code Requirements
No major revisions of the building Code are envisioned,
except as ts,ey may be indicated by "Architectural
Standards fcr Existing and Proposed Historic Districts."
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Yale 21
It is recommended that the Building Code Inspector
undertake an oxamination of the Building Code to
recommend changes that would make it possible to move
historic structures Into the Oak Street Historic
District, should such an action be found drairable
in the future.
Ili. Sign Regulations
The "Architectural Standards for Existing and Proposed
Historic Districts" makes the following remarks on sign
regulation:
A. No permanent or temporary detached sign will be
allowed in the Historic District, except signs
announcing construction or the sale of the property
or political signs no larger than 18" x 24" at
times as allowed by the City of Denton.
B. Permanent attached signs shall meet the following
guidelines:
1. They must be architecturally integrated with
the structure;
2. Their placement must not obscure significant
architectural or ornamental elements of the
structure;
3. The sign and the size of the lettering on the
sign must be proportional to the size of the
building;
4. The color of the sign and its lettering must be
compatible with the structure;
C. Attachments which have the effect of serving as
advertising, including but not limited to banners,
fla s, and balloons must be approved by the His-
torfc Landmark Commission, except for flags of the
United States and the State of-Texas, which shall
be of a size and placement appropriate to the
structure.
1Y. Parking Regulations
It is recommended that the City Council examine
alternatives that would have the effect of limiting
parking, particularly on Hickory street, to minimize
the negative effects of the overtinw of vehicles from
the large multi-family complexes south of Hickory
Stre^t.
V. Architectural kegulations
In accordance with the instructions set forth in
Article ZBA-14 (f) (S), the Historic Landmark Com-
mission has adopted "Architectural Standards for
Existing and Proposed Historic Districts." In pre-
paring that document the Historic Landmark Commission
was guided by the U. S. Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation.
Via Transit and Traffic Uperations
Both West Oak Street and West Hickory Street serve
ac major east-west thoroughfares. In addition to
monitoring traffic intensity of those streets, it is
recommended that the City of Denton bear in mind the
need to provide additional east-west traffic carriers
as it undertakes major capital improvements to the
City's traffic system.
F.
W F x1r.:. r
HLC Minutes
July 14, 1986
Page 12
Vli. Public Improvements
As the C`ty of Denton continues its regular program
of maintaaance, it is recommended that it try to bring
public elements of the streetscape into keeping with
the nature of the Historic District. One early prior-
ity would be to replace the fixtures for strerr :fight-
ing with elements more in keeping with the natuvp of
the Historic District.
VIII. Landscaping
Much of the character of the Oak Street Historic
District comes from its vegetation, especially its
old trees. No tree with a diameter greater than three
inches measured one foot above ground level shall be
removed without the approval of the Historic Landmark
Commission. The Historic Landmark Commission shall
generally permit such removals only for purposes of
public safet/ or for specific purposes demonstrable to
the Historic Landmark Commission, and in return for
allowing such removal it will generally require the
planting of a comparable tree at some other appropriate
place on the site,"
Seconded by Mr, Miller.
Roll call vote:
Randall Boyd - Aye
Catherine Conrady - Aye
Gaylen Fickey - Aye
Bullitt Lowry - Aye
Tom Miller - Aye
Sandra Matthews - Aye
Mike Cochran - Aye
Motion unanimously carried (7-0)
Ms. Spivey suggested that the public hearing on the West Oak
Street Historic District be held on either Wednesday, July 30
or Wednesdayy, August b, 1986. She asked if any of the Com-
missioners had a preference of time.
Mr. Fickey stated that he would prefer the meeting to be held
a 5:50 P.M.
Mr, Lowry moved that the district public hearing be held on
July 30, 1986 at 5:30 p.ia. Seconded by Mr. Fickey and unani-
mously carried (7-0),
V. Discussiou of 714 West Hickory Street,
Mr, Cochran reported that the property at 714 West Hickory
Street is not being developed in compliance with the site plan
approved by tho Historic Landmark Commission.
Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, said she would contact the
developer's attorney, Mike Whitten and report back to the
Historic Landmark Commission with further details.
VI. New dusiness
Mr, Cochran stated that he had been chairman of the Historic
Landmark Commission for a year and asked for nominations for
a new chairman.
Mr. Lowry moved that Mr. Cochran be re-elected chairman.
Seconded by Mr. Miller.
Mr. Fickey moved that nominations cease and that Mr. Cochran
be elected chairman. Seconded by Mr. Miller and the motion
HLC Minutes
July 30, 1986
Page 4
PUBLIC HEARING
Petition of the Denton Historic Landmark Commission requesting
historic landmark designation of the West Oak Street Historic
District. The boundaries of the proposed district are as follows:
South side of Oak Street from Williams to Welch streets,
North side of Oak Street from Williams to Fulton streets,
South side of Pearl St•aet from Williams to Denton streets,
North side of Hickory Street from Williams to Welch streets.
The property is more particularly described as City of Denton tilock
numbers 318, 3290 330, 3360 476, 488 and part of block 475.
Chairman Cochran opened the public hearing and requested that
individual comments be limited to five minutes.
Penny Bdyvean, 1000 West Hickory Street, asked how the Historic
District would affect her.
Mr. Cochran stated that a historic district is an investment in the
homes and increased protection of the neighborhood,
Mr, Lowry stated that historic zoning and historic districts overlay
the existing toning. He said that the histor.lc designation would
not affect non-public or interior environments but only the exterior
facade.
L. S. Forester, 710 W. Hickory, asked what could be changed on the
exterior facade.
Mr. Lowry stated that regular maintenance and repairs could be
performed but that architectural changes would need the approval
of the Historic Landmark Commission.
Mr. Forester asked if he could demolish his structure,
Mr. Lowry stated that he would need the permission of the Historic
Landmark Commission.
Mr. Cochran stated that the Historic Landmark Commission took into
consideration the economic ability of the property owners to
maintain the property,
Mr. Forester stated that he objected to the proposed historic
district. He said that he owns a deiapidated old house and plans
only to keep it in a condition so that it can be occupiel. He said
that he doesn't want to be handicapped where he would be unable to
sell or demolish it.
Mr. Lowry said that historic zoning didn't affect the owner's right
to sell the property,
Mr. Forester said that he was afraid that the historic zoning might
decrease his property value. He said that the only use for his
structure is as rental property to college students because the
structure is in such poor condition.
Mr. Boyd stated that historical designations usually increase
property values.
Mr. Forester said that he is willing to take his chances. He said
that personally he felt it would devalue his house by restrictin
uses, He ssked about the historical value of his structure at 7#0
West Hickory.
Mr. Cochran said the house is of value because it is in a
neighborhood with a collection of historical houses and it has a
relationship to them.
iil,C Ml!autrs
July 30, 19116
Page 5
Mr. Forester stated that the houses on Oak Street are for superior
to those on Hickory Street.
Robert Crouch, 801 North Locust, stated that he owned a four unit
apartment at 812 West Hickory, a single family house at 814 West
Hickory and a garage apartment at 811 1/2 West Hickory. He said
that he opposed the placing of his properties in a historic district
because he felt it was a violation of his rights as an owner and a
realtor to have someone else decide what could be done with his
property.
Mr. Lowry asked if he opposed zoning as a phi?isophical issue.
Mr. Crouch said lie e.id not oppose zoning for those who requested it,
but he did not feel it was right to be forced into a zoning
designation.
Mr. Lowry asked him if he felt all zoning should be voluntary.
Mr. Crouch said that he objected to hiving his rights removed.
lie said that it was wrong for a commission or a person to zone his
property, He started that property owners have the right to make
decisions about their property unless the property is condemned by
the government using sue process.
Mr. Cochran asked Mr. Crouch if, as a realtor, he had seen any
indication that property values decrease as a result of a historic
district.
Mr. Crouch said no.
Mr. Marino asked if this is the first time Mr. Crouch had heard of
the proposed district.
mr. Crouch said that t4ls is the first time he has articulated his
objecstons because this is the first time the district included the
whole block.
Mr. Boyd said that this was the third public nearing on the proposed
historic district, he said that Pearl Street was not included in
the first hearing but the boundaries had remained the same in the
second and third hearings.
Herman W. Lantrip, 1005 Gregg, stared that his house had not been
included in the prevtous boundaries of the proposed historic dis-
trict. He said ti►at he purchased his house 30 or 40 years no and
has made improvements. He stated that he wishes to be excluded from
the proposed district. He said that the district is fine for those
who wish to be included but that he should not be forced into a
historic district.
Bill Doggett, 918 West Oak, stated that he had been opposed from
the beginning and had articulated this fact li previous meetings.
He said that a man's home is his castle and that he or she should
have the prerogative to do what is best for it, within reason. He
said that many of the property owners in the proposed district have
renovated and improved their homes using their own discretion. He
said that this is their right as property owners. He said he had
no objection to anyone who wants their hose included in the histori
district but that he didn't wish to be included,
Mr. Cochran inquired as to the color of his house.
Mr Doggett replied that it is light gray. Hit said that it needed
paint.ing and that he Intended to improve it when financially
possible. He said that he intended to rely oil his own taste and
would not paint it purple or add an inappropr:.ste facade.
Mr. Cochran asked his if he thought It would affect his property
value if his neighbors painted their house purple.
i
HLIC Minutes
July 30, 1986
Page 6
Mr. Lowry said that t.ie ordinance is intended to prevent inappro-
priate painting or renovation, not to restrict the property owners.
Mr. Dog ett said that he had faith in his neighbor's taste, and that
in the future-he would fix his house as he saw fit.
Mr. Cochran stated that Mr, Doggett's house was noted as excluded
but is eligible for inclusion In the historic district if at some
time in the future Mr. Doggett or a new owner wished to have the
property included.
Leighton Le Claire, 924 West Oak, stated that painting is maintenance
and includes the right of color choice, He said that the painting
issue was the most ridiculous point in the ordinance. He said that
he opposes any ordinance that restricts his right to choose paint
color, roof material or add siding to his home.
Mr. Miller asked if he would object to the neighbors painting an
obscene pi,;tune on the hot,se.
Mr. Le Claire said that he would defend anyone's right to do so and
would strive to maintain a relationship with his neighbors that
would not drive them to such extremity. He alto stated that unli!•e
some of his neighbors, he was not oppos-3d to the idea of a historic
district. He said that the ordinance should be written to preserve
the cultural value, but not restrict the rights of property owners
in the district. He said that a historic district might increase
property values but that he did not wish his property to be included.
Mr. Lowry stated that an ordinance allowing the historical zoning of
individual properties and regulating the establishment of historic
districts was passed in 1980, He said the ordinance has been filed
with the United Stated 'apartment of Interior so that the people who
have historical zoiting would be able to obtain tax advantages. He
said that a certificate of appropriateness is a blank form that can
be filled out and is to be used as an internal document, He reite-
rated that the purpose of the public hearing is to decide which
properties would apply to the City of Denton ordinance 90-30.
Ms. Bdyvean asked if her property is included in the proposed
historic district.
Mr. Boyd said yes.
Ms. bdyvean said that it had been mentioned that there is a
possibility that property values would increase because of the
historic district. She said that she could foresee that possi-
bility on Oak Street but not on Hickory Street because there are
so many appartments and homes that are not well maintained. She said
that she is afraid that a historic district might cause her property
to be valued at more than anyone would want to pay to llve next to
run-down houses or apartments,
Mr. Cochran said that it is the hope of the Historic Landmark
Commission that the historic district would be an attractive feature
of the neighborhood and would encourage land owners in and around
the district to maintain their properties,
Ms. bdyvean asked if future owners would be prohibited from putting
in apartment complexes.
Mr. Boyd stated that the ordinance does prohibit chancaing the
historical nature of the property. He said that the Historic Land-
mark Commission and City Council would have to approve .2 demo'litio,1
of a house and its replacement with apartments. He said that cur-
eent uses are not in any way affected by the historic district and
the purpose of the district is to maintain the character of the
neighborhood. Ho also said that the property is currently zoned
for residential type uses and any other usage would rquire a zoning
: , r
HLC minutes
July 30; 1966
Page 7
change. He said that although the property owner might lose the
abilityy to pput in apartments their nel hbors would also and there-
fore the neighborhood arability would ~e maintained. He said that
the very nature of toning is to place certain restrictions on prop-
erty owners sd that the surrounding property can be protected.
Ms. Boyaean asked if she could remove a porch that had been added
after the hou,e was built.
Mr. Boyd said that if the exterior facade was offected, a short
appearance before the Historic Landmark Commission would be neces-
sary to explain the reason for the action and a certificate of
appropriateness could be issued. He stated that this is only a
precautionarey step. He said that the Historic Lundmark Commission
would not deny requests that were in keeping with the character of
the neighborhood. He said that to his knowledge the Histe.-ic Land-
mark Commission had never denied anyone with a reasonable equest.
Ms. lidyvean asked how long it took to process a request.
Mr. Lowry stated that the Historic Landmark Commission meets once
a month.
Mr. Boyd stated that the Historic Landmark Commission had never
turned down a request for a special meeting.
Mr. Lowry stated that the Historic Landmark Commission's guidelines
are cross-referenced to the Secretary of. the Department of the
Interior's Standards fox Rehabilitations and the National Trust for
Historic Preservation's Guide to Rehabilitation. He said that these
documents are legally binding upon the Historic Landmark Coitlmission.
Richard Rdyvean, 1000 West Hickory, asked if the proposed historic
district woule affect the single, fafaily and multi-family relation-
ships or if It Just affected the exterior maintenance of the
buildings.
Mr. Boyd stated that the basic zoning that is already in place would
be unaffected because the historic zoning t& an overlay type of zon-
ing. He said that it would be possible for lack-zoning to +,ccur if
anyone wanted to change their zoning back tr single family,
Mr. Lowry stated that Ordinance 80-30 a. ing with the establishment
of a historic district is an amendment to the City of Denton Code of
ordinances. He said that a set of standards have been required and
the Historic Landmark Commission has adopted the standards used by
the united States Department of the Interior.
Paul Davidson, representing Delta Sigma Phi Fraternity Gamma XI at
1018 West oak, stated that his organization is opposed to being
included in the historic district because they are unsure of their
future plans for the property.
Mr. Lowry stated that the Historic Landmark Commission had originally
excluded the property but the last Issue of the fraternity's publica-
tion boasted that the building was about to be included in a historic
district. He said that he had talked to Hs; Jackson, a reptasents-
tive of the Alumni Control Board, and had been told that the fratern-
ity wished to be included.
Mr. Davidson stated that thn organization wished to be eligible for
ineli:,ion but not included in the historic district,
mr. Lowry stated that the Historic Landmark "oemission would need
a statement in writing to that effect because they had included the
property due to a statement of Hal Jackson, the Control Board's legal
representative.
Brian Kruger, 614 West Hickory, stated that he is opposed to the
district. He said that although the north side of Hickory Street is
included in the bvindaries of the historic district, the name of the
i
HLC Minutes
July 30, 1986
?age a
district is the West Oak Street Historic District. He said that he
felt that the houses on Oak Street were well protected, but if a
home owner on the north side of Hickory Street did any improvements,
there was no guarantee that the property on the south side of Hickory
Street wouldn't develop into apartments and ruin the investments of
home owners on the north side. He said that if there Is going to be
a historic district, it should include both sides of Hickory Street.
He said that everything on Mulberry had been built after 1950 and
everything on Hickory was older so it would be better to draw the
boundary line between Mulberry and Hickory instead of down the middle
of Hickory Street. He said that he would be in favor of the district
under those circumstances.
Mr. Boyd stated that Mr. Kruger made a good argument for the
inclusion of the south side of Hickory Street. He said that the
boundaries had to be drawn somewhere and they had included a whole
block. He said that the south side of Hickory Street is likely to
be added to the district in the future.
Mr. Kruger said that there is no guarantee that this would occur In
the future and asked if it is possible to change the boundaries now.
Mr. Lowry stated that there is a time limit nvolved with the passage
of the district. He said the Historic Landmark Commission would
have no objection if the property owners on the south side of Hickory
Street petitioned to be included in the district.
Mr. Kruger said that he supported preservation but could not support
the proposed historic district unless the south side of Hickory
Street is included in the district.
Mr. Cochran stated that the petition for historic zc,ning had came
from area residents, and that the historic. district was not an
original idea of the Historic Landmark Commission.
Ms. Conrady asked if resident^ of Hickory Street had signed the
petition.
Mr. Lowry said that nobody on the south side had signed, just the
north side.
Mr. Le Claire asked how many persons had signed the petition to have
historic zoning.
Mr. Boyd replied about 50 or 60 had signed.
Mr. Le Claire said that there were not that many homes in the
district.
Mr. Lowry stated that some properties were jointly owned by more
than one person.
Mr. 8dyvean stated that he is in favor of the proposed district and
would also be in favor of the inclusion of the south side of hickory
Street.
Richard Hayes, 819 West Oak, stated that he felt the main issue of
concern is the boundaries of the proposed district. He said that he
was in favor of at least the boundaries as presently drawn and that
no Individual property should be excluded in order to maintain con-
sistency and orderly development of a significant historical area.
Murray Ricks, 705 West Oak, said that his family had lived in Denton
for four generations and that he had always been proud of Oak Street
any the old houses in the area. He said that over the years he has
seen irreplacable houses fall by the wayside. He said that the
historic district will function as a protective cocoon for these
homes and should be started and then oxpanded as necessary or as
requtrted. He said that the historic district would improve and
enhancL the City as a whole.
i
HLC Minutes
July 30, 1986
Page 9
Ms. Conrody stated that she agreed with Mr. Ricks, She said that
when she moved here from Baltimore, she wondered about the historic
consciousness of Denton. She said that she is proud of Denton and
that is why s!e is on the Historic Landmark Commission. She said
that the goal of the Commission is to protect, increase the value
of, and create pride in Denton 's history, She said that anyone who
has ever traveled to a historic district can easily see the value of
one.
Chair declared public hearing closed,
Mr. Cochran stated that he owned rental property within the proposed
district and that he is willing to s^-jpt the obligations involved.
He said that he felt it would tncre.oo the value of his property and
that he considered the entailed obligations a gift to the community,
Mr. Lowry stated that there is a notion that the ordinance allowing
for the creation of a historic district appeared overnight. He said
that the notion is incorrect. He said that a number of residents on
Uak Street were concorned about what was happening to the area.
These residents asked the County Historical commission what could
be done to protect their neighborhood. The County Historical Com-
mission asked the Texas Historical Commission which sent a City
Preservation officer to Denton to meet with 0e pproperty owr: rs.
It was decided that a historical district would be the best a proach
to solving the problems. A subcommittee was appointed to look at
model ordinances, The Denton Ordinance took two years to create.
Public hearings were held, the ordinance was revised, and endorsed
by both the Planning and Zoning Commissiun an' the City Council.
The Driskell Hotel case tested the Austin Ore$R)nce upon which the
Denton Urdinance is based. The Austin Urdinat, a was upheld although
its lack of time limits was criticized. Time limits were then in-
cluded in the Denton Ordinance,
Mr. Boyd stated that the ordinance has good and bad points. He said
that on a whole, it is a good attempt to do a good thing in preserv-
ing the historic nature of the neighborhood. He said that he
believes that Denton is a better city because of zoning and that
the historic district is a step in the right direction.
Mr. Marino stated that the houses on Oak Street are getting older
and that if they aren't saved now it will be too late.
Mr, Miller said that an example of lack of zoning is Houston. He
said that the historic district does not just include the finer
homes but also some modest homes. He said that the historical value
of a structure does not depend on how fine it is, but that the struc-
ture is part of Denton's history,
Mr. Lowry asked about the possibility of changing the name of the
div'rict.
Mr.. Morris said that a name change would be al" right, but no
substantial changes could be made at this stage in the process
without another public hearing. He clarified the process by saying
that the Historic Landmark Commission's recommendation goes before
the Planning and Zoning Commission which will also hold a public
hearing. He said that the Planning and Zoning Commission then makes
a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council holds a
public hearing also, and if the proposal is passed a formal ordi-
nance will be written by the legal department.
Mr. Lowry moved that the name of the historic district and all
the supporting documents be retitled to the Oak Street and Hickory
Street Historic District. Seconded by Mr. Boyd,
Mr. Boyd amended the name to the Oak Street, Hickory Street, Denton
Street, Historic District. Seconded by Mr. Marino.
HI,C Minutes
July 30, 1986
Page 10
Ms. Conrady asked if there was a better term, She said that
the pproposed name was too long although she agreed with it
philisophically,
Mr. Lowry said that he would vote against the amendment because
it was unnecessarily complicated,
Mr. Boyd withdrew his amendment and Mr. Marino withdrew his second.
Mr. Boyd suggested the First Denton Historical District as a name.
Ms. Conrady moved that the name be the Oak-Hickory Historic
District. Seconded by Mr. Dickey.
Noll call vote:
Boyd - Aye
Conrady - Aye
Fickey - Aye
Lowry - Aye
Marino - Aye
Matthews - Aye
Miller - Aye
Cochran - Aye
Motion unanimously carried (8-0).
Roll call vote on original motion;
Boyd - Aye
Conrady - Aye
Fickey - Aye
Lowry - Aye
Marino - Aye
Matthews - Aye
Miller - Aye
Cochran - Aae
Motion unanimously carried (8-0),
Mr. Fickey stated that he understood and appreciated the objections
of some of the property owners. He said that he is a public servant
and wants to help peo;ale. He said that other historic districts he
had ohserved were attractive and did not depreciate property values.
He said that he felt the Oak-Hickory Historic District was needed
yesterday.
Mr. Lowry moved that the Historic Landmark Commission recommended
approval of the Oak-Hickory Historic District to the Planning and
Zoning Commission using the boundaries as drawn and with the exclu-
sion of those previously noted as eligible but not included.
Seconded by Mr. Boyd,
Mr. Cochran stated that he appreciated philisophically the arguments
that had been presented, lie said that although everyone in the dis-
trict may feel a little intruded upon he felt the historic district
would protect the owners investments in their homes and would be of
benefit to the neighborhood, He invited interested persons to feel
free to discuss the matter with him or other Historic Landmark Com-
mission members.
Roll call vote:
Boyd - Aye
Conrady - Aye
Pickey - Aye
Lowry - Aye
Marino - Aye
Matthews - Aye
Miller Aye
Cochran - Aye
Motion unanimously carried (8-U).
Mr, Cochran stated that the proposal will proceed to the planning
and Zoning Commission and City Council. He invited the audience
to exercise their rights and attend these meetings,
E, Minutes
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 13, 1986
The regular muering of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the
City of Denton, Texas was held on Wednesday, August 13, 1986, at
a:UO p.m., in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Building.
1. MINUPUS: It was moved by Mr. Uscue, seconded by Ms. Brock and
unanTmously carried (7-0) to approve the minutes of the
regular meeting of July 9, 1986.
11. RUSULUTION: In appreciation of Gary L. Juren.
Ill. CUNSUNT AGENDA: It was moved by Ms. Brock, seconded by
MrGlasscockk~and unanimously carried (7-0) to approve the
consent agenda as follows:
A. Approval of preliminary and final plat of the
Avenue B Addition, Lot 1, Block 1.
B. Recommer,d approval of preliminary plat of the
Green and Moora Addition.
C. Approval of final plat of the Holbert-Wyatt Addition,
Lots 1 find 2, Block 1.
D. Approval of preliminary and final plat of the
Richardson Addition, Lots 1 and 2, Block A.
Is. Approval of c-Irrected plat of the Summtrwind Addition,
Phase 1.
F, Approval of preliminary and final plat of the
3-J Addition, Lot 1, Block A.
1V, PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Petition of the Denton Historic Landmark Commission
ceques n~In %hT_sforr' aandmarTsTFTci-deTgnarlon
for the Usk -Hickory Historic District. The boundaries
of the proposed district are as follows:
The north side of Oak Street from 610 West Oak west to the
Intersection of Oak and Fulton streets, with the exception
of the property located at 918 West Oak Street.
The south side of Oak Street from 609 West Oak west to the
intersection of West Usk and Welch streets, with the excep-
tion of the property located at 903 Nest Oak Street,
'file north side of Hickory Street from the intersection of
Hickory and Welch streets to the Intersection of Hickory
and Williams streets.
The east side of Denton Street from the intersection of
Denton and Oak streets to the intersection of Denton and
Pearl streets,
The south side of. Pearl Street from 607 Pearl west to the
intersection of Pearl and Denton streets,
The property is more particularly described as City of
Denton block numbers 328, 329, 330, 336, 4760 488 and
part of block 475.
Fift -nine notices were mailed to property owners within
tho boundaries of the district; twenty-three reply forms
were received in favor, twelve reply forms were received
in opposition, two reply forms were received from property
owners excluded from the district.
Y $ Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 2
Lee LeLlair, 914 West Uak, asked if lots 4.1 and 4,1 on
Gregg Street were excluded frog the district. Ms. Spivey
said yes.
A member of the audience asked if 903 and 918 West Oak were
still proposed excluded from the district. Mr. Claiborne
stated that this item could be addressed later in the staff
report.
PHTITIONBR: Mike Cochran, Chairman of the Historic Land-
mar CEiRTssion, stated that the Commission unanimously re-
commended approval of the Clstoric District. He said that
the Commission felt an obligation to protect the invest-
ments, homes and residents of this propose; district and
to preserve one of the last remaining intact older neigh-
borhoods, He said that this area has been in transition
for a number of years and it is not the commission's intent
to stop development but to insure the transition would pro-
ceed in moderation. He said that the cJty-wide zoning that
was done in 1969 zoned this area multi-family. He said the
people in this area realized that a rapid deterioration of
the area was occurring and a number of citizens formed an
organization and sou ht to stem encroachment and provide
protection of the neighborhood. He said that the culmina-
tion of the efforts of this committee was Ordinance 80-30.
He said that the ordinance provided a system for preserva-
tion, designation of historic structLres and creation of
historic districts. He added that he lives in the city
and in this proposed district. He said that the Historic
Landmark Commission feels that a historic district is a
good thing for the city and they urge support,
Mr. Claiborne asked why 903 and 918 West Oak were excluded
from the city. Mr. Cochran stated that the owners,
Mr. Pearco and Mr. Doggett, opposed the district over the
years and the Commission felt it was not worth the has-
sle to fight with them. He said that he felt subsequent
owners of the property would want :o be included in the
district. He said that it is not the Commission's desire
to force anyone and that in his opinion the ordinance was
not strong enough.
Ms. Brock stated that she received five letters in opposi-
tion requesting properties be excluded. Mr. Cochran stated
that if the creation of the district is in jeopardy the
Commission would be willing to exclude the properties. He
said that the district is weakened by exclusions. He said
that the district is being set up for protection and the
residents have a right to live in a residential neighbor-
hood.
Mr, Holt asked if in the 19ZU9 were the houses on Oak
Street all painted white. Mr. Cochran stated that he was
not sure but that from the research that he has done most
of the houses were white.
Mr. Holt asked if the house is not painted a period color
will the owner be prevented from painting a particular
color that he has chosen, Mr. Cochran stated that most of
the houses in the district are colored. lie stated that
the Commission is not trying to turn back the clock with
the district but trying to provide some protection for
this older intact neighborhood, He said that paint color
is a minor part of the proposal and a broad spectrum of
colors are acceptable. He said that some houses with a
historic designation have been painted without permission.
P $ Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 3
Mr, Holt asked about If the owner decided to Install
aluminum siding. Mr. Cochran stated that there are a
variety of sidings. He said that the owner is required to
appear before the Historic Landmark Commission and if the
Commission does not make a du~lslon within thirty days the
owner can go ahead and do lmpr6vements. He said if denied
the owner can appeal to the Planning and Zoning Commission
' and City Council,
Mr, Holt asked about repairs that are not economically
feasible for the owner. Mr. Cochran stated that the
Commission could offer options in the form of grants. He
stated that the Commission takes economic hardsisip into
consideration.
Mr. Holt asked about cities of this size that have
historic districts. Mr. Cochran stated that 110 cities in
the State of Texas have historic districts. Ms. Spivey
stated that Uainesville and Mcginney have historic
districts.
Mr. Holt asked if all of Uak Street was zoned multi-family
in 1969. Mr. Cochran said that It was all multi-family
and some of the property owners have rezoned or backzoned
their property to single family,
Mr. Holt asked how many of the property owners could build
apartments. Mr. Cochran said all property zoned multi
family except the property with historic designation and
619 West Oak.
Ms, Brock asked about the tax advantages to historic
zoning. Mr. Cochran stated that the Commission has
Proposed and passed a tax abatement for houses with
historic designation, He said that it amounts to a freeze
on appraisals for ten years and a fifty percent abatement
including multi-family and non-owner occupied structures.
He said that the dollar amount is symbolic but that the
taxes would be reduced. He said that there has been some
unfairness to property owners with renovations and this
document recognizes the unfairness and underscores
services that historic houses provide to the city as a
whole,
IN FAVUR: Richard 8dyvean, 1000 West Hickory, stated that
by a op ing this resolution this Commission would be
making a strong statement in favor of preserving Denton's
architectural heritage, lie said that he is a resident
property owner in the proposed district, He said that
they are restoring their house and have been for two
years. He said that the north side of Hickory Street has
a wealth of small and large properties and needs the
protection of historic designation. He said that two
homes have been bulldozed and apartments have replaced
them. He said that if the district is not approved
Hickory Street will lose most of the homes due to pressure
by developers. He sold that the district will provide
character and ambiance and that he feels this is the last
chance for preservation.
Paula Carpenter, 723 West Oak, stated that she and her
husband own the Lomax house. She said that they have been
very such In favor of the district for six years. She
said that she has admired Oak and Hickory streets for
years and was surprised that they were not protected by a
district. She said that she felt the residents have more
at stake than a rental property owner or person that owns
property that lives out of town. She said that her house
has a historic designation and they had no vroble■ in
painting their house. She said that she fe;.t ,hat they
f
Y 5 Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 4
were giving a gift to the city and that they wanted some
protection from the extremities. She said that the
property behind her house was bulldozed and apartments
were built. She said that the property in this area is
unstable and the residents are desperate and that they
cannot go on indefinitely. She said that the historic
ambiance and atmosphere draw people to the area and that
she urged and pleaded for a favorable vote.
Richard Hayes, 819 West Usk, stated that Nis home has a
historic designation, lie said that he recommended
adoption of' the proposed ordinance to stop the erosion of
the neighborhood. He said even though his property is
zoned multi-family it does not take away from the
historical or architectural significance, He said that he
recommended that no one be excluded from the district
because the integrity of the district would be weakened
and also is a grave injustice to the individuals in the
district, fie said that they needed a district, not a
checkerboard one,
Mr. Holt asked when the idea of a historic district
started, Mr. Hayes said four to six years ago.
Randall Boyd, 1013 West Oak, stated that the ordinance has
been in effect six years and is the response to the
neighbors concerns. He said that he worked on the
adoption of the basic ordinance before the Historic
Landmark Commission was created and before the realization
of a historic district. he said that he would like to
keep the integrity of Denton. He said that visitors to
the City of Denton are taken down Oak and Hickory streets
and at one time were taken much further down the streets.
He said that only about 10 percent of the old homes are
left In this area and fewer houses will be left if the
district is not approved. He said that the City Council
felt preservation was important enough to pass an
ordinance. He said that this is a fine neighborhood and
it needs to be protected and if this area is not preserved
not only will Denton suffer but so will his family. He
said that he has been on the Historic Landmark Commission
for six years and has been appointed for two more years
and that he urged the Commissioners to approve the
proposed district,
Diane kicks stated that they had just purchased their home
at 705 West Oak and have been there a month, She said
that this is a family oriented area and that a trend has
started on Hickory Street to preserve the houses. She
said that she was interested In this area when she was a
student and that it needs to be preserved for everyone.
Elizabeth Lomax stated that she lived at 723 west Oak from
1911 to 1980, She said that when she could no longer
afford the upkeep, the Carpenters purchased the property
and have made it a beautiful home, She said that this
area means a great deal as part of Denton's heritage. She
said that the historic district will aid the young people
to put money in houses that are substantial and need to Le
maintained.
Jackie Swanson, Lot 13 with historic designation, stated
that her family is in favor. She said that they are
builders and owners of apartments, She said that she is
not opposed to a variety of uses of these houses. She
added that they should be preserved. She said that the
house at the corner of Oak and Bryan was preserved afid
made into a 6 unit apartment house and she said that she
believed it is an asset to the neighborhood.
P 6 Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 5
Becky Wright, 912 West Oak, stated that their home is not
a historic house because it was built in the 1940s. She
said that the'character of the historic area needs to be
preserved for future generations, especially the historic
designated. She said that she has lived in this area of
town for 6 months and is in favor.
Russell Smith, 308 Marietta, stated that he has rental
property in the proposed district. He said that historic
district would be a real asset and thinks these blocks
should be saved from developers, He said it is a small
gesture and is In favor.
Murray Ricks, 705 West Oak, stated that the Chamber of
Commerce uses Oak and Hickory streets as a selling point
for Denton. He said that Denton needs healthy growth and
needs area tha shows stability. He added that there
needs to be a sense of history and is much in favor.
Don Vann, 811 West Oak, asked those in favor to stand.
Approximately 25 people stood up.
OPPOSED: Bill Doggett, 918 West Oak, stated that his
property had been excluded because of his fight against
the proposed historic district, He stated that he
appreciated the time, money and effort expended by those
property owners in this district in preserving the beauty
of the old homes. He said that he is not at all at odds
with the idea of historic preservation but is opposed to
the stringent restrictions of the ordinance. He said that
he plans to do extensive remodeling and refurbishing of
his home and would like to feel free to choose the
architecture and paint, brick, and other materials that he
deems appropriate.
Mr. Claiborne asked if he planned to use masonry, Mr.
Doggett said that his intent is to enlarge and he would
like to use brick on the lower and front parts of the
house and shutters on windows.
Terrell King, 714 West Hickory and 601 West Oak, stated
that his first opinion is that any individual who wants
historic desiggnation for his property Is certainly
entitled but he does not feel that anyone should be forced
to have historic zoning. He stated that he had a
difficult time with his property at 714 West Hickory in
regards to the Historic Landmark Commission. He stated
that this property improved the neighborhood and numerous
people park in their parking lot because there is not room
enough for adjacent renters to park, He added that if the
district is approved it will deteriorate the neighborhood,
Bob Crouch, 812, 814, and 814 and 1/2 West Hickory, stated
that he is not opposed to an individual's right to ask for
and receive historic designation on his property;
likewise, other property owners have right to use their
property for what they deem appropriate, He added that he
would like to have his properties excluded from the
district.
Mr, Holt asked when he bought the propperty. Mr. Crouch
stated that he bought the properties in 1966.
Mr. Crouch asked those in opposition to stand.
Approximately 1S people stood up.
Mr. Holt asked those who are opposed that live in the
district to stand.
P i Z Minutes
August 13, 1980
Page n
Approximately 6 people stood up.
H. W. Lantrip, 1004 West Uak, stated that he would like
very such to be excluded. He said that he thought this
was a free country and he felt he kept his property up as
best he could. He said that he is not against historic
designation or the district being next door to him.
Mr. Kamman asked Mr. Lantrip about the zoning of his
property. Mr. Lantrip said he thought multi-family.
Bob Pearce, 903 West Oak, stated that the other side does
not have a monopoly on wanting to preserve the old homes
and that he has been practicing historic preservation for
the past 20 years. He said that the point is that there
are two groups and one group is trying to make it look
like the opposition to the district is against preserving
old homes. He said that he sent letters to everyone that
didn't have historic designation and he received 24
letters from these tracts that agreed with him. He said
that those in favor were trying to gain control of those
who did not want to be included, He said that the Benton
Board of Realtors passed a resolution in opposition to
formation of this district two years ago and believes it
still stands. He said that he believes that the argument
about apartments has nothing to do with this historic
district.
Ms. Brock asked how many that agreed with his letter
actually live in the district. Mr. Pearce stated that ten
live in the district. He said he believed that all had
the same right to oppose. Ms. Brock stated that their
interest was a little different.
Ms. Brock asked if his plan for preservation of the
historic nature of Oak Street is by voluntary action, She
asked if he would like his house to sit in Isolation and
wouldn't he prefer to preserve the context in which his
house sits. Mr. Pearce stated that the market place has
taken care of this problem because the houses are too
valuable to tear down. Ms. Brock asked about a reversible
market condition. Mr. Pearce stated that these properties
arc, too much in demand.
Mr. Claiborne asked what if apartments were built on both
sides of his property. Mr. Pearce stated that a historic
designation would not prevent this from happening. He
said that if the property is zoned multi-family that no
one can stop the property owner from building apartments.
He said that the property owner could tear down an
existing structure and could get approval from the
Historic Landmark Commission. He :aid that if the
property is zoned single family on both sides of his
property then he would be protected.
Mr. Claiborne stated that the property owner would have to
appear before the Historic Landmark Commission, the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council before
demolishing to build apartments. Mr. Pearce said that the
inevitable could only be postponed for three months. He
said that if a person has to go before a board for
permission to do improvements then rights are being taken
away.
MEN
P i Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 7
Don Davis, co-owner 'of 700 West Hickory, stated that this
pro arty is part of him income to make mortgage payments
on his now property. Hv said that he is in opposition
because the proposed district,is not in his best
interest. He said that tax dollars can be better spent in
lieu of budget cuts and hard times.
Lee Le Clair, 914 West oak, stated that he was in favor of
preserving the architectural significance in the truly
' historic buildings throughout the city but cannot support
this historic district because of the way the ordinance is
written. He said the ordinance establishing historic
zoning is a great usurption of the rights of a property
owner, He said that the ordinance says 60 days before a
property owner can do what he wants with his property if
no decision is made byy the Historic Landmark Commission
instead of 30 days, He said that if one doesn't agree
with the Landmark Commission the recourse is City Council
only on demolitions, He said if one doesn't agree with
the historic Landmark Commission it cannot be brought back
before the Commission until a year has lapsed. He said
that the residents are not able to make their own
decisions about their house but a government appointed
body can. He said at the Historic Landmark Commission
public hearing, even though the opposition was two to one,
the historic district was passed unanimously. He said
that the proposed historic district has not followed the
letter of the ordinance but perhaps the spirit. He said
that he would not oppose with these conditions; 1) Only
facades visible from the street could be restricted; 2)
Current set of pictures of street facades be taken after
City Council approval within 10 days; and 3) Grandfather
existing residences and add a clause that states as the
boundaries noted now that it applies only to those
residents voluntarily enrolled by present owner and such
enrollment to be irrevocable and all residents not
voluntarily enrolled shall be automatically enrolled at
change of ownership.
Mr. Claiborne stated that the third condition is not
possible because of ownership versus land use issue, He
said that this 's not in the realm of the Commission.
Ms. Brock asked how long had he lived in the area. Mr. Le
Clair said two years and prior to that he lived in a tract
home In Lewisville and hated it. He said that he could
not accept a government agency coming in and saying what
is best for him. He stated that he has an apartment
building next to him now that is much older but he would
respect the right of the owner if he tore the structure
down and built new apartments rather than let the existing
structure deteriorate,
Mr. Claiborne stated that the ordinance and proposed
district is a mechanism to challenge demolitions. Mr. Le
Clair stated that he would like to have that kind of
mechanism without having the other requirements.
STAFF k8PORT: Ms. Spivey stated that there is strong
feelings ar►3 opinions on both sides. She said that the
Zoning Ordinance defines a historic zoning district as a
goo raphical area possessing a significant concentration,
lin age or continuity of buildings, structures, sites,
areas or land which are united by architectural,
historical, archeological or cultural importance or
significance. She said that the Historic Landmark
Commission has voted specifically on each property to be
Included and criteria sheets are available in the file and
the minutes. She added that the ordinance states that
P 4 Z Minutes
August 121, 1980
Yale 8
the structures have to meet one requirement. She said
. that this district is particularly concerned with West Oak
and West Hickory. She said that there are currently 14
structures with historical designation and all other
properties in the district are eligible for individual
designation. She said that most of the structures were
built by the early business and civic leaders of Denton.
She said that the area is ellyable for a historic district
for the following reasons: 1) some structures have
' architectural significance, l) value as part of the
social, cultural and historic heritage of Denton, 3) area
has identified with a person or persons that have
contributed to the culture or development of the city and
4) area does have aspect of community sentiment or public
pride. She said that the Zoning Ordinance declares as a
policy for the nature of historic preservation the
Following purposes: 1) to protect, enhance and
perpetuate histo:Ic landmarks which represent or reflect
distinctive and important elements of the City and the
State's architectural, archoologlcal, cultural, social,
economic, ethnic and political history and to develop
appropriate settings for these places, 2) to safeguard
the City's historic and cultural heritage as embodied and
reflected in these landmarks by establishing appropriate
regulations, 3) to stabalize and improve property values
in these locations, 4) to foster civic pride in the
beauty and accomplishments of the past, 5) to protect and
enhance the City's attractions to tourists and visitors
and to provide incidental suppport and stimulus to business
and industry, 6) to strengthen the economy of the City
and 7) to promote the use of historic landmarks for the
culture, prosperity, education and the general welfare of
the people of the City and visitors to tho City. She said
that the establishment of the proposed historic district
would comply with the policies of the Zonin$ Ordinance,
She said that the Historic Landmark Commission considered
this item at its ,July 3U, 1986 meeting and voted
unanimously (8-0) to approve the proposed district,
Mss Brock asked about historic designation and what it
involved. Ms, Spivey stated that those property owners
have applied to the Historic Landmark Commission for
individual designation as a historic landmark, She added
that they have provided information to justify their
claims that the structure is historic. She said the case
is then forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission
and then to the City Council for adoption of an ordinance.
Ms. Brock asked if this amounted to spot historic zoning.
She asked if they had to have permission to do
remodeling. Ms. Spivey said yes. She said that the
property owners with a historic designation have to got
permission to remodel exterior and request a certificate
of appropriateness by submitting plans and nature of
remodeling. She said that several had been through this
process.
Mr. Claiborne asked how Gainesville and McKinney handled
changes in their districts, Ms. Spivey stated that
without the ordinance she could not tell between the
differences or similarities,
Mr, Claiborne asked if the basis criteria is by the U.S.
Department of the Interior. Ms. Spivey stated that the
standards that the Historic Landmark Commission has
P 5 Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 9
proposed to be adopted as part of district If approved are
the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
She said that they are the suggested guidelines for the
proposed district.
xBBUT"PAL7 Mr. Cochran stated that he appreciated those
w o spo a in favor or in opposition. He said that Mr. Le
Clair's statement about appearing before the Clty Council
In 60 days is incorrect. He said according to the
• ordinance a petitioner may appeal within 30 days to the
City Council after a Historic Landmark Commission
decision. He said that It has been suggested that the
andtthat IseIncorrect. He stated thave hat he been that
there are more than 34 structures in this district that
have historic significance. He said that the pictures are
not out-of-date as suggested and were taken after the t hi onmtpphetCommisslon Issnotiakconflict ofaInterest but anal
Mr. earce'seletterhand sent I It back to him. h He received that
numbaelrsowassenntotthreeflletter
Pearce's Mures. He said
that this is an opportunity to make a statement on how the
city wants to live and develop. He said that he
recognized problems with the ordinance and encouraged
suggestions. He said that he believed it was his
stewardship as a citizen to maintain the property until
the next property owner came along, He said that this
ordinance provides a mechanism to slow down the process of
decline.
Chair declared public hearing closed,
DECISION; Mr, Claiborne stated that there are valid
Favor sides. a valid argument
area. He on othat
it is their goal as a Commission to preserve Denton, He
said that he wished a historic district existed eighteen
years ago before a lot of the erosion occurred between
Carroll Boulevard and Bonnie Brae, He said that the
opposition had a legitimate complaint in that they would
have to appear before the Historic Landmark Commission
before changing the exterior of their house. He said that
a historic district would help preserve the facades and
properties with historic designations because there is a
lot of multi-family zoning In this area. He said that
there is sufficient architectural styles on Hickory Street
to include as well. He said that he would favor district
as proposed,
Ms. Brock stated that several of the Commissioners have
b
strong een on the Land Use Planning Committee and have a very gg
Denton'sodistinctive a r
characte~andeseparareaidentity.piShe
said that this area is a community resource. She said
that the Commission has a responsibility to people and
they need the support and protection from the community.
She said that she Is proud to show newcomers and visitors
Oak and Hickory Streets. She said that this proposed
district is a step in the right direction.
Mr.
rrightHol issnaphilosophicaleargument. Heksoldarhatpheperry
d
idn't realize how important material things meant to him
unti he
surprisedcatehowback
much was gone. Denton
He tsAidythatrsoBetimes
one has to waive private rights for the public good. He
said that he was fortunate enough to see the historic
P 6 2 minutes
August 13, 1996
Page lu
district form in San Antonlo. He said that Gainesville
attributes its success of the historic district to Its
ordinance. He said that if they can do anything to
preserve some of the past, he Is in favor.
Ms. Brock moved to recommend approval of the Oak-Hickory
Historic District. Seconded by Mr, hscue.
Mr. liscue stated that everyone has to abide by rules they
don't like but that the underlying philosophy is that the
district would be better for the city.
Motion unah:mously carried (7.0),
DATE: 09/16/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT VORMAT
96
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR z-1827
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and zoning Commission considered this item at its
meeting of August 131 1986 and voted to recommend approval of z-1827
with conditions by a vote of 5-2.
SUMMARY:
This is a request for a change in zoning from the agric«ltural (A)
district to the planned development (PD) classification on a
80.8 acre tract located on the south side of East McKinney Street
(P.M. 426) approximately three miles east of Loop 288. If approved,
the planned development will permit the development of single family
attached and SF-51 SF-6 and SF-7 lots.
BACKGROUND:
This proposal complies with Denton Development Guide policies
regarding intensity and diversified land use and is compatible w! h
surrounding zoning and land uses.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Not applicable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
TI-ere is no impact on the general fund.
Re ctfuI s wbmtt
yd Harrell
Prepared by: City Manager
s r '
t}A,.,.e 4 'd" Denise spigey r
Urban Planner
App ve s
Jeff Me
Director of Planning
and Development
0293k
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
To: Denton City Council
Case No.: Z-1827 Meeting Date: September 16, 1986
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Oak Hill Joint Venture
5485 Belt Line Road, Suite 380
Dallas, Texas 75240
Status of Applicant: Owner
Requested Action: Change in zoning from the
agricultural (A) district to the
planned development (PD)
classification. If approved, the
planned development will permit the
following lend uses:
1) Single family attached - 164 units
on 13.94 acres with a density of 11.7
units per acre.
2) SF-5 - 62 units on minimum 5,000
square foot lots on 11,25 acres with
a density of 5.51 units per acre.
3) SF-6 - 77 units on minimum 6,000
square foot lots on 22.85 acres with
a density of 3.37 units per acre.
4) SF-7 -117 units on minimum 7,000
square foot lots on 32.96 acres with
a density of 3.55 units per acre.
Location and Size: An 80.8 acre tract located on the
south side of East McKinney Street
(F,M, 426) approxisoately 3 miles east
of Loop 288.
Surrounding Land Use
and Zoning: North - Single family residence,
Mobile Home Parks A
South - Vacant= A
East - Vacant; A
West - Vacant, single family
residences At PD
Denton Development Guide: Low intensity area
(Case Z-1827)
Page Three
ANALYSIS (continued)
The Development Guide recommends diversified land use in low
intensity areas. The original submittal included single family
attached and single family detached (SF-5, SF-6) land uses.
Staff suggested the addition of some SF-7 lots in the southern
section of the property since most of the smaller lots and
affordable housing in the city are being concentrated and
proposed in east Denton. Affordable and unconventional housing
and lot sizes are desirable but an over-concentration in one
quadrant of the city is not recommended. The proposal was
revised to add seventeen SF-7 lots to the development. Staff
recommends that the SF-7 area be :Increased to the 1.7 acre open
space area in order to create a more equitable distribution of
land use and a better transition between lot sizes.
This development is not within the service area of an existing
neighborhood park and the City is concerned about the amount of
residential development in the area with no resultant increase
in parkland. The Parks and Recreation Department has adopted
the standard that three acres of parkland per 11000 population
or one acre of land per 100 dwelling units be donated resulting
in the recommendation that 4.03 acres of this development be
donated to the City for a park area. The developer has offered
and the City will accept a dedication of the 5.85 acre tract
proposed as open space in parcel D.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning commission considered this item at its
meeting of August 13, 1986 and voted to recommend approval of
z-1827 with the following conditions:
1. Sidewalks will be required on one side of all public streets
in the development,
2. Electric service in the development will be underground with
the exception of major distribution lines.
3. The fencing shown on the concept plan in parcels A and B
shall be erected before any building permits are issued on
those parcels.
4. A detailed plan shall be submitted consistent with concept
plan, development schedule, and development standards.
(Case Z^1827)
Page Four
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve petition
2. Approve petition with additional conditions
3. Deny petition
ATTACHMENTS
1, Location Map
2. Concept Man
3. Development Standards
4. Mailing List
5, Reply Form Totals
6. Minutes of Planning and zoning Commission Meeting of August
13, 1966
0236o/4
~1. - - - - POP 20
AMW*mm
•
30
AP
' • N r
.1
_
. . . ;r, 1 . ,
. 4S 426
_ c`*1 _
Poster Rd
Moyhill
r~
z
gov.
LPockrmt Rd ; I
H ' HOME
S
19 .0
ore sil
r _1 I \ IIAW r. Wrr • 11
I ~.i r'~ YrA 1 ` r Ir~A ' 1
I •
' lhiUla~ MIIOrOaO
tJI U"m '
M A&
~i ..,w-ILI
'I
' man.. ~ rr~rr rnn
' ua+nr
i
1
s' •ssoo' '
.wwon.. J~
mm '
naessaa
' ..w,w,isWasia {
anti ULM
AN AVY.-MO M MMMMN a FTLAj
map OWWW /h w"
1Y 3: ,
l
CUPT PLAN C r. !
f
oint Venture
Iwwr, i «a rwwM w rrp nr,r w M nw,w IYw r ~ r. p•1. nR
REVS ED ]RIB c t IV V M
18 August 1986 J.O. 07744.3
PLUNED DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STATEMENT
Oak Hill Joint Venture
1. Statement of Intent
A. To develop a multi-use community with single family attached,
O-lot line, SF-6 and SF-7 units as permitted by each
appropriate zoning district.
B. Development and marketing to coincide with established and
future market demand. Construction to be accomplished by
phasing.
2. ration to CgWreheneive Plan
The proposed district is in a low intensity zone according to the
City of Denton Development Guide. This development has been
designed to meet the intent of the Development Guide.
3. Acreace
Parcel A - 13.94 acres
Parcel B - 11.05 acres
Paroel C - 22.85 acres
Parcel D - 32,96 acres
Acreage - 80,80 acres
4. Land Uses
A. Existing land use - agricultural, pasture - 80.80 acres
B, Proposed land uses
Parcel A - single family attached - 13.94 acres
Parcel B - 0-lot line, SF-5 - 11.05 acres
Parcel C - single family, SF-6 - 22.85 acres
Parcel D - single family, SF-7 - 32.96 acres
5, Off-Site Information
As shown on the Concept Plan
6. Traffic and Tr SDOrtation
As shown on the Concept Plan
A. Projected amount of traffic:
Parcel A - 10640 V.T.D.
Parcel B - 620 V.T.D.
Parcel C - 770 V.T.D.
Parcel D - 1,170 V.T.D.
Total - 4,200 V.T.D.
Note: Rear access by 20-foot private access easement for all
residential uses permitted
7. BLildinia
A. lpproximate location: As shown on the Concept Plan
B. Maximum height:
Parcel A - 45-foot, twa-story
Parcel B - 45-foot, two-story
Parcel C - 45-foot, two-story
Parcel D - 45-foot, two-story
Co Minimum building setbacks:
Parcel A - 25 feet
Parcel B - 25 feet
Parcel C - 25 feet
Parcel D - 25 feet
D. Maximum total gross floor area: N.A.
(non-residential)
E. Number of dwelling units and units per acre:
Parcel A - 164 dwelling units - 11.76 d.u./aorm
Parcel B - 62 dwelling units - 5.64 d.u./acre
Parcel C - 77 dwelling units - 3.37 d.u./acre
Parcel D - 117 dwelling units - 3.55 d.u./acre
8. Residential _ ,hd y tinnn
A. Number and location of lots as shown on the Concept Plan
Parcel B - 62 lots
C - 77 lots
D - 117 lots
B. Minimum size, width, and depth of lots
Parcel B - 5000 square feet, 50-foot width, 95-foot depth
is - 6000 square feet, 55-foot width, 95-foot depth
D - 7000 square feet, 60-foot width, 95-foot depth
C. W nimum front, side and rear yard setbacks
Front Side Rear
Parcel A 20 feet 20-foot separation
Parcel B 20 feet 10-foot separation M 15 feet
Parcels C&D 20 feet 15-foot separation 15 feet
* minimum separation between buildings
9. Water and Drainage
As shown on Concept Plan
lot UtjuLtu
As shown on Concept Plan
11. ,fig
As shown on Concept Plan. There are tree masses located on the
property with Oaks 3 inches in diameter or greater. A majority
can be saved with the land uses proposed.
12. Open Space
As shown on Concept Plan
Parcel A - 20.01% open space, private
Parcel B - 0.00% open space, private
Parcel C - 7.44% open space, private
Parcel D - 22.93 open space, public
13. Screening
As shown on the Concept Plan
Now
14. Develoognt Schedule
A. Estimated start of constructions 1987
Be Estimated phasing as shown on the Concept Plan according to
market demands
Phase I 1987-1992 - Detailed Site Plan - June 1987
Phase II 1990-1995 - Detailed Site Plan - June 1990
Phase 111 1993-1998 - Detailed Site Plan - June 1993
Phase IV 1996-2001 - Detailed Site Plan - June 1996
PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FORMS
CITY COUNCIL
Z-1827
IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION UNDECIDED
Weldon Burgoon None Received
Route 2, Box 634B
Denton, TX
MAI, I&I-
111111111. 1. 1111111. ljll~
t4e,
LIZ
low
mom
1 e : Y 1 ter' +M1C+rc^1 [
P 8 E Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 11
8.1 x-1817. Petition of Oak Hill Joint Venture requesting a
change in zoning from the agricultural (A) district to the
planned development (PD) classification and approval of a
7 concept plan on an 80.801 acre tract located on the south
k side of East McKinney Street (FM 426) approximately S miles
east of Loop 288. The property Is further described as a
tract in the Gideon Walker Survey Abstract 1330, If ap-
proved, the planned development will permit the following
land uses;
Single Family Attached - 13.94 acres
164 units with a density of 11.7 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 11.25 acres
62 units on 5,900 square foot lots
with a density of 5.51 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 45.9 acres
187 units on 6,000 square foot lots
with a density of 4.09 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 9.87 acres
17 units on 7,000 square foot lots
with a density of 1.72 units per acre
Five notices were sailed to property owners within 200
feet; one reply form was received In favor, no reply forms
were received in opposition.
PE'1'1'1'IONBR; Roger Barrett, Metroplex Engineering
Torpor-ration representing Oak Hill Joint Venture, stated
that they reviewed a M/PF market research concerning
household incomes and population. He said that this
research was used as a basis to improve this piece of
property, He said that this property is extremely linear
and difficult to plan. He said that they have several gas
easements and a drainage area through the middle of the
property. He said that the boundary at the south end of
the property is Pecan Creek, one of the major watershed
areas for the city. He said that this Is a quality
development with a boulevard entry. He said that they are
providing a screening wall and fence around the single
family detached area and are proposing a clubhouse/tennis
court/pool facility for entire subdivision, He said that
they have tried to create some diversity within the
project on this 80 acre tract with SF-S, zero lot lines,
SF-6, and SF-7 tracts that back up to a park. He said
that they have no private access on the north/south
collector which provides for safety and the engineering
staff has recommended an east/west collector street. He
said that the park area of 12.04 acres has exceeded the
Park and Recreation Departments' recommendation by three
times, He sold that they feel the project is diverse with
excellent buffering. He said that the developer agrees
with staff recommendation and conditions except the
extention of the SF-7 area from the middle park to the
Pecan Creek area.
Mr, Claiborne asked about the right-of-way on the streets.
Mr, Barrett said that the internal streets will have SO
feet of right-of-way and the east/west collector street
will have 6U feet of right-of-way.
Mr. Claiborne asked if the southern end of the property is
Pecan Creek, Mr, Barrett said yes and little or no devel-
oppwent can occur in this area because it is designated on
the PEMA map as a flood hazard area.
Mr. Claiborne asked where the staff recommended the SF-7
be extended to from Pecan Creek, Mr, Barrett said to the
east/west collector street,
P $ L Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 12
Ms. Brock asked if most of the property dedicated to the
city as park by Pecan Creek is undevelopable. Mr. Barrett
stated that they are working with the Parks and Recreation
Department on a tennis court facility in the flood hazard
area but that m66 t of the dedicated land will be used for
the pedestrian pathway system that goes all the way to the
lake.
Ms. Brock asked if the 1,7 acre park area is in a flood
plain area. Mr, Barrett said no but that there are drain-
age considerations.
Ms. Brock asked about the concrete bottom channel.
Mr. Clark stated that it would be in the 1.7 acre park
area.
Mr, Holt asked if there are any other SP-5 in the city.
Ms. Carson stated that there are very few built but there
are some existing and zoned in oast Denton,
Mr. Holt asked how far this development would be from the
lake, Mr, Barrett said that this developpment is between
Mayhill Road and the Lakeview project. He said that this
project is within walking and smelling distance of the
sewage treatment facility and dump and this is another
item that needs to be addressed.
Mr, Ellison stated that there are some SP-S zero lot line
type housing between Stuart and Bell in the Windsor area.
Ms Carson stated that It is the Windsong development and
that the SF-6 lots are more common than the SE-5 lots.
IN FAVOR: Charles Suite, representing developer, stated
iU troy have a rather challenging development plan. He
said that It will be owner occupied and are trying to
secure VA and FHA to make the housing more affordable.
Mr, Ellison asked about the infrastructure in regards to
the Lakeview development. Mr. Barrett stated that the
waterline would have to be extended down East McKinney and
it would depend on who developed first in regards to most
cost. He said that the sewer would be no problem since
the property is next to the sewer plant. He said that
this is an autonomous subdivision and is not linked to
Lakeview,
UPPUSED: None present,
STAFF REPURT: Ms. Spivey stated that this property is
olcaie~ in a low intensity area and if approved will not
violate the intensity standard for the area or any techni-
cal provisions of the Development Guide policies. She
said that there are two areas that warrant consideration.
She said that the Development Guide recommends diversified
land use in low intensity areas. The original submittal
included single family attached and single family detached
(SF-51 SF-b) land uses. Staff suggested the addition of
some SF-7 lots in the southern section of the property
since most of the smaller lots In the city are being
concentrated and proposed in east Denton. Affordable and
unconventional housing and lot sizes are desirable but an
over-concentration in one quadrant of the city is not
recommended. The proposal was revised to add seventeen
SF-7 lots but that staff requested it be increased to the
1,7 acre open space area in order to create a more
equitable distribution of land use and a better transition
between lot sizes. the Parks and Recreation Department
has adopted the standard that three arses of parkland per
1,000 population or one acre of land per 100 dwelling
i
71
P 6 Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 13
units be donated resulting in the recommendation that 4.03
acres of this development be donated to the City for the
park.srea. The developer has offered to dedicate S.85
acres. She said that staff recommends denial if the
condition about the SF-7 area being increased to the 1.7
acre open space is not included.
Ms. Brock stated thst in their design statement she under-
stood that the major tree masses were to be saved. She
asked if there is a requirement for tree preservation,
Ms. Spivey stated that there is no particular requirement
listed at this time but that when the detailed site plan
is submitted, the Planning and Zoning Commission has oppor-
tunity io decide if the landscaping plans are acceptable.
Ms. Brock asked about the 2U foot private easement.
Mr. Barrett stated that it was put in to provide flexi-
bility and that they are not proposing any alleys at this
time, Ms. Brock asked if it would be possible to have
alleys. Mr. Barrett said yes. Ms. Brock added that a
development can be improved by rear access,
Mr. Holt asked about the development to the west.
Ms. Spivey said that it is McDonald Highlands, a mixed use
planned development that contains general retail along the
frontage of Bast McKinney and the balance to the south is
duplexes.
khBUTTAL: Mr. Barrett stated that this developer has been
WorKI~Vwith the city and for the city to assume this is a
substandard development is unfair, lie said that they vio-
late no standards and meet technical issues and have a pos-
itive project. He said that he could not understand how
staff could recommend denial if the SF-7 in the southern
quadrant is not extended.
Chair declared public hearing closed.
DECiS1UN: Mr. Ellison stated that the issue of diversity
is a judgment call, He said that 6,000 square foot lots
in the eastern quadrant of the city are frequent and staff
has alerted Council to this concern of the staff. He said
that staff has an obligation to say that overconcentration
is not good. He said that the staff had no objection to
the townhome or zero lot line but feels the SP-7 area
should be increased. He said that it is unfair to say
that staff is negative.
Mr. Holt stated that the area east of the Loop is a beauti-
ful area and can appreciate the argument that people can't
afford a home unless it is on a small lot. He said that
it is not that people cannot afford property but that the
money is not available. He said that density is a concern
and feels they are creating a monster in this area.
Ms. Brock stated that she felt this is i~ beautiful area
and does not want to create a ghetto of low cost housing.
She said that it is healthy to have a mix in all areas of
the city. She said if this proposal is in isolation the
plan has merits but that she is concerned that there is no
SP-10 or SP-16 in this area.
Mr. Claiborne stated that his question is whether this
plan fits the area. He said that in regards to site
specifics this plan fits in with surrounding land use.
He said that the SF-7 expanded to collector street is
valid because it is more balanced.
Mr. Morris stated staff recommends denial of this proposal
as shown and the Commission should take action on this plan
as submitted. Mr. Claiborne asked if the Commission could
P 6 Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 14
reduce density. Mr. Morris stated that an alterastive
would be to deny the original proposal and if the petition-
er agrees to an amendment, the Commission could reconsider
and make a recommendation.
Ms. Brock moved to recommend denial of Z-1827 as Presented,
seconded by Mr. Escue and unanimously carried (7.9).
Ms. Brock moved to reconsider Z-1827, seconded by Ms. Cole
and unanimously carried (7-0).
Mr. Barrett stated the petitioner is willing to change the
proposal to increase the SF-7 area to the east-west
collector.
Ms. Cole moved to recommend approval of Z-1827 with the
following conditions:
1. The single family (SF-7) tract (Parcel D) should be
increased to the 1.7 acre open space area.
2. Sidewalks will be required on one side of all public
streets in the development.
3. Electric service in the development will be underground
with thn exception of major distribution lines.
4. The fencing shown on the concept plan in parcels A and
B shall be erected before any building permits are
issued on those parcels.
5. A detailed plan shall be submitted consistent with
concept plan, development schedule, and development
standards.
Seconded by Mr. Claiborne.
Ms. Brock stated that the east west collector is the
logical dividing place and she would like to reduce
density.
vote was called and motion carried (5-2). Mr. Uscue and
Mr. Holt voted no.
Mr. Ellison stated that a revised plan was needed before
the case could be presented to the City Council.
C. Z-1829. Petition of Metroplex Enginaering Corporation
request Ing a change in zoning from the single family
(SP-7 and SF-10) districts to the planned development
classification and approval of a detailed plan and pre-
liminary plat on an 18.446 acre tract located on the
south side of Payne Drive approximately 2,300 feet west
of Bonnie Brae Street The property is more particularly
described as a tract in the Francis Batson Survey, Abstract
43, if approved, the planned development will permit the
following land uses:
Single Family Detached - 4.9 acres
15 units on minimum 10,000 squre foot lots
with a density of 3 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 13.4 acres
64 units on minimum 7,000 square foot lots
with a density of 4,7 units per acre
Twenty-one notices were mailed to property owners within
200 feet; one reply fora was received in favor, no reply
forms were received in opposition, one reply form in favor
and one reply form in opposition were received from
persons not on mailing list.
PETITIONER: Roger Barrett, Metroplex Engineering Corpora-
tion, stared that this proposal is simply a change in lot
size. He sold that the developer is requesting a change
a rq{ T'T 7 . 5R^R....:wry 'fir.. ~y.. a. . ?
1S67L
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. 69-1,
AS AMENDED, AND AS SAID MAP APPLIES TO 80.8 ACRES OF LAND
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF EAST MCKINNEY STREET, APPROXIMATELY
THREE MILES EAST OF LOOP 2880 AS IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED
HEREIN; TO PROVIDE FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM
AGRICULTURAL "A" DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION, TO
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT "PD" DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE
DESIGNATION; PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF A CONCEPT PLAN FOR SAID
DISTRICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
I
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
That the zoning classification and use designation of 80.8
acres of real property, described in Exhibit "A", attached
hereto and Incorporated herein by reference, is hereby changed
from Agricultural "A" District Classification and Use
designation to Planned Development "PD" District Classification
and Use designation under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of
the City of Denton, Texas.
SECTION 11.
That there is approved for the district hereby established,
the Concept Plan, labeled as Exhibit "B", attached and Incorpo-
rated herein by reference, in accordance with the provisions of
article 11 of Appendix B-Zoning of the Code of Ordinances of the
City of Denton, Texas.
SECTION III.
The Zoning Map of the City of Denton, Texas, adopted the
14th day of January, 19690 as an Appendix to the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas under Ordinance No.
69-10 as amended, is hereby amended to show such change in
District Classification and Use subject to the above conditions
and specifications.
SECTION IV.
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
oth4r things for the character of the district and Cor 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 V.
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and approval,
Z-1827/PAGE 1
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1986.
RAY ScEPHERS9 MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
SECRETARY
CHARLOTTE MEN, CITY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DdBRA ADAMI DRAYOVIT'CH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY: / c' v.
1
Z-1817/PAGE 2
EXHIBIT "A"
All that certain tract or parcel of land that is situated in the
Gideon Walker Surrey, Abstract Number 1330, Denton County, Texas,
being a certain (called) 80.741 acre tract deeded by Ws. E. Lokey and
Christopher G. Lokey to Daniel N. Bailey, at ux on the 25th day of
September, 1978 and recorded in Volume 917, page 381, Dead Records of
Denton County, Taxes, and being more fully described as followss
southnrtght-of-waey onrthwest corner f Fore-to-Marketo Road i Number ~44260 also acre tract an the
northeast corner of a 430.140 acre tract deeded by Folix W. Callihan
to Ann C. Stark on the 5th day of October 1979 and recorded in Volume
979, page 103, Dead Records of Denton Countyt
Thence South 46 degrees 43 minutes and 16 seconds East with the south
right-of-way of Farm-to-Market Road Number 426 along and near a fence
a distance of 95.32 feet to an iron pint
Theme South 40 degrees 33 minutes and 10 seconds East with the south
right-of-way of Form-to-Market Road Number 426 along and near a fence t
a distance of 600,48 fast to an iron pint
Thence South 40 degrees 51 minutes and 03 seconds East with the south
right-of-way of Farm-to-Market Road Number 426 along and near a fence
a distance of 403.62 feet to an iron pint
Thence South 01 degrees 46 minutes and 43 seconds West along and near
a fence a distance of 4494.94 feet to an iron pins
Thence North 89 degrees 22 minutes and 33 seconds West along and near
a fence part of the way a distance of 133.38 foot to a point in the
middle of Pecan Creaks
Thence Northwesterly ■lon8 the middle of Pecan Creek the following
courues and distanceet
1. North 21 degrees 02 minutes and 43 seconds west 187.49 feet;
2. North 35 degrees 28 minutes and 08 seconds West a distance of
73,37 Costs
3. North 63 degrees 27 minutes and 14 seconds West a distance of
181,01 feats
4. South 61 degrees 44 minutes and 31 seconds West a distance of
93.55 Costs
3, North 64 degrees 10 minutes and 43 seconds West a distance of
224.81 foots
5, North 72 degrees 36 minutes and 15 seconds West a distance of
76.07 foots
74 North 03 degrees 59 minutes and 16 seconds West a distance of
53,31 featt
8a North 06 degrees 33 minutes and 32 seconds East a distance of
380.63 foot to a band in Pecan Croaks
Thence deporting Pecan Creek North 01 degrees 48 minutes and 48
seconds East along and near a fence s distance of 2796461 feet to an
iron ping
Thence North 01 degrees 44 minutes and 02 seconds East along and near
a fence a distance of 1700,96 feet to the Point of Beginning and
contolning 80,800 acres of land.
Z-1817
EXHIBIT "B"
CONCEPT PLAN FOR OAK HILL JOINT VENTURE, CONSISTING OF:
1. Conceptual Site Plan (1 page);
2. Planned Development Design Statement
and Development Schedule (4 pages).
r
Z-1827
1
Ott A. ANNE
r . .~.ti 4 y
y ~ l~ , 111 / t • T. li
' YTLtfI~ PlIiC/Orp
tJfLtT1~! ,
+.70 An
:
{r
00
i . r i i.
rrurw.wwrw~e r~ .
MINI
I
a
n ~
LM
A~ + 1
PA emamiL
QTY/I►d r ~ t r
0^11frwape l rM11v , + r
OrVM,CPM~ff' r •~r-
wr r . rrr Mr d , '
NCUPY PLAN C
Hiff
o i nt Venture .NOtN~rNo
M, w.Iny ~+w.+w, rnr rN"w w.a rwwww la nwrae r rMr~ it t/rDi. M1,r1M WK /M1M~ ~
18 August 1986 J.O. #7744.3
PLANNED DE FIDPMLNT DESIGM T~ATEMEXT
Oak Hill Joint Venture
1. Statement of Intent
A. To develop a multi-use community with single family attached,
0-lot line, SF-6 and SF-7 units as permitted by each
appropriate zoning district.
B. Development and marketing to coincide with established and
future market demand. Construction to be accomplished by
phasing.
20 gelation to Comerehen•ive an
The proposed district is in a low intensity zone according to the
City of Denton Development Guide. This developme;)t has been
designed to meet the intent of the Development Guide,
3 Acres !
Parcel A - 13.94 acres
Parcel B - 11,05 acres
Parcel C - 22.85 acres
Parcel D - 32.96 acres
Acreage - 80.80 acres
1
4. Land Uses
A, Existing land use - agricultural, pasture - 8U,80 acres
B, Proposed land use:
Parcel A - single family attached - 13,94 acres
Parcel B - 0-lot line, SF-5 11.05 acres
Parcel C - single family, SF-6 - 22.85 acres
Parcel D - single family, SF-7 - 32.96 acres
56 Off-Site Information
As ehown on the Concept Plan
6. Irk; a and Transportation
As shown on the Concept Plan
A. Projected amount of traffic:
Parcel A - 1,640 V.T.D.
Parcel B - 620 V.T.D.
Parcel C - 770 V.T.D.
Parcel D - 1,170 V.T.D.
Total - 4,200 V.T.D.
Note: Rear access by 20-foot private access easement for all
residential uses permitted
7. Buildim
A. Approximate location: As shown on the Concept Plan
B. Maximum height:
Parcel A - 45-foot, two-story
Parcel B - 45-foot, two-story
Parcel C - 45-foot, two-story F
Parcel D - 45-foot, two-story !
C. Minimum building setbacks:
Parcel A - 25 feet
Parcel B - 25 feet
Parcel C - 25 feet
Parcel D - 25 feet
D. Maximum total gross floor area: N.A.
(non-residential)
E. Number of dwelling units and units per acre:
Parcel A - 164 dwelling units - 11.76 d.u./aore
Parcel B - 62 dwelling units - 5.64 d.u./acre
Parcel C - 77 dwelling units - 3.37 d.u./acre
Parcel D - 117 dwelling units - 3.55 d.u./acre
4
8. Reaidential S,bd& tinny
A. Number and location of lots as shown on the Concept Plan
Parcel B - 62 lots
C - 77 lots
D - 117 lots
B. Minimum size, width, and depth of lots
Parcel B - 5000 square feet, 50-foot width, 95-foot depth
C - 6000 square feet, 55-foot width, 95-foot depth
D - 7000 square feet, 60-foot width, 95-foot depth
C. Minimum front, side and rear yard setbacks
Front Side Rear
Parcel A 20 feet 20-foot separation *
Parcel B 20 feet 10-foot separation * 15 feet
Parcels C&D 20 feet 15-foot separation * 15 feet
* minimum separation between buildings i
96 Water and Drainage
As shown on Concept Plan
10, Wlium
As shown on Concept Plan
As shown on Concept Plan. There are tree masses located on the
property with Oaks 3 inches in diameter or greater. A majority
can be saved with the land uses proposed.
12. Open 3gace
As shown on Concept Plan
Parcel A - 20.01% open space, private
Parcel B - 0.00% open space, private
Parcel C - 76441% open space, private
Parcel D - 22.91% open space, public
13. Screening
As shown on the Concept Plan
14, 2gveloMCnt Schedule
A. Estimated start of construction: 1987
8. Estimated phasing as shown on the Coroept Plan according to
market demand:
Phase I 1987-1992 - Detailed Site Plan - rune 1987
Phase II 1990-1995 - Detailed Site Plan - June 1990
Phase III 1993-1998 - Detailed Site Plan - June 1993
Phase IV 1996-2001 - Detailed Site Plan - June 1996
i
1
77
r
DATE: 9/16/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TOs Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM* Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT, PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE FOR Z-1629
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval.
SUMMARY.
A request for a planned development, on 18.446 acres on the south
side of Payne Drive, 2,200 feet west of Bonnie Brae Street. The
approval of the detailed plan would allow the development of
residential uses on 7,000 and 10,000 square foot lots.
BACNGROUNDt
The planned 6evelopment was requested to allow a variance in the
setback, lot width and lot depth while maintaining the minimum lot
area of 7,000 or 10,000 square feet.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OP GROUPS AFFECTED:
Twenty-one (21) property owners within two hundred feet were
notified.
I
FISCAL IMPACT:
No impact can be determined at this time.
4ity ectfully su' nittec:
d arr r
Prepared by: Manager
Cecile Carson
Urban Planner
Appr ed
Jeff Meyer
Director of Planning
and Development
02590
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
To: Denton City Council
Case No.: Z-1829 Meeting Date: September 16, 1986
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Metroplex Engineering Corporation
1123 Fort Worth Drive
Denton, Texas 76205
Status of Applicant: Engineer
Requested Action: A change in zoning from Single
family-10 and Single family-7 to
planned development district and
approval of the preliminary plat.
The detailed plan would permit the
development of single family
residences on lots with minimum 70000
square feet on 13.496 acres and with
minimum 10,000 square feet on 4.950
acres.
Location and Size: An 18.446 acre tract located on the
south side of Payne Drive
approximately 2,300 feet west of
Bonnie Brae Street.
Surrounding Land Use
and Zoning: North - Agricultural (A), Single
family-7
South - Agricultural (A)
East - Single family-7, PD-86
West - Single family-10 (Greenway
Club Estates)
Denton Development Guide: Low Intensity Area
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Transpor6ation: Payne Drive has been constructed
along north boundary. Residential
streets require 250 foot minimum
center line radius.
(Case Z-1829)
Page Two
SPECIAL INFORMATION
utilities: Water and sower lines are adequate in
the area. A 12" water line on Payne
Drive is subject to pro rata. All
other utilities are available in the
area.
Drainage: Drainage has been addressed in
platting of the phases adjacent to
the east and west.
HISTORY
In April of 1985, the City of Denton approved a change in zoning
from Single family-7 to single family-10 on 6.714 acres. This
request includes a portion of that property. The petitioner
could have platted the lots as 10,000 square feet with the SF-7
zoning, but was interek:ted in establishing the zoning to match
the lot size proposed.
ANALYSIS
'the property is located in a low intensity area and the proposal
would not impact the intensity in the area. The area is
presently 54% under based on land use and 5% over based on
zoning.
The purpose of the planned development is to retain the minimum
lot size in the Single family-7 and Single family-10 areas as
currently zoned, but to modify the lot depths and setbacks. The
modification of the depth of the Single faiaily-10 lots would
permit the developers to increase the depth of the Single
family-7 lots to provide larger rear yards. The 25 foot front
yard setback change would permit a more uniform appearance for
Hrooklake West because the zoning ordinance requires a 30 foot
front yard setback for Single family-10 and a 25 foot front yard
setback for Single family-7.
The attached detailed plan and preliminary plat contain all
information required by the Planned Development Ordinance and
the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations of the City of
Denton.
(Case 2-1629)
Page Three
RECOMMENDATION
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of Z-1829
with the conditions as outlined in the development standards and
schedule attached to the detailed plan.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve petition
2. Approve petition with additional conditions
3. Deny petition
ATTACHMENTS
1. Location Map
2. Detailed Plan and Preliminary Plat (Westgate Heights)
3. Development Standards
4. Rep1 Form Totals
5. Mailing List
6. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of
August 13, 1986
0236o
smog
s \ i = 139
I 1 (fit. , ' s~
14
+ SF-10
I
\ I i 5F-`"
1
PD 85
L I'
PD-13 ` I
1
r
r\ 1
\ L I 11 A
1 lit
Ilk
111^~ 1 AGAIC ` 5. F. IONS
M
I N .•I- „
/ li•
/ I
APPROVED FINAL PLAT
1 I I • t
I is I
y i N
' N 11' N / 1 N 1
M
I 1! I I
A??ROVED FINAL PLAT III I '
NOT CONSTAUCIEO 1! I, 1 =~N u I
IrOgon
1w,w N I II 1 I
/ 1 1 I I ' It i t .
M I N t l f fff 1~'~'~'~
N I III I I Y ! 1 ; I
I [ ~ t/ 1 I I ill...
~ uI+ ~ ~ ~ ~ N w
t
1! N t N 1
I 1 I 1 •~V1 • I I+1 I II If vd 1(~ 1
I..., 1 I
1 f n ,
I I N
1 I 11 I 0111 I 11 N _
I ~ tI li 1t
I tM JI wN ^`MI
JI N; I N I n LOW Ilk IW
IQ 1v1; .{N~ Sun r -
K' t 1 LAND USE TAME
w N{11Wn1~ frIM1Y Ni I , IMo U 0 We
p 4 ism LM is, 444
dl 11 I! r/
NMI 474 i./! I.H
.
YO}[t
1. NL 1WL1 rN111 NNbll• Y•t W Y•Ir LNI ML
1111 N to" M N AVM*" IM I.ol Ih 4M0 1 IM/
wltf 11tMIN.
nwro WI
"Lao
YLLI.IL 1'00/. IIYLII/ Is
tPM
I G
1 NNIN11 II mollm M M LNN /M V Now INN.
1, W100, laft, It O,IY / N 1./111 Iwll 11 LIN 1
M " 11.00NN I4011e 101 NN IN'.
IwN lit *W"b"t I IMYI .ale or.
1. L" FN. LLIM I M LYI 1.14 am I M tm 14 Kam 1
IMMA ow 1 1' ONylryN/lw~~a a 11. AtA 'M Wilmot.
1. LNI M WLLf~IwM 1 1• pN~LM MfYM1 LM 1 N'I" l1N
NIM. _
J-- 00= dim%
Now
IL•I METROPLE% EMOINWINO COW M?Ii
011n01 • tug w I "d. "a
O tln 1/00 NM• NtN NW1 N+Ir N!N
KAIGA K~w
iWWNt NO ;!L
OOMMONATION
IIM /0111 IIIOIIIf gIIf Alglt qlM 10100 4':'1. 1•.101• anal Iwtri
aMwr reMl~l/»•rw
Ii~
~
r rCEIVBZ) J It ~`sf3
z-iz~9
06 August 1986 86-0297.PD
MAW WN&M W199 VAMW
Westgate Heights
14 Statssetat of intent
A. To develop the currently zoned SF-7 and SF-10 community with
a lot depth and building set back variance in the SF-10 area
B. Development and marketing to coincide with established and
future market demand. Construction to commence pending
approval process.
2. Bela Aan to CorcrWwgsire Plon
The proposed district is in a low intensity zone according to the
City of Denton Development Guide. This development has been
designed to meet the intent of the Development Guide.
3. Acrew
Acreage - 18.446 acres
4. UM4 U s
A. Existing land use - SF-7, 13.496 acres; SF-10 - 4.950 acres
D. Proposed land use: SF-7, 13.496 acres
Modified SF-10 - 4.950 acres
5. Off-Site Information
As shown on the Detailed Site Plan
Existing storm drainage and utility improvements are currently in
place in Phase I development.
6. Tr, c and Transportation
M-Mb
As shown on the Detailed Site Plan
A. Projected amount of traffics 790 V.T.D.
i
7.
N.A.
8. Ilsidential Subdivisions
A. Number and location of lots as shown on the Detailed Site
Plan
B. Land Uses SF-7 Modified SF-10
Heights 2 stories 2 stories
Minimum Lot Dimension
Front yard 25 feet 25 feet
Side yard 6 feet 7 feet
Rear yard 10 feet 10 feet
Lot area 7000 sq. feet 20,000 sq. feet
Lot width 60 feet 70 feet
Lot depth 100 feet 100 feet
Max. lot coverage 35% 35%
Density 4.74 dwelling 3.02 dwelling
units per acre units per acre
9. Water and Dxaigga
As shown on the Detailed Site Plan
Identical to Preliminary Plat
10. Utilities
As shown on the Detailed Site Plan
Identical to Preliminary Plat
11. Trees
There are no tree masses located on the property three inches in
diameter or greater.
12, Qwa Space
None proposed
r ' rte.-
13, acre fna
None proposed
14. Rgta 4M& jjh*d~n1,_
A. Estimated start of construction: June 1987
S. Estimated finish of constructions December 1981
Phasing identical to Preliminary Plat
15. Lsndaupini Plan
Landscaping to be provided by individual lot owners
16. SU
None proposed
17. 3 d I e
Along south side of Payne Drive as required by current zoning
PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FORMS
CITY COUNCIL
Z-1829
IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION UNDECIDED
Denton Tedi, Inc. Watt L. Black
9801 Weetheirer 2904 Lakewood
Suite 302 Denton, TX 76201
Houston, TX 77042
Elaine Mitchell Herr
J. B. Smallwood 2900 Lakewood
2907 Brook Hollow Denton, TX 76201
Denton, TX 76201
AA"
/iT WA. t'
A In
JAM
I
i
3
a
a - no
-w
OQ
Rol
8580 - Q0Sa~
n
b d
5
Q `
QhA
X
4 8510-on
q~13-~ C
G
.
41
ALOn 121 A4
r
L 4, V 77 7, 7 7771
~I
00
-r
r
~rrr
r
P 1 Z Minutes
w , August 13, 1986
Page 14
reduce density. Mr. Morris stated that an alternative
would be to deny the original proposal and if the petition-
er stress to an amendment, the Commission could reconsider
and make a recommendation.
Ms. Brock moved to recommend denial of 2-1897 as presented,
seconded by Mr. Escue and unanimously carried (7-
Ms. Brock moved to reconsider Z-1827, seconded by Ms. Cole
and unanimously carried (7-0).
Mr. Barrett stated the petitioner is willing to change the
proposal to increase the SF-7 area to the east-west
collector.
Ms. Cole moved to recommend approval of 2-1827 with the
following conditions;
1. The single family (SP-7) tract (Parcel D) should be
incr,iased to the 1.7 acre open space area.
2. Sidewalks will be required on one side of all public
streets in the development,
3. Electric service in the development will be underground
with the exception of major distribution lines,
4. The fencing shown on the concept plan in parcels A and
B shall be erected before any building permits are
issued on those parcels.
5. A detailed plan shall be submitted consistent with
concept plan, development schedule, and development
standards.
Seconded by Mr. Claiborne.
Ms, Brock stated that the er,st west collector is the
logical dividing place and site would like to reduce
density.
Vote was called and motion carried (5-2). Mr. Escue and
Mr. Halt voted no.
Mr. Ellison stated that a revised plan was needed before
the cn,se could be presented to the City Council.
C. Z-1829. Petition of Metroplex Engineering Corporation
reqquesting n change in zoning from th,; single family
(SF-7 and SF -10) districts to the planned development
classification and approval of a detailed plan and
pre- liminary plat on an 18.446 acre tract located on the
south side of Payne Drive approximctely 2,300 feet west
of Bonnie Brae Street. The property is more particularly
described as a tract in the Francis Batson Survey, Abstract
43. If approved, the planned development will permit the
following land uses;
Single Faily Detached - 4.6 acres
15 unitms on minimum 10,000 :iqure foot lots
with a density of 3 units per acre
Single Family Detached - 13.4 acres
64 units on minimum 7,000 square foot lots
with a density of 4.7 units per acre
Twenty-one notices were mailed to property owners within
203 feet; one reply form was receiver! in favor, no reply
forxs were received in opposition, one reply form in favor
and one reply form in opposition were received from
persons not on mailing list.
PETITIQNER4 Roger Barrett, Metroplex Engineering Corpora-
ME, stared that this proposal is simply a change in lot
also. He said that the developer is requesting a chance
P fi E Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 15
or variance in lot depth. He said that this is the final
phase of West ~ste iiei hts. He said that the SF-7 area
required adde depth ~ecause of marketing and would like
the SF-10 area to have the same building setback for
consistency.
Mr. Claiborne asked if the SP-10 were on the west side.
Mr. Barrett said yes. He added that they have lost one
lot from the original submitted plat.
IN FAVOR: None present.
OPPOSED: None present.
STAFF REPORT: Ms. Carson stated that the property was
orilinally"oned in the 1970's as extension of the
GreenwaY Club Estates to the west. She said in April of
1985, the City of Denton approved a change in zoning from
single family-7 to single family-10 on 6.714 acres because
the petitioner was interested in establishing the SF-10
zoning to match the lot size proposed rather than platting
10,000 square foot lots with the SF-7 zoning She said
is the purpose of the planned development s to retain
the minimum lot size in the single family-7 and sin le
family-10 areas as currently zoned, but to modify t9a lot
depths and setbacks. The modification of the depth of the
single family-10 lots would permit the developers to in-
crease the depth of the sin le family-7 lots to provide
targer rear yards. The 25 foot front yard setback change
would permit a more uniform appearance for Brooklake West
because the zoning ordinance requires a 30 foot front yard
setback for single family-10 and a 25 foot front yard set-
back for single family-7. She said that the detailed plan
and the preliminary plat contain all information required
by the Planned Development Ordinance and the Subdiv'sion
and Land Development Regulations of the City of Denton.
She added that staff recommends approval of Z-1829 with
the conditions as outlined in the development standards
and schedule.
REBUTTAL: None offered.
Chair declared public hearing closed.
DECISION: Mr. miscue moved to recommend approval of Z-18299
seconded by Ms. Cole and unanimously carried (7-0).
U. Z-1831, Petition of Bob Tripp, Trustee, requesting a
change in zoning from the agricultural (A) district to
the single family (SP-7) classification on a S9.14 acre
tract located at thm southwest corner of North Locust
Street (FM 2164) and Hercules Street. The property is
further described as a tract in the B.B.B. and C.R.R.
Company Survey, Abstract 186. If approved, the zoning
will permit the development of single family detached
units on minimum 7,000 square foot lots.
Six notices were mailed to property owners within 200
feet; three reply forms were received in favor, no reply
forms were received in opposition.
PETITIONER: Bob Tripp, owner, stated that this property
a een n his family for 60 years. He said that this is
a good time for zoning in a,ite of the seculation and
numerous requests for zoning all around gis property. He
said that it is a logical request.
IN FAVOR: None present.
OPPOSED% None present.
i
rn f--rSTr=•4r=,'R"'e~'R*.'!'Ri .r:~ ^Ip: s..
ROW77-TW~ TT
1
1566L
NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DENTON,
a TEXAS, AS SAME WAS ADOPTED AS AN APPENDIX TO THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON TEXAS, BY ORDINANCE N0. 69-I,
AS AMENDED, AND AS SAID MAP APk IES TO 18.446 ACRES OF LAND
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PAYNE DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 2,300
FEET WEST OF BONNIE BRAE STREET, AS IS MORS PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED HEREIN; TO PROVIDE FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY "SP-7" and "SP-10" DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION, TO PLANNED DEVELOPMEAt "PD"
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION; PROVIDING FOR
APPROVAL OF A DETAILED PLAN FOR SAID DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR A
PENALTY IN A MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF Si,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
That the zoning classification and use designation of 18.446
acres of real property, described in Exhibit "A", attached
hereto and incorporated herein br reference, is hereby changed
from single Family "SF-7" and 'SP-10" District Classification
and Use designation to Planned Development "PD" District
Classification and Use designation under the comprehensive
zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas.
SECTION II.
f That there is approved for the district hereby established
the "Detailed Plan", labeled as Exhibit "B", attached hereto and
incorporated by reference; so that hereafter the district shall
be used and developed in accordance with the Detailed Plan
herein approved.
SECTION 1 1.
The Zoning Map of the City of Denton, Texas, adopted the
14th day of January, 1969, as an Appendix to the Code of.
j Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas under Ordinance No.
69-10 as amended, is hereby amended to show such change in
District Classification and Use subject to the above conditions
and specifications.
SECTION IV.
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 pparticular uses, and with a view to
conserving the value of tAe buildings, protecting human lives,
and encou,aging the most appropriate uses of land for the
maximum bdni£it to the City of Denton, Texas, a;ad its citizens.
SECTION V.
or fai s person who therewith or rovision of fthe this
requirementordinance,
i
thereof, or of a permit or certificate issued thereunder, shall
be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding
One Thuusand Dollars ($10000.00), Bach such person shall be
doomed 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 VI.
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 caption of this ordinance to be
published twice in the Denton Record-Chronic'.a9 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 2986,
I
UT [bFHEN-3t MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
I
t}~Ci A
CITY OF DENTON,tTEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCN, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
Z-1829/PAGE Z
. r
EXHIBIT "A"
PI
All EL0 MOTES (SF-7 area)
that certain tract or parcol of lead situated in the P.
Survey, Abstract Number 43, pouter ^,ooat) 8etsoa
part of a tract shown by do" to Dartor-TG~( Terast said tract d•lA=
Volume 1354, Page 203 oR the Real Pr two ao r
Tsxaa worded to
, and being sportr Race"#
more fully described as followol ' Denton County,
Beginning for the aoothe"t. comer of this
herein, Sid Point also being the southvest co tract being described
o
77. f Nestoats Heights, Phase It na shown of record r in Of Cabinet 22, to 8 nton right-cffwM line otThuundet~t=dR COVAN, and also being in the north
Haights, Phase I; +~;vn of record in acid Weatgeto
Thence North 02 dogroor 06 minutes 00
line of said Westgate Koights,0^elm Bast, aloe vast a point for the Southern nnorthe
M&ft conaribhthee °hej •31hEeet to
tract, said point &I" rain described
Phase to and in the South rightro84 fwr clo off Said ileStlate %ightr,
of record is said Wootgats Noilhts, y Weatviaw trail Sa shown i
PheBO !I ~
't'hence North 87 degrees 34 minutes 00 ssconde
right-of-wdy line of said Watviow Trail West
, a along the south
q of co
a point for corner; said point Slse being dthe Southern 15.0n fthwhvert
corner of said WSatgets Hoilhts, Phase 11
ner
Therm North 02 dyraes 06 min
lino of said Weatgato utes 00 ase"" Rest, along the vest
Heights, Phase to a distance of 167,13 fact to a
point for the northwest corner of the herein described tracts said
poinC 4180 WAS the northwest corner of said Westgate H.iights, Sa
recordd _
in Cabiinnet Fo Slidet2 ofit~l~ of Psyn Driro to shown Dancon County , Plat Records, of
righte North l88iedegr said 41 minutes 31 seconds West, along the South -of
-voy Point of curvature a a Panne Drive, a distance of 112.01 feet to a
angle of 00 degreer 31 tgniel2 curve t° the right having a central
and a chord bearim aeooda, a radius of 13,826,60 feet
seconds West, 125.51gfoqtjsad of North 88 degrees 26 minutes IS
Miles in a northwesterly direction, a of said Payne Drive, end along 8814 crlronwi the
south rl ht f line
of 123,31 feet to ♦ to tho right, ne -0re lenth
described tract, Point for ;,a northwest comefMe heroin
Thence South 02 degrees 06 minutes 00 seconds Welt. a distance of
72.00 feet to sr Sella point,
Thence South 33 door" 29 ainutea I8 8SCo4de Woet,
132,37 fast to an culls point, S distance of
33.36 feeStuto as aAp~dNa 06 point, riaator 00 eSeoada West, a distance of
Thefts South 02 debase 06 minutes 00 geco4dg
1356.71 foot to a Point for the soot weft West, a dls
dsacribed tract,
Of said POiat ht cornner of the • of
said Thunderbird, sle° being in the north right-of heioin
1 I"
Thence South 84 delrep 49 aiautes , along the north
right-of-w.y liar of s Th
• a saeomd4 3ist hat"
poia~t cg ~rvaters of a taidaulsae cnn+ IS
areeStof 378.80 feet to
and a chord bbeestiatlaad dice oft *to the s ~adluahof~l a central fefto
on seconds Beet, 13..11 1 2718.98
set, 84 4ge4es 39 mlertae 43
43
Th"CIN 41081 Sold cave to tho left
of 2414 TMmpderbird, am are distaree oftis.3m1 to" to the Point! Of
%limmiml W cort"Mas 13.496 manse.
2-1829
EXHIBIT "A"
• FIELD NOTES
(SF-10 area)
All that certain tract or parcel of lend situated in [ht F, Batson
parteyof abtract sho nab 4d~*d0eo[Donton-~t' Texaat said tract being
Volume 1354, Page 203 of the Real Property Inc, as recorded in
T*xss, and being more fully described asolowords, Denton County,
Beginning for the northern northwest corner of the herein described
tracts said point bearing South 02 degrees 07 minutes 45 seconds (Jest
40,00 feet, South 88 degrees O1 minutes 58 seconds East 330,14 feet
from the northwest corner of said Denton-TEDI tract, and also being in
the south right-of-way line of payne Drive as shown of record in
Cabinet F, Slide 2 of the Denton County Plat Rseordss
Thence South 01 degrees 06 i„inytea 00 seconds West, a distance of
200,34 feet to a point for corners
Thence 'forth 07 degroas .54 minutes 00 seconds Vast, a distance of +
22,00 feet to a point for corners
Thence South 02 degraas 06 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of
624,41 feet to a point for corners
Thence North 87 degrees 54 minutes 00 seconds Wast, a distance of 5,00
feet to a point for corners
Thence South 02 degrees 06 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of
700.00 feat to a point for the southwest corner of the herein
descrtbed tract, said paint also being 1n the north right-of-way line
of Thunderbird as shown of record in Cabinet R, Slide 77-78 of the
Denton County Plat Records
'Chance South 84 degrees 49 minutes 58 seconds East, along the north
right-of-way tint of said Thunderbird, a distance of 136,45 feet to
a point for the southeast corner of the herein described tracts
Pence North 02 degrees 06 minutes 00 seconds Cast, a distance of
1356,71 feet to an-angle points
nonce North 47 degrees 06 minutes UO seconds East, a distance of
35.36 feet to an angle poi,.tl
Thence North 55 degram 29 minutes 18 seconds East, a distance of
132.37 feet to an angle points
Thence North 02 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, a distance of
72.00 feet to a point for the northeast corner cf the herein described
tracts said point also being in the south right-of-way line of said
Payne Drive, end also being a point on curve of a tangent curve to the
right, having a radius of 130826.60 feet, a c+ntral angle of 00
degrees 06 minutes 41 seconds, and a chord bearing and distance of
North 88 degrees 06 minutes 19 seconds West, 34,96 feat,
Thence in a northwesterly direction., along said curve to the right,
and along the south right-of-wry line of said Payne Drive, an are
distance of 34.96 feet to the point of tangency of said curves
The
tNorrith 88
a diatancsiof 20535
feet to the Point of Beginning and containing 4,950 acres of land,
' Z-1A1~
x1 P
EXHIBIT "B"
DETAILED PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR WESTGATE
HEIGHTS, PHASE III, CONSISTING OF:
~1. Detailed Site Plan and Preliminary Plat (1 Gage);
1 ,'z. Planned Development Design Statement and
Development Schedule (3 pages).
f
i
Z-1829
i 1• - ' ,
-777
a
I
- - - - - - - - - - - -
I Y ~ ~ r.. • •fY
I II • . I -
r IIhK..„ 1 • IY
1.
N I
APPROVED FINAL PLAT
r
t 1 M • 1
/
~ 1 1 If Y /1 I '
I I
AiPADI' FINAL PLAT
NOT CON5IRUCT[0 I 1 I -
Y I .1.
NN I I r I " I
.w...~ ~ w Y • 1~
1 1 ' h
r I I I r
I 1~ I Y I .w
1 I _
....«I ~ 1 1 .x.11 ,
n/ I • I w
w ~ I • ~ S
1 l i II I ~ Y ..I "
I A I Mql ...M, ~
M r! L%HIM wM
1, I
s, ~ ~ ant s. .N-_
I l 1 I 11 II NYlui
s ' + I LAND USE TAE,E
p~
K
K1 M
/ L LM
1. •L 04.1 /wtv "~&A r•1 0404 r•II Will
114
w11 r Y1Y he "PAO11 w1 w 4 la a - ow
1. OM 1Y . IrN. YI low lUY
1. / 11••M1 Y Mr11Y M h Mw04 IIY r I•I.1 wIL
I, Lm I W N 1104 I/I11 10411 a am a
•Y U.0 r-• •104 K1M will 1 1I'.
1. Iw• In YY11t•Y1 WIMA - AOL IW.
1, 6" 6.11►MI 1 W 1111 Pit UM 11.00 W KAY I
LILr1~n1L~r~{M l~I1~YII~1•w/Y111Ym" A X10, Kull too1111M111.
1• KY1 1 M{I ~ • 1' IIY~NM MIYM M / M' MY /M
■
!19 ism
M91" KIZ DlitiMD4 cwfm TON
O~ IIII 1/r ~w fK111 NNK1 I
~ IIYN11
/1~~11~CKN A MN1y 1lN ~ • j
02PUMORAAMON DIY w
m mv %W^ No own f~ "M
IM•NM IAI~M/M•MI!
aJ7bab
~~C$1~1319''I
06 August 1986 86-0297.PD
Westgate Heights
10 Statamt of latent
A. To develop the currently zoned SF-7 and SF-10 coamunity with
a lot depth and building set back variance in the SF-10 area
B. Development and marketing to coincide with established and
future market demand. Construction to commence pending
approval process.
24 11191100 10 2122EMMITI USA
The proposed district is in a low intensity zone according to the
City of Lenton Development Guide. This development has been
designed to meet the intent of the Development Guide.
3.
Acreage - 18.446 acres
4. La&¢ Used
1
A. Existing land use - SF-7, 13.496 acres; SF-10 - 4.930 acres
B. Proposed land use: SF-7, 13.496 acres
Modified SF-10 - 4.950 acres
S. Off-SiS2~iafoM t~iga
As shown on the Detailed Site Plan
Existing storm drainage and utility immprovenen+;s are currently in
place in Phase I development.
6. Tr~.aad_Txaaaoortatioe
As shown on the Detailed Site Plan
A. Projected amount of traffics 790 V.T.D.
7.
N.A.
8. Re id_ntia_I Su ivy
A. Number and location of lets as shown on the Detailed Site
Plan
Be Land Use: SF-7 Modified SF-10
Height: 2 stories 2 stories
Minimum Lot Dimension
Front yard 25 feet 25 feet
Side yard 6 feet 7 feet
Rear yard 10 feet 10 feet
Lot area 7000 sq. feet 10,000 sq. feet
Lot width 60 feet 70 feet
Lot depth 100 feet 100 feet
1
Max. lot coverage 35% 35% 4
Density 4.14 dwelling 3.02 dwelling
units per acre units per acre
9. Wat r and Draiaase
As shown on the Detailed Site Plan
Identical to Preliminary Plat
100 Utilities
As shown on the Detailed Site Plan
Identical to Preliminary Plat
ill Tro"
There are no tree masses located on the property three inches in
diameter or greater.
12. _Oneg Dace
None proposed
13, Scrr
None proposed
140 Divest Sehednl_•
A. Estimated start of construction; June 1987
B. Estimated finish of construction; December 1988
Phasing identical to Preliminary Plat
15. ~id~ nl PI=t
Landscaping to be provided by individual lot owners
16. Sim
None proposed
17.
Along south side of Payne Drive as required by current zoning
DATE: 09/i6,/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE z-1831
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning commission recommends approval of the change
in zoning from the agricultural (A) to the single family-7 (SF-7)
district,
SUMMARY:
The property is located in a low intensity area. The single
family-7 land use is a good transition and is compatible with the
adjacent zoning.
BACKGROUND:
The low intensity area is at its capacity based on the intensity
standard because of the 912 acre planned development approved by the
City Council on September 20 1986. Areas over the intensity stan-
dard or at rapacity are 'red flagged' for planning purposes, and the
remaining property should be zoned the least intense logical land
use for the tract. The single family-7 zoning is the least intense
land use for this 59 acre parcel when compared to adjacent zoning.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
All departments involved in the development process. Six (6)
property owners within two hundred (200) feet were notified.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No impact can be determined at this time.
Res otfully submitted:
rr
Prepared by: Pty Manager
\J tA b Cal~a~s~~
Cecile Carson
Urban Planner
'Arp ve
aeff Mey
Director of Planning
and Development
1358]
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
To: Denton City Council
Case No.: Z-1831 Meeting Date: September 160 1986
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Bc~b E. Tripp, Trustee
6634 Chevy Chase
Dallas, Texas 75225
status of Applicant: Owner
Requested Action: A change from the Agricultural (A)
district to the Single family (SF-7)
district
Location and Size: A 59.14 acre tract located at the
southwest corner of North Locust
Street (FM 2164) and Hercules Street
Surrounding Land Use
and Zoning: North - Agricultural (A)
South - PD-63 (open space, townhouse,
single family, duplexes, and
Evers Park
East - PD-72 (single family, duplex,
multi-family, four-plea)
West - Agricultural (A)
Denton Development Guide: Low Intensity Area
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Transportatlon: The proposed planned development to
the west shows a collector street
that would be extended through this
property to Locust Street and the
collector street should be offset
from Hercules Lane. The access to
Locust Street should be limited.
(case Z-1631)
Page Two
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Utilitios: An existing 1211 water line has
sufficient capacity for the request.
A 10" parallel sewer line must be
extended from an existing line on
Stuart Lane and the City may wish to
oversize the line,
Drainage: No majot improvements are needed but
some minor improvements are
necessary. The property is located
at the upper end of Cooper Creek.
HISTORY
The area surrounding this property has been the site of numerous
zoning requests. The Commission recommended denial of two
requests on the 412 acres to the west and north and made no
recommendation on a third request on the property. The Council
approved the zoning of the property north of this request for
a mixed use planned development on August 19, 1986. The
Commission also denied a request for a mixed use planned
development on the 59 arse tract north this request. (Specific
details on the cases are attached.)
ANALYSTS
The property is located in a low intensity area according to the
Development Guide. The request for the 412 acre planned
development mentioned on the History section will use the
majority of the intensity in this area if the request is
approved. Therefore, staff must analyze this tract and consider
the most reasonable land use for the property. The adjacent
property to the east is zoned single family and the property to
the west is proposed as single family with 7,500 square foot
lots. This request would be consistent with the surrounding
zoning.
The proposal violates no Development (Guide policies. The
intensity question is not resolved because of the pending
request in the area, but thA land use is an acceptable planning
use on this property.
Now
(Case Z-1831)
Page Three
RECOMMENDATION
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of Z-1831.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve petition
2. Deny petition
ATTACHMENTS
1, Location Map
2. Concept Plan Z-1786 (Commission denied 1/22/86)
3. Concept Plan Z-1793 (Commission denied 3/26/86)
4. Concept Plan Z-1810 (Commission denied 6/11/86)
5. Concept Plan Z-1815 (Commission made no recommendation
6/25/86)
6. Concept Plan Z-1815 (submitted 8/6/86)
7. Reply Form Totals
8, Mailing List
9. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of
August 13, 1986.
02360
i
i
~I
SF-
8 ,
S "t 0 PO-79 j
rr .ttin 1r
PD-72 SF•T_..
MF-I
f
- - ~ _ P" r. ; (P I., 1. ,1.
CL f I .rrrrr.
IMPRIJ
' Ifs y
-bl
IF Lrzl DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS
,+0ls
tog, H-b
Ic41 r10 01VIKf Goals 0v an
wl
•1 / 1 1 • 27x6 u 1.40!11
./im mom wIN. / / J b 2.17 N6 R6fAE, ytI 30
c 20.62 Mf AW,R~MENT 0.311 24
d 0.33 WI MIA& 21.O,AC
6! 67.30 X92 0.5:1 21
V►. ' 1 0 . 8.06 w" T05115/ *xu
I-d _ J f A 2500 C OFf9C&SWWROOM 1;.O/AC !f 3•
NNN•
If.i9 0 M1oF111>IIpNAI OFF 0.4A 30'
EIS d 14.E OR METAL ~E o.s,l 40'
Il - IM. 25.72 oR META&
- UI-b ` b 23.01 0 OF 0.5;t 30
I l/~ wn.. r'iW~l a 12.10 W fiCE AfNRT 0.5;1 60
~-0 \r, . 01.03 MlIVT 22.OrAC 2?0 36
7.33 OR
IV -b I rvb 6 17.43 C 0"CR 0.5:1 >1 Pit TAL
FfIClYOIlpyygpOM
2tso wR Tow*am 0.6:1 30
d 13.12 MF APARTWNT 10,O/AC 215 s'
IV -8 • 11.76 Lt UQW NOMINAL 20.O,AC 302
I tw,1t
kl 30'
e $0.0 10.48 Olmel Y f 76p61 3.6/AC 091
! IV -C I I Y b
30'
` 0 33.59 !f 10W FAOM.Y 116001 3.6/AC
+ I I„ d 2.13 M METALS IRYICE 120 30
OA:1 21'
i , W.17
~!.!!tS s • to 10.31 L"2"
F 113.17 16%
IV-d
some
IV -0 / n KIM woo
i . 162.29 REOIOENTtAL 3l.4
?6,63 COWAR"C1AUOFFICE M.6
A ~ 19.61 COMWMIAL,RETA6. 12.1
V"a 6lllif• 72.1! 61G1. If.6
12.10 OPEN N PACE 2.6
1 1OOMWAY 0.6
/ 1122,12
.12
r ! LE0E11b
Wp
Ore//
M NONUA KI
'WA A461"Kito Mum FANKY
V-c \ W WfAtt FAMILY
~ ~uoil•ol,laoo atmce j
V -b w OIrtAAa Ia7AIL .
- ° \ o awe
cowmftmA
V -d w V UORI MIOMINAL
OF woo Owl
YD7Nf. 1 1 N e+aMfuMa•1ft PROPOSED WHIM - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
C I NORTH PpNTE
WTI mot 11401"
ill "I PLAN T to A1L OW of
Ip14l Y MAVXY1C1 IIW M oNDf 11242 ACRES
IM ►14N
li .
w C DENTON, TEXAS
SWINNEY/TEBQ INTEREST
i I+b
1-b
Ii ly l _ 1-*0
DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS
14@ WM UI/O /Mr WN O.W. /J.~. MI.
No. "a" owou 04 lf"fv
r 10 17.70 U MW omlyft" Y 30'
} s'' 6 3,77 IN KTAiL NAMR 0.311 14'
• ' - - - e 11.51 C omuehoweoai 0.111 54'
ON MIAL
d AA
X7128
i i -
1.33.00 C 10FROK 0*11000f ek1 30'
0 Tt18 0 PROM81ONAL o1AOe 0.001 00'
j' I d 1 MR3' 1, • • viii M 'WAL LIM 24'
KTAL Mod 30'
^l 1
K
b t 0 YM TO~wwwim 11.01AC 47 0 ~1 W
~ ; 1
M.
M1 l' No 7,31 OR MTAL 0A1 24'
mo=w 0 11.43 W AMRTMEW MOM 08 !0'
IV
_b ' a 3Le2 OF SMO l FAMLY-"" 4.1. LWAO tea 38'
4 18.17 W AMIRTMT 30.OIAC 313 30'
011.54 U UONT.WOUSTMAL ti se
Y4 {U1 M 8MA FAMILY 170001 LWAO W 30'
1 \ ► 10:4g 00 Df01C m /ARK
f j e rile M ,MALI PAMLY 170011 3.e/A0 .04 3r
1 x \ A 301 IM MIAN490WIO1 0.>+r !r
1
*%I 4UT A" lu
ME*
'
q_ mm A41 3 3erAC 8810 Wr
IY-0 ( r 1 MWM ur
l M7.le rWvv f1AL 40.0
07.80 fit[ 31.3
1 1 40.80 M7AL 1211
$.2! 00118""1 1317
M.41 DIWATID PARK 1.1
V Alt HOWA%Y $A
. ~ 411.0
1
Lum
6ma
IV-d f i a .w.wa.
I" mwra m rrul A01IOy
7M Owurmw►r
v-o is e• wRee
V ee errOeln►
008 w1
V-d se
( r rrlMee mm" PROPOSED 2"00 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
1 NORTH POINTE
Mm0 AOO/IIONI► now a my Irt00MM ON 4IL12 ACNA
LIP.
Mu ~ ~ a %PVW Y/'TEBO INTEREST
41► Mf1 /0010100 54131333
' 1'r. rwl~lrrre •A14 NI110AT4M YAalYllll ~'I
RECEIVED imi 3 f 1986
f•
~IYI No N
I• ~1M N 1 1 W JI INNN. IMNI.1 f IfYI N I. INM.
NNf~J11wyWN Y M Ww111 M IN Aw111YN
N~ NIW WFaIaWIW M iti Wl1Y b 1
N• 1 alY.
t. IN I~IIIMN l fw ,11N/Y N ffi f IN NY 111
J. w N1N~ INNr N 1Y~41~1I YIa1N1 NIl11i W IYYYNANIY 1 7 J(S o.
aN, IMM N N.YNI NIMI • 1
1. 41 NIYW PMW YNNI N IN, N' JiY. Mir i~•1 1/ 9 J~ f
_ J ~1
l• 1MIIN %",w I a WIIIA N fY1N1 If NI WfY W NYI•I.IY l• NY ,yy~ M ~1y,I1/ N M NYIM II IN lMYN
111 N'1r
N.ISMNN MW IYNIIIN 1IW111W IM. M J,iM U. µl Y. M N o Y#=NYN
N NI MMN
W N1i IfN wIMMN 1' NN• MNINNN.NINIw 11 Mi . NIW
1N MNNI NurNN N INIM YNN NN nN. ~W
NI W L N.YS ♦IIN NWIW1Y11'WNI NMU WNM 4NImHY ~I
~~~Y1~ _ WWI.NrI NrN• I ,~N i1
. ►.ffi A' - N~M1Nf WW 0 IN ~.w/1.MIMWaI IhIN MINI, Y0'1. 1,111164,40,
em pII,AY 1
'NY NN, W 1• Y11 YN W 1111IW YY W JN~ ~'NI IN JyMN IN JNNM 804.1 N, i WH /WI Ni1,N W IN,
11N IN UII 11114«N«,N 1•IN/41 1
MfN1YN N N M W Y' N" Y IMNN ftm,l NI W«INMI
MllNy ILIIN M W.)IN N lMp Illl IIYI NIYININII MAIN. YM 1 Mull 1,11 YI ,NNIN1~N1-
Ir~a fNll If W I.~. NCCon
~~I~~ ts~ Nr~ YIWNUI NY11i /.1 Y11NNr. ~ 1
7j1 M Y _~„f _ bwkCA> LHI I
I ~r
' UN 11F w w fM ,(i^:M~04 r vN4MT' ►MP
!J'F f1' I r 0! ) .AI
L N sYw.
TfrAL L11V AM ft "A
eNJ-L
O ti+T
My1 MAW
by
~f~ sl. xM x~ ~ ~
110
1
-In Int op
M
it STRUT Raw
for
y, t.w~ III
f#04MIMr• • I hfN • MMNII faAl r
Y1L Nl.
____LL~/f/'sCV SlTR flJll en",~,~ WAINIMPI, WA&Wr" °r..
bhp 91-I.,'A"' M. #Igo
94,
wil DMftsbD toils r wu.a TQK416 1'ytt+S
PD Z-/eio
pR~ObERPy IIJYFSTHpjLjTS ING. BURKE ENGINEERING XZ>
1 V AEY~~~«sr
IMlIT • ZAJIWJ 4~OWO MOINT wi+w
1 Of IfT I. C°C06T, •ulTt IM
°KMT°NIT9XAl74201 ($01S"-6714•ti
I REVISSED
.1
■ rY rw.rr
1, sow
MOM
01 ma qpM
r I I r!w wr IM
~~~r1.1y.~■r Warw. I rn rw z
OAA
La Now, ww I ~ I w www.
I Iw I~wwr w w
r III
I n .Irw lit writ rr.. ~ ~I{~ 1 wrr_xi w~.r
wr : r.w.
~ 1 r."rrWlwn wrr
Y~LL1YIIf 1 rw.r n.
1' ~\rl... Ir r r~AYxVi rW_I. I.W .iW. Yli.
. Y r.rr w.
~ Y M M.. 111..Y 4MY.Y
JMMAClfOMtM~ AVM x W NY YY .Y.
i
logo" , ` i i Y ~w =riu w♦awuu M xu N_
r rrln - -
A
Y" Mr*..rr• w r11111~r.1w• I r~r. '.w=~.w«
■r lrlil wr \rlMl WY.M.YIr , I r xriw i°: :i~«
•r.. w /w.. r
w
rllr
i I
• wr rr..,.r w . MOM w rr mwn
r+w. w wrrrwrrrrr rwrrl
r ' .r rrYr lrYll
'..1 rIM /M.W 1U~ Ad" rN r10
.~1'rral n, w~.uti w...w PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
PUN
LE, 2 cowcarT
f- X-4 I
11 PROPOIND AEI m
••r~+•K w.«+ r NORTH POlNTE
41&U p4m
~-or SWINNEY/TEBo INTERESI
4.i
1 II•~
- 1 ~
.NM .,.I r~1ee~~Ku I (1I li:~l~
hms itiM wlMt 1. \ Yl~ri a ~wne wwr• 0 was
rn raw
'I ry1••J_NL1_~ * r
4u r,A4
I N I w~.1~lY/1 1 N N.
I wr, N.
' 111i' •.iiC1,1n r IM r1l.wlw.r ~ I ll~
' Y /wrl r+ ~ ~ 1
LA
1 I is « w M q 1'w i M
low.
M~ YMKN
' +1M ;MWi11N1' YId11Y~ 1 II r 1
yY • MM MIMI ~~1~A1 ~1 1 I r. «Hrl N NI ^~II~~u« N r~wr `w
r.. M ~~~/Nl•..• `-1'N II~'S^. iw•~Li: wr"'1.1N.
' =rmlM rl.wl Fln 5 r 1. Y1•Nr.irr ll«I
Ylr
' lo" ; wlwfl r1l)Nf1 1 r r w.81- ` .~ii}}!" 1 i«I'r1Y {yl~w
.«Y«. 1 11 ~ YM.IIN~II~
w~4G~ ~.1'Y I .HNi
. „r.l yy ~1 yy
y+I I \ \ \ 1 ' Y1"11F. NIr1M' MN Ni'YYN'«'
r 1. wF.N HNr. t
, . I l M YM bIw.NOr YI M..
I'1. I 1t~• A .MINI Y Nr. 1, •
7••IrUI F ~Y ««r lr ~,IINN11 IIY r
\Y; s~lr • 4 YII.NIYI b N r,r YpNW~ w
' I' I r • 1~wY11,111r YIN rINl«1rr 1111 N.NIyNY'HNYWy
I /r ; i \ _ ~ , I 1R MINNN N'w~r1Y,11y MNI~NI'1111~ r
rl Y ~ Wr 1!.!M rN ««Nw IrN.
' H,1 «W NINIW .N W1 '
'lLa'S'1.•!4~'J~ 1YINN.
N~ a , \ ~ IY F.V~1 YWIi w««N Wn wM rM1I11
W WNnI
I ~ r• . ~ I W I. Iw '1~ INI MM
I. ; ~lbww.wwuN~ ~r I ~ W F M
1' \ I 6 FF 111 'MI Y1'• •
M Y
111E ~"'•.•Igy•~IM y~y'~ A
AIM
M~' + tNANt r' 7«' 1i
•;N.
aa" wee 1 Nt. Y.
' flit l1l, Nt f
' n ~ IM y1111 YH }I 1
J 1
r !
j
! cr x w,t..,..w 1.... Ef
Now sftn
1?111. . N I 041L ^40 N
SlS }!:%j «n 11111 w
"rnYr i 1.II1~ ^ 1Yt J u u 1,, t A ~ , u MIn IMY
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
"*POSED WN*4
Y F.1 NORTH POINTE
1MkRliYY 1►-w~i 41&U ACM
OENTOK TEX"
ti N SWINNEY/ TEBO INTERESTS
v1 4yy 1~~W~MM~~1~~~
• ~ ~ ~Yt~ X111 ~gr1111
PROPERTY OWNER REPLY FORMS
CITY COUNCIL
Z-1831
IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION UNDECIDED
Bill Roberds None Received
5956 Sherry Lane #1810
Dallas, TX 75225
~O
A.A
80
.00 A~ Awl/
h141 1Y
r
-MEMNON
f
mwmmftwm~
mm~
P Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 1S
or variance in lot depth. He said that this is the final
phase of Westgate Nei hts. No said that the SF-7 area
required added depth 96Cause of marketing and would like
the SF-10 area to have the same building setback for
consistency.
Mr. Claiborne asked if the SF-10 were on the west side,
Mr. Barrett said yes. He added that they have lost one
lot from the original submitted plat.
IN FAVOR: None present.
OPPOSED: None present,
STAFF REPORT: Ms. Carson stated that the pro arty was
UISIiTr? y toned in the 1970's as extension of the
G reenway Club Estates to the west. She said in A ril of
1985, the City of Denton approved a change in zoning from
` single family-7 to single family-10 on 6,714 acres because
the petitioner was interested in establishing the SP-10
zoning to match the lot size proposed rather than platting
10,000 square foot lots with the SF-7 zoningi She said
that the purpose of the planned development s to retain
the minimum lot size in the single family-7 and single
family-10 areas as currently toned, but to modify the lot
depths and setbacks. The modification of the depth of the
single family-10 lots would permit the developers to in-
crease the depth of the single family-7 lots to provide
larger rear yards. The 15 foot front yard setback change
would permit a more uniform appearance for Brooklake West
because the zoning ordinance requires a 30 foot front yard
setback for single family-10 and a 2S foot front yard set-
back for single family-7. She said that the detailed plan
and the preliminary plat contain all information required
by the Planned Development Ordinance and the Subdivision
and Land Development Regulations of the City of Denton.
She added that staff recommends approval of 1-1829 with
the conditions as outlined in the development standards
and schedule.
REBUTTAL: None offered,
Chair declared public hearing closed.
DECISION: Mr. Escue moved to recommend approval of Z-1819,
seconded by Ms. ,,)le and unanimously carried (7-0).
D. Z-1831. Petition of Bob Tripp, Trustee, requesting a
change In zonin from the agricultural (A) district to
FT the single family (SF-7) classification on a $9.14 acre
tract located at the southwest corner of North Locust
Street (FM 2164) and Hercules Street. The property is
further described as a tract ir, the B.B.B. and C.R.R.
Company Survey, Abstract 186. If approved, the toning
will permit the development of single family detached
units on minimum 7,000 square foot lots.
Six notices were mailed to property owners within 200
feet,, three reply forms were received in favor, no reply
forms were received in opposition,
PETITIONER: Bob Tripp, owner, stated that this property
a men in his family for 60 years. He said that this is
a good time for zoning in spite of the speculation and
numerous requests for toning all around his property. He
said that it is a logical request.
IN FAVOR: None present.
OPPOSHDt None present.
/ I
P i Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 16
STAFF REPORT: Ms. Carson stated that the area surrounding
TATS iTt'bs been the site of numerous zoning requests.
The Commission recommended denial of two requests on the
412 acres to the west and north and made no recommendation
on a third request on the property. The Council will con-
sider zoning the property for a mixed use planned develop-
ment on August 19, 1986. The Commission also denied a
request for a mixed use planned development on the 58 acre
tract north of this request. She said that the property
is located in a low intensity area. The request for the
412 acre planned development will use the majority of the
intensity in this area if the request is approved. There-
fore, staff must analyze this tract and consider the most
reasonable land use for the property. The adjacent prop-
erty to the east is zoned single family-10 and the property
to the west is proposed as single family with 7,500 square
foot lots. This request would be consistent with the sur-
rounding zoning. She said that the proposal violates no
Development Guide pclicies and the intensity question is
not resolved because of the pending request in the area,
but the land use is an acceptable planning use on this
property. She added that staff recommends approval of
Z-1831.
Mr. Claiborne asked if Hercules Street is proposed to be
offset. Ms, Carson stated that the street would be offset.
\ Mr. Claiborne asked ff Bell Avenue would intersect with
Locust Street, Ms. Carson said closer to Evers Park and
the baseball field area.
Mr. Claiborne asked about signalizstion at Hercules and
Locust. Mr. Clark stated that the streets would be offset
to avoid a major arterial and allow the streets to func-
tion as collectors.
g0UT'rAL: Mr. Tripp stated that staff recommends approval
andTt fs logical zoning.
Chair declared public hearing closed.
DECISIUN: Mr. Glasscock moved to recommend approval of
Z-1831, seconded by Ms. Cole and unanimously carried (7-0),
15S5L
NO,
MAP OF THE
TEXAS ORDINANCE AMENDING EWASNGADOTHE PTEDZONING
APPENDIX TO CITY
THE F CODE DENTON,
ORDINANCES SN SAID FMAPEAPCITY PLIESFTOEAPPROXILIATELYB S9o149 ORDINANCE
ACRES O OF GLAND
OUT OF THE B.B.B. 6 C.R.R. SURVEY, ABSTRACT N0, 186, AS IS MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRissED HEREIN; TO PROVIDE FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING
CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FROM AGRICULTURAL "A" DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION AND USE TO SINGLE FAMILY "SF-7" CLASSIFICATION
AND USE FOR SAID PROPERTY; PROVIDING FOR A MAXIMUM PENALTY OF
$1,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFPECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1.
That the Zoning Classification and Use designation applicable
to all or part of the property described in Exhibit "A" attached
fhereto and
al reference herein, is Classification and hereby to cSingle
Family "SF-7" District Classification and Use under the Compre-
hensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas.
SECT_ ION It.
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.
Any person who shall violate a provision of this ordinance,
or falls 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 b 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 M
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 ca&tlon 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 STEP
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CITY OF DENTON,,TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM;
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DBNTON, TEXAS
BY:
Z-1831/PAGE 2
EXHIBIT "A"
59.149 acres out of 1E8 & CRR Survey, Abstract 186, Denton County, Texas
EECI1MNG at an iron pin in the gro,.nd in the watt line of Farm I:arket
Road 2164 (N. Locust Street) at the southwest corner of the intersection
of Hereulea Street, said point being the northeast corner of this tract
Thenee South 00 Fetes JU rket Road 21degrees 59 La ust Street) 1752,01 ft, i to an ~ iron pin of i
set in
the ground at the venter of a 20 ft sewer easement recorded in Volume 1105,
Page 449 of Deed Records of Denton County, Texas
MEN'CE ;north 74 degrees 10 minutes 02 seconds West 510,78 ft. to the center
of a sanitary sewer manhole cover
MACE South 78 degrees 30 minutes 41 seconds West 515.29 ft. to the center
of a sanitary sewer aeohole cover
THENCE North 89 do ves@ 06 minutes 11 seconds West 924.89 ft, to to iron
pin set in the ground for the southwest aorner of this tract, said b• sa in
fn8 in the center of the previously described sewn easement. p
THENCZ North 01 degrees 15 minutes 49 seconds Lest 1729681 ft, to on iron
pin set in the ground for the northwest corner of this tract, said corner
also being the northeast corner of the eighth trsot rooord*d in Volume 356,
page 52 of the Dead of Trust reoords of Denton County, Tsxes
TFS:ICZ South 89 degrees 08 minutes 35 seconds Lest 1513.83 ft to the point
of beginning,
The above described 59.149 sore treat was surveyed on the trot;nd by Dewy
Fields in Novenber 1982, It is pert of a tract described in deed to
Bob Z. Tripp recorded in Volume 996 Page 379 of Deed Records of Denton
County, Texas
Z-1831/PAGE 3
;.u 0857L (JbL)
NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS,
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING ON OCTOBER 1 1986, AND ENDING ON
SEPTEMBER 30, 1987; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the budget for the
City of Denton, Texas, for the fiscal year 1986-87 was hereto-
fore published at least fifteen (15) days in advance of said
public hearing; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the said budget was duly held
on the 9th day of September, 1986, and all interested persons
were given an opportunity to be heard for or against any item
thereof;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
The Budget for the City of Denton, Texas for the fiscal year
beginning on October 1, 1986 and ending on September 30, 1987
prepared by the City Manager and filed with the City Secretary,
as amended by the City Council is hereby approved and adopted,
SECTION II,
That the departmental appropriations for the City of Denton,
Texas, for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1986 and ending
September 30, 1987, from said budget are hereby approved and
adopted:
REVENUES
FUND
AMOUNT
General Fund $ 21,550,973
Sanitation Operations 2,792,084
Electric System 63 992 000
Water 4 Sewer System 13,634,732
Working Capital fund 3 914 324
General Debt Service Fund 4,105,655
Revenue Sharing 0
Recreation Fund 4470000
General Project Fund 0
TOTAL REVENUES , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , $110,436,768
PAGE ONE
t
EXPENDITURES
FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
General Fund General Government $ 535,717
General Fund Building Operations 674,743
General Fund Operations Analysis and
Energy Management 72 721
General Fund Word Processing Center 172,637
General Fund Legal 476,576
General Fund Personnel 316,080
General Fund Emergency Management 64,636
General Fund Planning 4 Development 377,646
General Fund Data Processing 8310958
General Fund Airport 869757
General Fund Finance 1,732,153
General Fund Public Works 1,6830354
General Fund Police x,00771747
General Fund Animal Control 216,887
General Fund Fire 31635,033
General Fund Parks 4 Recreation 107200510
General Fund Library 750,120
General Fund Contributions Other Agencies 131,807
General Fund Miscellaneous 1,993,891
TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES , . . , . $ 21,550,973
FUND AMOUNT
Sanitation Operations $ 217860744
Recreation Fund 445,265
Electric System 64,3451189
Water g Sewer System 13,246,646
Working Capital Fund 3,919,610
Revenue Sharing Fund 0
General Debt Service Fund 317830905
General Project Fund 0
TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $110,078,332
SECTION Ill.
That the City Manager is hereby authorized to transfer the
amounts of money contained in the Reserve for Salary Adjustment as
contained In the 1986-87 budget to the various departments as
needed for the purpose of implementing the proposed pay plan as
approved by the City Council for the General fund employees,
SECTION IV,
That the City Manager shall cause copies of the budget to be
filed with the City Secretary and the County Clerk of Denton
County,
PAGE TWO
SECTION V,
That if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause,
' phrase or word in tb.is ordinance, or application thereof to any
person or circumstances 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 be effective upon its passage and
approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of September, 1986,
RAY STSPH
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLEN CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON,,TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
14594 _
NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF
THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE COST OF FURNISHING
AND INSTALLING STREET NAME SIGNS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
That Article 4.03 (J) of Article III of Appendix A of tho
Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, is amended to
read as follows:
(J) Street Names and Name Signs. New streets shall be
name by the developer, subject to commission
approval, by placing the street name on the
required plat. A street which is a continuation
of an existing street shall bear the some name.
Names shall be sufficiently different in sound and
spelling from other existing street names so as
not to cause conflict or confusion.
Street name signs shall be installed by the dove.
loper at all intersections within or abutting the
subdivision prior to the acceptance of any public
improvements. The name signs shall be constructed,
located, and installed in accordance with written
specifications on file with the City Engineer.
SECTION II.
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
i Its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1466.
i
RAY STEPHENS MAYOR
CITY OF DENT N, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLEN CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON,$TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
E
LL7))
CITY of DMX70N WNTON, n LX" 76"1
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 31, 1986
TO: DEVELOPERS/CITY OF DENTON
PROM: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Developers Funding New Street Name Signs
The City of Denton has experienced rapid growth in the 4r
~s4±
four yoars, Our budget for traffic signs has not grown at the
same space. The past year, signs for new subdivisions have
cost over $20,000 which is 65 percent of our sign budget. This
reduces our ability to maintain the existing signs that are
stolen or have been damaged by accidents or weather (fading).
Our correspondence showing our costs, other cities data, sign
specifications, and the proposed ordinance is enclosed.
Please advise if you have any questions.
Je 1a k, P.E.
Ci y En neer
is
!104038
r._
corY of Diw m, rRXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 / TELEPHONE (817) 566.8200
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 61 1986
TO: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
FROM: Joe Thompson, Traffic Control Foreman
SUBJECT: NEW DEVELOPMENT STREET SIGNS
I did a survey with the Directors/Superintendents of
Transportation at Arlington, Carrollton, Plano, and Grand
Prairie about each city's policy of having developers pay for
the first set of street signs for new sub-divisions. The
following notes were taken from each city's spokesman.
A r l i n_qL_
All plats are reviewed by the D. R. C. Loard for problems. At
this point D. R. C. tells the developer that the first set of
street signs must be paid for before final plat is approved. A
fee of $100.00 is charged per set of street signs, which will
be installed by the City crew when the streets are paved.
Carrollton:
All plats are reviewed by D. R. C. Board members during this
review the developer is told that before final approval of a
plat all street signs must be paid for.
If the developer wishes to use an outside vendor to make and
install the signs he may do so, as long as the signs meet City
specifications.
After the signs have been installed, the City is to be notified
and the signs will be inspected by a City crew. After the
first set of street signs have been installed, the City Sign
Department will. maintain any future needs for the plated area.
Signs may be installed when the streets are paved.
R
1
Jerry Clark
August 6, 1986
Page 2
Planoi
D. K. C. Board members review the development plate with the
developer and request that before the final approval of the
plat that street signs be paid for. The Sign Department will
then make up the needed signs and install at 50% occupancy
and/or when streets are paved and roadway lights are installed.
Grand Prairie:
D. K. C. Board members review all development plats with the
developer and request that before final approval of the plat
that all street signs be paid for that are to be installed by
the City. If the developer wishes to have a vendor install the
signs, all work must meet the City specifications which will be
checked by the City Inspector. If the City puts up the street
signs, the development must. have 50% occupancy and/or roads
paved with street lights installed.
Temporary signs may be used for delivery sites only.
Final summary is that the cities are asking the developer to
pay for the first set of street signs, within a range of $50.00
to $100.00 for each sign.
d
e Thompson
jd
1306]
5
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
CITY OF DENTON STREET SIGNS
January 1986
The following specifications are to be used by developers to
order materials for street signs for new developments.
Ordinance # with an effective date of
1986, gives the 'City of Denton the autnor ty to require
developers to place street signs in all new developments before
final acceptance; The City of Denton reserves the right to
store the sign faces until building activity begins to avoid
theft of materials.
1. STREET SIGNS:
A. Composition ■ Extruded Aluminum
B. Size ■ 9" Collector and Arterial Streets
6" Residential Streets
C. Thickness = .08" Minimum - Uutside End
2, LETTERS:
A. For 9" Signs ■ 5" Letters - ALL Upper Case
b" Signs a 41" Letters - ALL Upper Case
B. ALL letter material to be Engineer Grade reflective
material meeting "Scotchlite or equal" standards. All
letters shall be white
C. SIGN FACES shall be green adcolite meeting City of
Denton approval
3, POLES:
A. Shape i Round - 2 3i8" diameter
B. rliickness ■ Wall - .U65" minimum
C. Material a Galvanized - weight, per foot 1,b4 Ibs,
D. Length = 12'
#03631;
0,.
10 d
CITY Of DEMON, MUS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. McKINNEY ST. / DEMON, TEXAS 76201
MEMORA1400I
DA'I'S: June 3, 1986
TO: City Council
FRONI: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Street signs in subdivisions
Subdivisions are increasing rapidly in the City of Denton. Due
to this increase, the cost and time involved i~l making and
installing street signs has increased the work load on the
Engineering and Traffic Control Divisions. Due to these
duties, maintenance of existing signs has suffered. Accepting
this ordinance, will put that responsibility on the developer
allowing him to name and install street signs much quicker to
better inform the public while allowing our present staff
levels to handle our current sign maintenance needs.
J ry (;,~a k, Y.E.
C y E near
is
n0a00h
e17/5MM D/FW METRO 434•2520
C/TT of DWrOM DtMTON, rs"s 710801
MEMORANDUM
DA'rE: July 2, 1986
TO: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
FROM: Joe Thompson, 't'raffic Foreman
I '
SUBJECT: Sign cost estimate for subdivisions
Eighteen (18) subdivisions have had signs installed in them
this fiscal year to date. 'rwo nundred and fifty-eight (258)
signs were made for streets.
Seventy-three (73) signs (stop, yield, etc) were made for
traffic control.
Cost Break Down:
1, overhead and one man hour per sign $16,UU
2, Concrete 1,00
3, Pole for sign 9,10
4, Brackets for sign u.00 set
5. Street sign (blank average cost) 6.50
6. Street sign (cover material) 13.72
7, Traffic sign (blank average cost) 11.35
8. Traffic sign (cover material) 2U.UU
a. Average cost for street sign 53,42
b. Average cost for traffic sign 85,77
As of July 1, 19860 331 man hours have been used to make
subdivision signs.
As of July 1, 1986, 20,043.57 dollars have been spent from the
City sign budget 8302 to make subdivision signs. This is 65%
of total sign budget.
Joe Thompson
Traffic Foreman
00403E
F:
VMOAIili~liL i ASSOCIATES a*Er »o. 00 _
13619Mwood R SWts 300 CALCULATED NY aura -
. DALLAS, TEXAS 75244 CHECKED NY _ uerE
;CEIVED Attu 2 5 }sia4-3104 •aA`E
MEMORANDUM
August 19, 1986
YOs Jerry Clark, P.E,
City Engineer
CITY OF DENTON
Municipal Building
Denton, Texas 76201
cROM: Roy Roberson
SUBJECT: The proposed ordinance requiring developers to fund now
street name signs.
z-------------------------------------------_
We agree with the Intent of your proposed new ordinance which would
place the burden of the Initial purchase of street signs upon the
developers. In view of the fact that the City of Denton Is one of the
few municipalities which 1s yet to enact such an ordinance, we feel
that this is a legislation whose time has come.
Although we do feel that developers should bear the costs of these
signs, we do not feel that it is in the best interest of our clients or
the City of Denton to have all developers be responsible for the actual
construction of the signs. We would request that the ordinance be
revised to require the funding of the proposed slgnage, up, to a cost
of about $100.00 per intersection, be supplied by the developers prior
to final plat approval. It may also provide that should a developer
decide to do so; he may arrange for the construction of the signs to
City specifications. These changes would allow the City to remain
primarily responsible for the construction and maintenance of street
signs with funding for the Initial 'Installation provided by the developers,
Thank you for your consideration on this matter. If we may be of
further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.
RR:S
I
,oo s►i (~+r. r.t ~r. wn.
star:.
DATES 09/16/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT, FORMAT qjA$
T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: PETITION OF HARRY T. RINEY POR VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF
ARTICLE 4607 OF THE CITY OF DENTON SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS WHICH ESTABLISHES CERTAIN MINIMUM CAPACITIES OR GALLON
PER HINUTE WATER PLOW REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE PROTECTION FOR ALL
DEVELOPMENTS PRIOR TO CONNECTION TO THE CITY WATER SYSTEM (V-31)
RECOMMENDATION:
The Public Utilities Board recommended approval at its meeting of
June 25, 1986 and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
denial at its meeting of August 13, 1986,
SUMMARY:
The petitioner submitted a replat for the Original Town of Denton
Addition, Lot 2, Block 33 in March, 1986. The replat is required
before a building permit can be issued for a storage and maintenance
facility behind an automoaile dealership at 520 South Elm Street
(old Dairy Queen). During the plat review process it was
determined that the existing water line serving this property has a
water flow of approximately 730 gallons per minutes a minimum 1,500
gallons per minute flow is required for adequate fire protection for
commercial uses. The replat review continued for several months,
but the flow requirement issue was not resolved. A variance request
was held in July, 1986. To obtain the necessary flow a new 8" water
line would havg to be extended approximately 10000 feet to connect
to an existing 10" water line completed as a CIP project in 1985
(10' line runs from Maple to Eagle).
BACKGROUND:
The Development Review Committee and Fire Marshal and utility staff,
specifically, recommended denial of the variance request prior to
consideration by the Public Utility Boird. The Public Utility Board
recommended approval and the Planning and Zoning Commission, citing
the eight standards that are evaluated when variances are requested,
denied the request. The petitioner appealed the decision.
PROGRAMS] DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
3)eveloper/owner, City of Denton and citizens if the line is
ultimately replacod at public expense through the Capital
Improvement program.
City Council Report Format
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT;
Based on Utility Department estimate, approximate cost of line
extension is 2,000 feet x $21.50 per foot • $21,500,
R tful y a fitted
yA Narrell
Pr pared byt _ ity Manager
~akl, * E6,
David Ellison
Senior Planner
App R
Jeff Me
Director of Planning
and Development
0367e
PLANNING $ ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEh
TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING $ ZONING COMMISSION
FROM: R. E. Nelson, Director of Utilities
SUBJECT:
Consider Appeal of City of Denton Code of Ordinance Appendix A,
Article III9 4.07 (E) Water Utility Standards, by Commercial
Structures and Interiors Inc., (Original Town of Denton Lot 2 Block
33), Harry Riney, Owner, 420 Southfork, Lewisville, Tx 75067.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Public Utilities Board at their meeting of June 25, 198G,
reommended to the Planning $ Zoning Commission approval of this
variance appeal for lower fire flow than required by this ordinance.
SUMMARY:
On June 3, 1986, the Developer appeared before the Development
Review Committee requesting recommendation of approval for
preliminary plat and replat for construction of a storage facility
behind existing retail sales building. All commercial developments
require a fire flow capacity of 1500 gpm. The existing fire flow
from a fire hydrant at South Elm St, and East Prairie St, is 637
gallons per minutes, which is far below the necessary requirement.
The City of Denton completed a 10" CIP water line project in 1985
from Eagle Street to Maple Street on Locust Street which currently
gives 2706 gpm fire flow. The Developer can construct a new 8"
water line from this point to his development which would satisfy
the fire flow requirement. Approximate cost to developer would be:
1000 feet x $21.50 per foot ■ $219500. The City may wish to
pparticipate in oversixing that portion on Locust Street from
Developer's 8" to a 10" water line.
The Utilities Staff and Fire Marshall recommended denial of this
appeal for variance.
BACKGROUND:
The proposed development is located on the west side of South Elm
Street between Prairie and Highland Streets.
The City Code of Ordinance, Appendix A, Article III, 4.07(e) states
as follows:
0182n:2
"Water capacity required. The city reserves the right to prohibit
any connection to the city water system when it is determined that
adequate capacity does not exist to serve the proposed development,
Adequate minimum capacity shall be defined as follows:
Area- High intensity commercial and industrial
GPM: 3000
Area: Medium intensity commercial
GPM: 1500
Area: Medium intensity residential
GPM: 750
Area: Low intensity residential
GPM: Sao
All flows to be calculated with 20 lbs residual pressures.
Sppecial and unique exceptions to the above standards may be made by
tfie Planning and Zoning Commission after recommendation from the
Public Utilities Board. Note: All sewer and water utility
standards are applicable in the city limits."
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Customers and employees of this site, citizens of Denton,
development near this site, the Fire Department and the Utility
Department.
FISCAL IMPACT
Possible increased insurance rates in the City of Denton, loss of
life, medical expenses incurred in a fire due to lack of proper fire
protection,
Prepared by: Respectfu ly submitted,
av Ham, Asst. Director K, E. Nelson
Wtr/WW Utilities Director of Utilities
APPROVED:
av am, ssr, Dire or
Wtr/WW Utilities
ATTACHMENT I Sketch of site
11 Letter from developer requesting variance of fire flow
III PUB Minutes of June 25, 1986
0182n:3
M.Mi
ATTACHMENT I
HALF OFLLTOTW2 BLOCK T33.
i
T t
~ IM
O
- •i w ~
i
q> ~f41r
„EAGLE r WI
;aLINfS = ON Ala
FIRE FLOW VARRIANCE j
p~.i.a~ le►eatlun
I
t.• ~ ~ r RN wr1 trrN y 4
e•lule Iflvfmum ~ ~'s Q ~
nor r ~ ?x "m , j II
•al f
M wfl.S•ts~tj.,;; ~tIK efrow
1{ 7i
M, 00
10
4 }
• •a, l I L1~I
rx Pow toll / ~ •
fN on ~~MU► fMwlCt ! Ulrpla Kt.
at Alh,Aa~ ' 140
/ I lW q1Y 11i
Am IL
A~ `MN 1 r 1 a ( / LOT 2 A '
WON ONE MALE OF LOT 2
hrl. i
f ltlmr + •
0.11~RIIfawM In% plod" t?
It. t. ILM or.
r
yMM Nip ! G
1.1 tllf i 1
nay 14
AITORNtYS AT LAW
nauN o. v" MWISAMAL CORFORAWN
OAN TRAMMKLL
$30 wpT N1C><ORY
Sf pNiN ! l9YSt D{NTON. TiXA! 76301
Y 17) !H iT7q
h4YrR0 MOODY!
May 13, 1986
Mr. Bob Nelson
Director of Utilities
City of Denton
215 East McKinney
Denton, TX 76201
REI Request for variance to water capacity pursuant to Article 3, 4,07(E),
Appendix A, to City Code
Dear Mr. Nelsons
This letter Is to advise that I represent Harry Riney, who has submitted a replat
for Lot 2, Block 33, Original Town of Denton Addition.
The above replat has been denied partially because of Inadequate minimum water
capacity. A recent fire flow test conducted at South Elm and Prairie produced
a result of 767 gallons per minute when the City Code requires 1500 gallons per
minute for this development. The Development Review Committee has Informed
me that It is possible to obtain an exception to said standard by writing you this
letter and requesting an appearance before the Public Utility Board.
My client's proposed development Is a 6000 square foot storage facility to be
built behind his existing retail sales business. The facility will be ujed for
maintenance and storage of Mr. Riney's vehicles and equipment and will result
In no additional water usage.
This letter is to request that such exception be granted and that we be allowed
to appear before the Public Utility Board for such purpose.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sl reiy,
Dan Trammell
DT/mc
I
ATTACHMENT 2
EXCERPT
PUBLIC UTILITY HOARD
MEETING OF JUNE 25, 1986
3, CONSIDER APPEAL OF CITY OF DEN'TON CODE OF ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A 44TI II 4.07 E W fi L Y OARDS,
'i'OA
OF E Oh OWNER*
Nelson explained that the Utilities Staff and the Fire
Marshall recommend to the Public Utilities Board denial of
this variance appeal for lower fire flow because of the
r~;iquirements of Ordinance, Appendix As Article III, 4.07(e).
Nelson pointea out that on June 3, 1986, the developer
appeared before the Development. Review Committee requesting
recommendation of approval for preliminary plat and replat
for construction of a storage facility behind existing
retail sales building. All commercial developments require
a fire flow capacity of 1500 am. The existing fire flow
from a fire hydrant at South Elm St. and East Prairie St,
is 637 gallons per minutes, which is far below the
necessary requirement.
According to the requirements of Ordinance, Appendix A,
Article III, 4.07(e) "Water capacity required. The city
reserves the right to prohibit any connection to the city
water system when it is determined that adequate capacity
does not exist to serve the proposed development. Adequate
minimum capacity shall be defined as follows:
Area: High intensity commercial and industrial
GPM: 3000
Area: Medium intensity commercial
GPM: 1500
Area: Medium intensity residential
GPM: 750
Area: Low intensity residential
GPM: 500
All flows to be calculated with 20 lbs residual pressures.
Nelson explained that special and unique exceptions to the
above standards may be made by the Planning and Zoning
Commission after recommendation from the Public Utilities
Board. Nelson asked Mr, Trammell for details about what
would be stored in the facility, Mr, Coomes expressed a
concern about the key rate.
Thompson recommerded that the requested appeal be approved
and forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission for
their consideration. Frady second, All ayes, one nay
(Coomes), potion carried.
STROUD 14
s
204
52. ISO 9 76.3 EC 0 150 0, 13
2~ 4 2C 28 2A " 12
BLOCK 26
40.2' 57-M 60,01' 150.0' 8
so' 50 3 S I I
r : 12 11 10
r 10 9
18 14 13 94 66' 155' 16o' Iso'
)2.5' 50 50
179 IT ao 30 292- 304
IV
16 21 i
1 ~ 2 3 ` ` •N
• ~ ~
20 103'
15 i 00 7 \ 2
179
x 90
14.1 ..1
19
" 3
4
14 0
p 18 loo'
13 3.1
290,
?0' 63' 17
a" 204' 4
~~X224' 144: 66 :00,
s0 ao ZZ, k z "
6 0 Ifi (P. D)5
12 II 10 M 9 8
7 32914
120' 63' 92' 50' 50' 122'
HIGHLAND
60 125 115 120
BLOCK C
6
I'1
125' SAFEWAY ADDITION
s ~
L7) cffy Of 09m ON, rEX.1S
OFFXS OF US C1Ty ATTORNEY
+MSAfORANDU~1t
Ja D. MOPP(4 A•t UMU Ctty A'.U moy
Robert d. ArUntsr, Aptstmt MY Attom*y
DATE: January 14, 1985
TO: Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission
David Ellison, Senior Planner
FROM: Joe D. Morris, Acing City Attorney
SUBJECT: OPINION N0. 370
Standards to be Applied in Determining Adequate
Water Supply Facilities for New Developments;
Variances to Standards
We have been asked to address the question of the applicable
standards to be used in determining the neceasai-y water supply
facilities to be furnished for new developments, and the Planning
and Zoning Commission's ("Commission") authority to vary those
standards. The issue arises because there are provisions in the
Denton Development Code and the Uniform Fire Code which both
address the necessary water supply facilities that must be
provided for new land development.
The "Denton Development Code" (DDC) provides regulations and
standards for all new subdivisions and developments within the
City (and for subdivisions within the City's extraterritorial
,jurisdiction). Article 4.07 of Chapter III of the ADC provides
for "Water Utility Standards" for all new subdivisions and
developments. Paragraphs (A) and (E) of Article 4,07 address the
required capacity of water facilities to serve those new
developments. They read as follows:
(A) Basic Policy. Water systems shall be provided with
a sufficient num er of outlets and shall be of sufficient
size to furnish adequate domestic water supply to furnish
fire protection to all lots and to conform to the City of
Denton Master Water Plan, the Comprehensive Utility
Ordinance of the City of Denton and the Standard
Specifications of the City of Denton.
OPINION N0. 370
January 15, 1985
Page Two
(L) Water Capacity Required. The city reserves the
right to pro bi any connect on to the city water system
when it is determined that adequate capacity does not
exist to serve the proposed development. Adequate
minimum capacity shall be defined as follows:
Area GPM
High-intensity commercial and industrial 30000
Medium-intensity commercial . . . . . . 11500
Medium-intensity residential . . . . . . 750
Low-intensity residential. . . . . . . . . . . 500
All flows to be calculated with twenty (20) pounds
residual pressures.
Special and unique exceptions to the above standard may
be made by the planning and zoning commission after
recommendation from the public utilities board.
Section 10.301(c) of the Uniform Fire Code (1982 ed.) ("UFC"
adopted by Ordinance No. 84-112, effective September 4, 1984, also
has provisions relating to the providing of adequate water
capacity for new buildings and developments. Section 10.301(c)
provides, in part, as follows:
(c) Water Su 1 An approved water supply capable of
supplying requ red fire flow for fire protection shall be
provided to all premises upon which buildings or portions
of buildings are hereafter constructed. When any portion
of the building protected is in excess of 150 feet from a
waoter supply on a public street, there shall be provided,
when required by the chief, on-site fire hydrants and
mains capable of supplying the required fire flow.
Water supply may consist of reservoirs, pressure
tanks, elevated tanks, water mains or other fixed systems
capable of supplying the required fire flow. In setting
the requirements for fire flow, the chief may be guided
by the standard published by the Insurance Service
Office, "Guide for Determination of Required Fire Flow."
We must first determine whether there is a conflict between the
provisions of the DDC and UPC which respectively address the
providing of water supply facilities for new development.
OPINION NO. 370
January 15, 1985
Page Three
Section 1.103(a) of the UFC provides that "(t)he provisions of
this code shall supplement any and all laws relating to fire
safety...."
The same rules of construction apply to municipal ordinances as
apply to statutes. Town of Port Acres v City of Port Arthur, 340
SW2d 325 (Civ.App. 1961 writ. re
address the same n'r'e• tatutes which
their provisions harmonizedsubject
thewill
extent construed
possible together
own and
Patterson 609 SW2d 287 (Civ.App. 1980). The legislative body-fin
enact ng a new law, is presumed to have acted with full knowledge
of aI1 existing laws, especially those dealing with the same
subject matter. Garner v Lumberton Inds pendent School District,
430 SW2d 418 (Civ. pp. 68)0 A
iven more spec c statute will--6e
g precedence over a more general one regardless of their
temporal sequence. Bank of Texas v Childs, 615 SW2d 810 (Civ.App.
1981 writ ref'd n.r.e. . '
Applying the above rules of statutory construction to the
provisions of the DDC and UFC which address the providing of
adequate water capacity for new developments, we conclude that
there is no irreconciable conflict between the two.
Article 4.07(E) of the DDC sets a specific minimum water capacity
standard for new development. Section 10.30 c
eneral standard for determining necessary addeq ate hcapacUFC itytfor
new evelopments. Since the specific statute takes precedence
over a general statute on the same subject and the UFC
that its provisions shall supplement existing laws relatingidto
fire safety, we conclude that Article 4.07(E) was meant to provide
only the minimum water capacity standard for new development. In
providing for a minimum water supply standard, Article 4.07(E) of
the DDC does not preclude that in some cases a water capacity
greater than the minimum specified may be required. In such
cases, the UFC provides a method of determining how the water
supply in excess of the minimum standard of the DDC is calculated.
The question we are addressing arose because of a request for a
variance by Mr. Randy Smith from the minimum water capacity
standards of the DDC. The information we were supplied concerning
the background of the circumstances leading to tits variance
request are as follows.
Mr. Smith had operated a manufacturing
to annexation of the property. Upon nnexation Btheie Brae prior
zoned agricultural and the use of the property became oaelegalwas
ly
nonconforming use pursuant to the provisions of the zoning
ordinance# The plant was recently completely destroyed by fire,
77-
OPINION NO, 370
January 15, 1985
Page Four
which resulted in termination of the non-conforming use. Mr.
Smith requested and received approval of the rezoning of the
property to light industrial in order to rebuild the plant and
resume the prior use of the property.
In order to rebuild on the property, Mr. Smith was required to
comply with the requirements and procedures of the DDC, including
the providing of adequate water supply facilities.
Article 4.09 of the DDC reads as follows:
Art. 4.09. Extensions of water and sewer mains.
(A) Extensions Required to Serve New Subdivisions and Other
Developments:
(1) Required extensions; All developments shall be
required to extend across the full width of the
development lot (defined by plat or lot of record)
in such an alignment that it can be extended to
the next property in accordance with the master
sewer and water plans for the city. Properties
already served by water and sewer shall not be
required to install additional facilities unless:
(a) The current lines are not of adequate capacity
to serve the proposed development; in which
case the developer will be required to install
adequate facilities.
(b) The current lines are not of adequate capacity
to serve the zoning of a property that has
been rezoned to a more intense use since the
time of the original utility installation.
The original water line serving the property provides 683 g.p.m.
Since the property had "been rezoned to a more intense use since
the time of the original utility installation", Mr. Smith was
required to provide additional water facilities in accordance with
Art. 4.09(A)(1)(b) above. The minimum water supply standard for
the property, rezoned for industrial use, is 3000 g.p.m. Mr.
Smith applied for a variance to allow him to develop the property
with the existing water supply of 683 g.p.m. At its meeting of
December 12, 1384, the Planning and Zoning granted the variance.
The last sentence of paragraph (E) allows the Commission to make
special and unique exceptions" to the water capacit standards.
Since Chapter III of Article I of this DDC specifically provides
for variations and modifications of the general requirements of
OPINION NO, 370
January 15, 1985
Page Five
this ordinance," it must be presumed that the "special and unique
exceptions allowed by Article 4.07(E) refers to the general
variation provisions of Chapter III.
As we pointed out at the meeting of December 12, the Commission, in
order to grant a variance of the provisions of the ADC must find
that all of the conditions of Chapter III of Article I are
satisfies. If one of the conditions are not met the variance
cannot be granted. Those conditions read as follows:
(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.
(4) The modification accomplishes the spirit and intent of
the standard. (Even though the modification may not
meet the letter of the applicable standard, it provides
for a better project design. For example, the require-
ment for drainage piping in residential streets might
be waived if the design maintains all building lines
out of the 100-year floodplain and the system is
designed to provide detention qualities that help
correct downstream drainage problems )
(5) The problem in question is not generally common 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 commission 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 modification of
standards.
(7) The hardship must be a physical hardship relating to
the property itself as distinguished from a hardship
relating to convenience.
(8) The hardship must not result from the applicant's or
property owner's own actions.
a `..lei l~-' . -.e. _
OPINION NO. 370
January 15, 1985
Page Six
In enacting the DDC, the City Council was performing its legisla-
tive function of providing regulations for the development of
land. It sought fit to provide a procedure to allow variances
from those regulations under very specific circumstances.
providing specific conditions for the granting of a variance from
the requirements of the DDC, the Council sought to insure that the
regulations it enacted are followed except in those very limited
circumstances. The Council did not and could not bestow upon the
Planning and Zoning Commission a general variance power without
adequate guidelines to determine when such variancies should be
granted. Had the Council given the Commission general variance
powers without standards or conditi:-ins it would have unlawfully
delegated its legislative authority to a subordinant body.
In graning any request for a variance from the re ulations of the
DDC, the Commission must, of course, have sufficient information
before it to determine whether all of the eight listed conditions
of Chapter-III are met. For ex mple the Commission if it is to
grant a particular variance, must mind that "Whe problem in
question is not, generally common to other properties in the
city. If the problem standard" is of general application to
other properties in the cit , the Commission may not grant the
variance. (Chapt. III (A)(5)JT
In the case of the variance request by Mr. Smith, the Commission
would need sufficient informationto detemine that the "'problem
standard" " of developing Mr. Smith's property (i.e. existing water
facilities were not adequate to serve property rezoned for a more
intense use) would not generally be common to other properties in
the city which are to be developed. If the Commission determined
that the "problem standard" was not generally common to other
properties, it could grant the variance if the seven remaining
conditions were also met.
By addressing the variance powers of the Commission, we do not
presume or desire to question the Commission's decisions on
requests for variances, but do emphasize the strict limitations
placed upon the Commission, power to grant variances from the
standards contained in the DDC.
We would suggest that In future variance requests, the Commission
follow the procedures used by the Board of Adjustment, which
performs the analogous function of granting variances from the
requirements of the zoning ordinance. In such cases, the Board,
in each case where a variance is requested, files its written
decision denying or granting the variance. Since the Board and
the Commission, in considering variance requests, are performing a
quasi-judicial function, the findings and decisions on such
OPINION NO. 370
January 15, 1985
Page Seven
requests should be reduced to writing. This procedure insures an
accurate written record of the decision and the basis for the
decision.
We have attached a copy of a proposed form to be used by the Com-
mission in considering requests for variances from the provisions
of the DDC.
Summary
The provisions of the Denton Development Code and the Uniform Fire
Code which respectively address the providing of an adequate water
supply facilities for new buildings and development are not in
conflict. The Development Code sets a minimum required water
capacity. The Fire Code supplements the Development Code by
providing a method to determine the necessary water capacity
required which is in excess of the minimum standard required by
the Development Code.
The Planning and Zoning Commission may grant a variance require-
ment of the Development Code only when all of eight conditions as
specified in the Code are met. In considerin3 a request for a
vari,ince, the Commission should reduce its findings and decision
to writing to be filed with the minutes of the Commission's
meetings.
JOE D. MUKKIS
JDM:,j c
xc : Chris Hartung
Jeff Meyer
Bob Hageman
.
P 4 Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 19
P. eF PotitIon of lArticle Harry T of Riney W for a y of vDenton special
and Land Development Regulations whicn establishes certain
minimum capacities or gallon per minute water flow require-
ments for fire protection purposes for all developments
prior to connection to the city water system. Additional
development is proposed on commercial (C) property located
at 520 South Elm,
!light notices were mailed to adjacent property owners; one
reply form was received in favor, no reply forms were
received in opposition.
PETITIUNER: Steven Reese, attorney representing Harry T.
Un ey, stated that they are seeking a variance on Article
4.07 of the City of Denton Subdivision and Land Development
Regulations which requires a minimum 1,500 gallon per
minute flow of water for fire protection in a light
commercial area. He said that the property located at 520
South Elm has access to a six Inch main. He said that the
Public Utilities Board recommended waiver of this
requirement. He stated that he would like to make a
comment about the eight conditions In regards to why the
variance should be granted:
1. The modified propposal would conform to the city master
p_Ian. . fie staTea"ffiar"tTiere'Ts no'"cfienge in the usage
of the property. He said that they are adding a build-
inR for the storage, maintenance and repair of vehicles
which is being done now, tie said that purpose of Arti-
cle 4.07 is for adequate fire flow protection not human
consumption.
2. Literal enforcement of a revision would result in an
extreme fier n_~hl_~-nr tTie~eveT_n~m'cnt a~'"tFe su6d3vT
sfon.He-said enforcementroi:- Ers"regrTeoenr -wouI'd
prevent the development.
3. Granting of a modification will not have the effect of
revonting,r_ o'rcTerTy s_u6c~TvTs3ori_oF_ot>)er-fend-usc~-
n she area. i?o'sCatec~ tTiat~there is other commercial
property in the area. He sRid that there is riot a
change in land use deslgr.dtion.
4. The modification a_ccomplishes the_sp~ii-r_lt and intent of
tie standard e said the spirit ai,IT lnrerit o the
Art"Tcle`Cs for adequate flow for fire protection and
it is currently inadequate in the whole area.
5. The problem in question is not general! common to
`ot~`rogert e_s-Tn the~cfT-.___ f-the problem standard
T`-n quesTTon is'ol" g`oneraT" pplicatlon to numerous prop-
erties throughout the city, then the Planning and
Zoning Commission is prohibited from grantiig such
variance, but should Instead recommend an ordinance
change to the City Council. He stated that he hoped
this was not a common problem throughout the city.
6. The actual ecun__ia~~~~r~yy~~cost of development of the proeer:
T-sTia a cUsIdete or mo FT¢aT oT-n of st--wards.
He steed that r. Riney as spent ,00in attempt-
ing to subdivide the property and the cost of the
building is $76,000.
7. The hardship must be a ph sical hardshi relatin to
the property itse? i[TZsf nT guTsh roa a ardshTp
re at n to convenience. He said t at t e atrdshT Is
at the only access to the water supply in this com-
merical zoned area is inadequate and that there are
plans underway to remedy the situation but the city is
not sure when It will happen.
8. The hardship must not result from the a licant's or
do ose roopor_t~ own._er in actions. a sa t a`t
he a addressed condition number a ght in condition
number seven.
Y $ Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 20
He said that the Arricli is concerned with fire protection
and the building is not going to increase the fire hazard
any more than already exists.
Mr. Claiborne stated that they will be containing vaporized
fuel and it will increase the fire hazard.
Mr. Reese stated that the fire hazard is there without thin
building and with the building the fire would be more
effectively contained because it is an all metal building.
IN NAYUN: None present.
UPPUSED: None present.
STAFF REPUR'T: Mr. Ham stared that prior to 1970 there
were no minrmum size standards and the State of Texas
adopted a minimum six inch line on water and an eight inch
line on sewer. He said that the state also stated that
the [ire flows should be abided. He said that a 10 inch
main is planned to be installed on Locust to Maple. He
said that ne would like to defend the ordinance because
the insurance rates depend on how well the city police
these areas. He said that the Utility Department and the
Fire Marshal recommend denial of the waiver. He said that
the city has currently IOU miles of substandard lines. He
said that the Five Year Capital Improvement Program
intends to take care of this area and replace the lines
but there are no immediate plans to remedy this
situation. He said that the petitioner had an alternative
to run a line and the cost would be approximately
$2105UU. He added that the Public Utilities Board
recommends approval.
Mr. Claiborne asked if a six inch line under normal pres-
sure would produce 1,5OU gallons per minute. Mr. Ham said
no.
Mr. Claiborne asked about pro rata. Mr. Ham stated that
the city could give the petitiuner a pro rata agreement
and he would be reimbursed if other developments tapped in
on his line.
Mr. Holt asked if there were lots of requests in waiver of
fire flow. Mr. Ham stated that there have been four in
the last year.
Mr, bllison stated rhat staff sympathizes with the
Individual. tie said that from a staff perspective the
question is consistency. He said that there have been
10-12 similar requests and in two Instances the variance
was approved because the property was annexed with no
oxisting utilities. He said that staff felt that with the
eight conditions not being met, the petitioner did not
have adequate justifications for a variance. He stated
that his comments on the eight conditions were.,
1. The master plan is not being conformed to as currently
proposed.
2. This is a development point of view, not staff.
3. If the area redevelops, it would allow for other
Industry in this area.
4. The spirit and intent are not being met.
S. Cf the problem standard in question is of general
application to numerous properties throughout the
cityy tnen the Planning and Zoning Commission is
prohibited from granting such variance, but should
Instead recommend an ordinance change to the City
Council. He said that this is a common problem
because there are a lot of substandard lines and
individuals deyeloping should have to pay to upgrade
the lines.
i
_ IT y..~--~+T+~.v T'~'*er-'.n^^` .a, s s is .
P 6 Z Minutes
August 13, 1986
Page 21
6. Staff has nj comment on this condition.
7, it is really not a physical hardship,
S. Basically the petitioner did not create a hardship but
that he could wait until other development occurred or
until the Capital Improvement Program improved the
area.
Mr. Ellison asked Mr, Morris if the Commission could deny
the variance and approve the plat. Mr. Morris stated that
if they denied the variance the petitioner would have to
meet all requirements of the Subdivision and Land
Development Regulations. He said that once the repIct is
approved the petitioner can build anything allowed in the
zoning district,
REBUT'L'AL: Mr, Reeser stated that the petitioner did not
want to subdivide and replat and that his original intent
was to build on an existing lot, He said that the
petitioner had no intent to hook on to city water and the
tapping system already existed, lie said that the city
would not give him a building permit unless the property
was replotted and tied into the city water system. He
stated that there is a pro rata recovery system but that
tt=ey did not know when they would be repaid if at all.
Mr. Ellison stated that not all of Lot 2 belonged to
Mr. Riney. He said therefore a lot must be created that
shows the property Mr. Riney owns. He said that city will
not Issue a permit if sold by metes and bounds description.
Mr. keese stated that the problem in general is that the
Oriqlnal Town of Denton plat was destroyed years ago and
this property was surveyed by metes and bounds.
Chair declared the public hearing closed.
DECISION: Mr, Claiborne stated that the land use exists
anS even though the property will not be modified much the
City of Denton has an obligation to enforce the
regulations.
Mr. Escue asked if Mr. Bain knew of the fire hydrant
situation in this area, Mr, loam stated that there is a
fire hydrant well within 300 tent on the corner of
highland and film Streets,
Ar, Escue asked for the tlow rate, Mr. Ham said 767
gallons per minute.
Ms. Brock moved to deny v-31; seconded by Mr, Escue and
motion carried (4-3). Mr, Claiborne, Mr. Glasscock and
Mr. Holt voted no,
MINUTES
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 31
June 2S, 1986
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Roland Laney, John Thompson, Kenneth
Frady, Edward Coomes, R. E. Nelson
ABSENT: NAncy Boyd, Lloyd Harrell
STAFF PRESENT: Ernie Tullos, Charles Cryan, John McGrane,
Glenn Jaspers, Harlan Jefferson
OTHERS PRESBNI: Dr. Littlefield. Dan Trammell, Harry Riney,
Mc. McNatt, Mr. Oswald
Service Center Training Room 5:30 p.m, to 07:00 p.m.
r" 3, CONSIDER APPEAL OF CITY OF DbNTON CODE OF ORDINANCE
BLOCK OF DENTON LOT 2 33), HARRY RINEY, OWNER.
Nelson explained that the Utilities Staff and the Fire
Marshall recommend to the Public Utilities Board dental of
this variance appeal for lower fire flow because of the
requirements of Ordinance, Appendix A, Article III, 4.07(e),
Nelson pointed out that on June 3, 1986, the developer
appeared before the Development Review Committee requesting
recommendation of approval for preliminary plat and replat
for construction of a storage facility behind existing
retail sales building. All commercial developments require
a fire flow capacity of 1500 gym, The existing fire flow
from a fire hydvent at South Elm St. and East Prairie St.
is 637 gallons per minutes, which is far below the
necessary requirement.
According to the requirements of Ordinance, Appendix A,
Article ill, 4.07(e) "Water capacity required. The city
reserves the right to prohibit any connection to the city
water system when it is determined that adequate capacity
does not exist to serve the proposed development. Adequate
minimum capacity shall be defmed as follows:
Area: high intensity commercial and industrial
GPM: 3000
Area: Medium intensity commercial
GPM: 1500
Area, Medium intensity residential
GPM: 7S0
Area: Low intensity residential
GPM: S00
-2-
All flows to be calculated with 20 lbs residual pressures.
Nelson explained that specie' and unique exceptions to the
above standards may be made by the Planning and Zoning
Commission after recommendation from the Public Utilities
Board, Nelson asked Mr. Trammell for details about what
would be stored in the facility. Mr. Coomes expr,;ssed a
concern about the key rate.
Thompson recommended that the requested appeal be approved
and forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission for
their consideration. Frady second, All ayes, one nay
_(Coomes), motion carried.
1. CONSIDER MINUTES OF PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MEETING OF JUNE
1 1996-o
71' 0-
DATE: 9/16/86
5 CI COVNCIL RKORT FORMAT 4P
TOs Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
f
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE NEW PLACE ADDITION AND THE
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL REPLAT OF THE OMSLEY PARK ADDITION, LOT IUR,
BLOCK 9
RECOM@tENDATION :
The Planning and Zonir.,q Commission recommends approval of the above
plats.
SUMMARY.,
The New Place Addition is a proposed six (o) lot single family
(SF-7) development planned for 2.506 acres approximately 700 feet
north of Nillowwood and approximately 250 feet west of Highland Park
Road. The Owsley Park Addition, Lot IOR, Block 9 is being replatted
to accommodate multi-family use on a 0.546 tract located at the
northwest corner of Bonnie Brae.
1ACCUROUND:
Not applicablm.
PROs s DRPARTMENTS OR OROUP9 AFFECTED:
City of Denton and developers
FISCAL IMPACT:
Undetermined
ectfu11 u witted:
d '~►r e ~
Pr r7a!~Xored by: ity Manager
David Ellison
Senior Planner
Apprad
Jeff May
Director of Planning
and Development
02690
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
BACK-UP SUMMARY SHEET
MEETING DATE: September 16, 1956
SUBJECT: Approval of the preliminary plat of the New
Place Addition, Block A
SUMMARY: The New Place Addition is a proposed six (6) lot
subdivision on 2.504 acres of SF-7 property
located approximately 7UO feet north of
Willowwood and approximately 250 feet west of
Highland Park Road, All lots exceed SF-7
standards,
Extension of Wisteria, a standard residential
street that will be cul-de-sated is proposed.
Existing 6" water and 5" sanitary sewer will be
extended. Adequate gas, electric, and cable
service is also available for extension. Plans
for drainage are acceptable.
ACTION REQUIRED: Approval of the preliminary pli,_*.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and zoning commission recommends
approval.
ALTERNATIVE: Approval of the preliminary plat.
ATTACHMENT: Reduced preliminary plat
David Ellison
Senior Plc nner
1356)
OTO F. a 00 7R SCSA /
/ VOL.A'N PG. ft
Ef•7 ZON
ti
1 ~ti.~•-~ no's 'se'e 413. 16.1
II IM EAE.]I' i
K" 1A MIII
A ITr~ r. e ~ I I
}~~InI
X{~ <NNL _ ~ Y Rii]L sus SITE
w
2 -7 ZONE
{ \
r NEW P ACE so, 0.W.
1 ~1 1
\ r r g n
pyQ <
»
Q I 1
is. ry
a 3 WIL a\ I } I 11 I t OCA MAP
't 1 ME3T 366.09,
1
yV } r ROa[RT LAWWRE I' X.f. R I3~ 1 N. F.0ELMM.AFan it
Zl , • S~ II 1V ~ 77 V YD W77x Z"il
NROM1000 AOOrT10M~lE'IlTIL. I y I I M
M~p M t EMT.
I
II f \ 6r I f
\ 1 ~ I I , I ~I u
Wruo MA'OITIJM
. I YLL.A M. 16 MOCT
T W-7 o` SEp 0 41986
r GOLF COl1fiT
usn ~ ~ w. a opauma rMOwo
7.N. AA?VSEIOIA
1 MLLLWMr RAt
NEW PLACE ADDITION
A A `
/ I CITY OF Gatdla oma carm'.+ASv a
a11eR "ETROPLU WEB COIMOf1ATION
OEME WAw 04INaRM . N.AMNN a MIMIYLM
Mil no YORTM OMra aM1IN Tow 7gOa
g SCALE OATS .106 MO.
d ~r rr ■ Cmemm? • • • 660431
Kq-^ii ssr-7-.,:.
.5
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
BACK-UP 5MMMY BI ET
MEETING DATE: September 16, 1966
SUBJECT: Approval of the preliminary and final replat of
the Oweley Park Addition, Lot 10R, Block 9
SUMMARY: This is a 0.546 acre tract zoned multi-family
(MP-1). Multi-family development is planned and
the purpose of the replat is to remove existing
lot lines between lots 10-12. An existing frame
apartment building will remain. The property to
located at the northwest corner of Bonnie Brae
and Louiee Street,
Public utilities, drainage and streets are in
place and adoquate.
ACTION REQUIRED: Approval of the preliminary and fiaal replat,
RECOMMENDATION: The Planni,ng and zoning commission recommends
approval.
ALTERNATIVE: Approval
ATTACHMENT; Reduced plats
&J
David Ellison
Senior Planner
036le/2
R E r; IT C 1) r lJ G! 'l 1996
1% 1%00
104 154'
7
r
f A7 Vf
' 9010P&- 0.848 ACRE r
I LOT 10 R LOCATION MAP
~ I Marc rlwr
I M'
Nf-1 PONE i
Ir 88 yid'' ~ .o
104 - 9 ♦ MIST
-t:ou;ai $rnE6~ Ai.,i.t.60 9.4' rr~~
I Vl
I •-...`"~"`-"""~'-'E%i11 .6'91N.4ENER
I VEx19T.e'Ml7IR
C]R' - - • • - - - - - `extol t'ol.el IOE
M. OAK ,__owwtnra
Yf/D.TC
rlEYIo1Q6 r I
Ilan .wr
ONOLD PARK AWITION
STRATA pgOPERTIES
0 c%= MY6.t AqM
OifY p OMI6K O NM Oawrv. Mo
11ETIIOPt Elf ENOINE ns CUPPOMTION
ms DMe r f161VtY7M pm No mnv
avow 1F11116 n10!
L-MIZUUEttm dUMN! ~JI[.. =UX an
,Apb N0.
rM..rrs CMlptt0:.asL f'-26' SS6012!
Rio C o'. T ''"D AUG ? `r 1986 REVISED
tlrTb N )10 1 C 4! I Ox
tram a Nitro
wgYa, giants IrsPan ill, Ide. A" tw it"" If a it", at 1w sttwta 4 am r.
►at"t"i 0wrwr. "Nw4 tr,YN 0%. M/t" Cawr), Tarr, "Ad tral 161444 ohm lo)
4sa1 to Nnl41 ►r."n/fi, Iw. oaf ra"4" N aloft iyS,, rats W, Bert posting
twsodt It bostaf lessly, rfi44, W holy roods Ciotti 4661I1m1 N 411wo
boAlwty far tbi N ibwot efiwf of 14 drat bolt) 4144t1►a 444 x a al 1/1•1ab
!r" Pro. 4814 Id" Its At" biiy tot ratb"64 wstr of 411 Lt 10, bias f. Owalry
bit M/itiN AN abort 04 raffia i. Mow 11 Iat/ At 141 Of ihe drat" 4rty Flat
4rN401 W it the.raaalgeWAM ajyt XWa eNN'IL-mmikt «IwIN /trb". 0411 The
fast t4►t- 404 y "ded 61 Begeels trstl
Taws lblib N Iwow N s$Noted I) wsYt Bert At Ad IN wl rl 4-If•w It" N
1/141N►Mties 4! s to $4 WtWr~t/aar lof the to Ift~iN ftris 'm (Add to a sit
otel w11T Area pit
get" bo1K tot sfitim"o dfiwe N 0414 41n" A M(tl Ttut ON. ot$ the sfitltla
•aref at maid Bel S0, the aw bity IN awt Wlt latest at 41 1, 1104p I N 4414
o4lpiwj
thews ed, as I"frN 11 tided" is sodwr trot . P0461y at $1.00 test tot a$dlgeui0
-n.:. 01 4414 41 10, I" ~ hotso tot "dlaw$rt Nrlor al NII w it, a/ ",Also at
10).00 1"t, 14 w tmot altar of 044 Bet It, 14 dw laly IN a"IWit unrr of
t tw I 1 W 1 I to t to • ,Atil 41 it. $46 t0" rwtWn aawf N "it tot SI all s [Mal iiatwr N 144.54
1 N,Si' '"•l N {SDO' flrt u s ftW tram, PIN tot se "0:0 Hu1i NII lass $to tli* Niy Is 414 ralY IIN of
04 p 4 _ 014 Bet 1, sot it the Ware llw N 1414 41 111
a t .,A.~41 SNNr %fib 01 /Mrra It flat" N Y"ws Msl, sitfiq rod "Or t tbaia list fwd,
iI CAF W, it Ibl,"* of N.N Nat to a sit 111-WY it" Plt to lu *WIN W NrNr Of rw Nrsls
OT I0 e A le re r1N1 great; Oslo list pit sloe ",y to t1Y raft ;IN 11 Nli Lt 414 taw Nly
yCC •7 tae .6% 1$" of 41 41 Nwl 1 N 1414 Nittim
D LOCK 011 ThNel sfwta 0o
GD • y 1
al yna II 01"101 II disease Wu, LINO 414 s0,016 AC% Ilw el NII to 1, "1
A the •vN I(N el Nit Bet 1, ptalN at 1.)1 felt tM wtMSN Nurr N Nll Lt 1, the
400 w tae a t1i U m it 6N woc the alma Wen toast of said 41 4. W ibo 4tlbew (4rsar 11 jaw Bet t1,
rod the wtbWa4t eNgetl Of 4i 13, black f" sa4 oddities, is All a east U44we of
II6.11 Isar el a rot I!1-1wh it" pea for the awtbo"t (4,4411 N 14 )WgelA 4$9411hol
tnttl 4411 Item ►it 4140 441 %W rwthoNe Nt"t at NII genes" t deal, Trwl 044,
0 ;R the rw1bo04t 94Mt s( said Bet It. W V4 604h4hNl differ of af(A Bet 11, rot Is the
1 "rib rltat~fl wp it" of 0414 last" ln40q
lU L......_ - j ti'r 1411 Thecae *64, Mtrty at "I" f"t us southeast Nnrr At 0414 W It, the tw holy
i aalbiaat time# It tilt let 11, W ",Alai at 100,00 INI, dad owlew14t Janet of toll
_ W 11, to. $NO bily the rdet"aft cat"I Of 6814 Bet 1), it all t total 4fatwd of
!11.00 tad to the n41 ,A 41uNso sot ew44bly 0.$44 ti44a of IW.
NE61 IgS.00' Pal. "lr""go OWN au No h "131 ""two
P,0.f1,
L{JVI88 6TAEET LIIIl.rO'I.O. P. tool, rents /rg/raN, Iw. 44 4"" sat" laid tilt NnlNtiy Its barite NNrIW
property as 44 lot, Ilab 1, 0"141 tart. "dittos to the Cltr sf r4441N, tesdN T4Nty,
tests •w N her/q dNtdr,A is to t"Aid a" fselelr the n,An• W 0"04 t6 I,A ibi
rdde ►oelsil sat sas,Ala Nel" ,4pnr"4 btrw.
"A" at "SolI tai 1114 too
4fo1 r, 414 faool$sod Palley Wio 4r the ItMS 81 Twe, a kilt Air porswllp
appear" Ono Als$aNd. Iarrs is a 4 he I4 Pores ahead s"a It lob4otw to Ibi
Ina sly 4eltwda eel "Nwts/led it w that bo raw I'd toe $w her the "ry"a w
d"atlostiwo tbirsls sgloaod W to the tgePotity rutty.
41tp tod,A N aW 041 4081 of $fIIN this tbe _ day at
Be40ry bt lr • NN1 a! ifiN
toalNlN esphN1
1rrTxri,S x1lTIPI.CA21
"W A" M 411 Met Nptlml
Tool 11 tt"fIN f"y . aso/440fN P" lit lwr"T", N a."" lenity that This Plot
Odd NsariptiN Wage pt"ond 0w 41 retail sod affirla sorry gesta be the trwN al
that to* b" PIN $bass (biggest Wart P1fis1 WN ry as Fee. Was 4 ft"" wt with 94
site * Its.
ST'IATA PROPERTIES
526 S. LOCUST STREET » hetfst N
DENTON TEXAS 76209 tIda .aN sA I.1►taaw
16th? d68-6005 r IEa
wr.ap.r low": UAw4x Cris
® 1 ~I ~ N aw pet a N, pet NOwatyge t
10,_(O a Am" ltttlat ytll0Yt0
P VOSJOMi
LOCAL ION MAP AEKrT ISO
OWSLEY PARK AOCITION
LOT to It 1L= 1
1. ^C LLM1 11Atbt7 41 1w
0" K DWOK 0617040 MAN", MO
ME'f"Ofto Omm m wo CaP►OUTION
N t~t WAL1 IU2 no 101111110 IK SMM"ON 71110$
'2113 =.Ad$ 4= A
A tr - - ft1 oMt1► !GALE DATE i1o1 No.
.r wattrn frtGtC.~SG. trr~. 111-NMo1~ .
tTRATA MO►1f1t116
77' , 7r "
MINUTES
CITY OF DENTON
DATA PROCESSING ADVISORY BOARD
September 5, 1986
Called meeting of the City of Denton
Data Processing Advisory Board, Friday,
September 5, 1986 at 7:00 a.m. at the
Ramada Inn, Denton,
Members Present: Jim Kuykendall
Dale Maddry
Ronald McDade
Charl99 Ridens
Others Present: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
Gary Collins of the~City staff.
Gary Collins explained that the #31,875 costs associated with the software
maintenance contract for the financial system known as "LGFS" was the same
price as last year. Gary Collins also explained while :his contract was
our most expensive contract, the financial system encompassed the General
Ledger, Accounts Payable, Purchase Orders, Fixed Assets and Performance
Measurement areas. Gary Collins indicated while the cost of the AMS main-
tenance contract would cover the cost of a programmer to perform maintenance
functions it would not cover the cost of additional staff members in the
user departments to monitor and evaluate new regulations of such items as
FERC Accounting, Dale Maddry made a motion that the Board recommend the
City Council enter into a contract with American Management Systems for
a one year maintenance contract on the financial system known as "LGFS".
The motion passed unanimously.
Gary Collins discussed the need for a software maintenance contract with
TRES Corporation for the Payroll/Personnel package known as "EIS". Ron
McDade asked if the maintenance costs associated with the tax updates were
necessary due to Federal tax aeing the only taxes associated with City of
Denton payroll. Gary Collins explained that the need for tax updates may
be more necessary this year, than any other due to the anticipated changes
associated with the Federal tax reforms. Dale Maddry made a motion that
the Data Processing Advisory Board recommend the City Council authorize
the City to enter into a one year maintenance contract with TRES Corporation
for Payroll/Personnel.system known as "EIS" and the associated tax updates.
The motion passed unanimously.
Gary Collins reviewed the proposed 1986/87 budget with the board and pointed
out the major increases were due to requested funds for two new anticipated
software packages and requested funds for a new Programmer Analyst III
position.
"k PL
i
Minutes, page 2
Lloyd Harrell invited the Data Processing Advisory Board's input on the
subject of controls regarding the acquisition and use of personal computers
by user departments. Gary Collins suggested the Board at a future meeting
review the current policies and suggest improvement to the policies based
upon the board members' experience in their own organizations.
There being no further business the meeting was adjorned.
1
11
1
American Management Systems, 'Inc.
May 30, 1986
Mr, Gary Collins ;
Data Processing
City of Denton
324-8 East McKinney Street
DENTON, TX 76201
Dear Mr. Collins:
Effective August 1, 1986 the LGFS maintenance support for the City
of Denton expires. Under the License Agreement, the City of Denton is
e,-,titled to purchase maintenance support from AMS for additional
periods. Some of the benefits LGFS clients derive from purchasing
on-going support from AMS are:
• Delivery of annual enhancements to LGFS along with complete
installation instructions.
• Delivery of new modules which have been developed by A14S or
other users (i.e., reporter, automatic check reconciliation,
"what if" budgeting, etc,).
• Updates to LGFS documentation.
• Continued active involvement in the Users Group (one of the
main sources for devplooing enhancements lists).
• Support'with the development of new report requests using AliS
provided repor': writers.
• Hotline support of LGFS processing logical questions.
We would like to continue to provide the City of Denton with
enhanced versions of LGFS as they are released. Per your contract the
maintenance fee for LGFS if 15% of the prevailing price list (attached),
Remittance of the attached invoice will provide the City of Denton
with LGFS maintenance support for the 12-month period of August 1, 1986
through-July 31, 1987.
If you have ahy questions, please call me at (703) 841-6452.
Sincerely,
Karen 0. McCullough
Manager, Product Support
1777 North Kent Street - Arlington, Virginia 2220-" GC31 Tele; titiosR - Ans%%erback ?.NISI\'C
Regional Offices 1w Ch:cago - Dcmcr )'ork 1 5r:n Francisco
•
American Management Systems, Inc.
May 30, 1986
Mr. Gary Collins Project No; P2649
Data Processing
City of Denton
324-8 East McKinney Street
OENTON, TX 76201
INVOT.CE
LGFS Maintenanca Fees for August 1, 1986
through July 31, 1987
LGFS $26,250,00
Fixed Assets 30375.00
Performance Measurement 2,250,00
TOTAL INVOICE $31,815,00
(LL
a~ en 0. McCullough
Manager, Product Support
Please make remittance payable to: ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE and send it
c/o Karen 0. McCullough
AMS, 10th Floor
1777 North Kent Street • Arlington, Virginia :2.1174 - i7o.*-, Ide\ r4h3ts - -,wwoback A`fSINC
Regional Offices In; Chicago b(-mf¢r - H! 1 or). sin rrrauiseo
pig*
AMERICAN tr; t~~orrrtr ter: r s1~t>i r im
MANAGEMENT ARLINGTON, VA 22209
SYSTEMS, INC. (703) 841.6001)
LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL SYSTEM PR .~E SCHEDULE
IBM VERSION-LGFS-PLUS i
EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1985
PROFESSIONAL DAYS OF
PRICE SUPPORT
I, SOFTWARE LICENSE FEES
LGFS Plus On-Line System VSAM CiCS Version $175,000 50
LGFS Plus ADABAS On-Line CICS Version 215,000 55
LGFS Plus 1DMS On-Line CiCS Version 220,000 55
LGFS Plus IMS On-Line CICS Version 25000 60
ON-LfNE OPTIONS Fixed Assets 22.500 5
Performance Measurement 15,000 3
Investment Inventory 17,500 3
Job Cost Accounting 30,000 5
Cost Allocation 30,000 5
Extended Purchasing 47,500 8
Advanced Budget Preparation 30,000 5
Report Distribution 10,000 3
Reporter N/C -
Inquirer 15,000 3
Tax Accounting 100,000 20 I
PC Mainframe Link 5,000 5
Inventory 40,000 8
Dismunls: Options are offered at discounted fees with LGFS, The first option is discounted 5%; the second 10%;
the third 1517c, and the fourth and subsequent at 20%.
11. TERM OF LICENSE AND RENEWAL
The initial term of the License is thirty (30) years. At the end of this initial term, the licensee may renew the
License annually for a fee equal to two (2) percent of the initial term License Fee. ;
111, MAINTENANCE AND WARRANTY
The system is warranted for one (1) year from the date of delivery of the software. An optional annual mainte-
nance service provides continued warranty, and telephone consultation, The current annual maintenance
fees are 15% of the license fees. Maintenance is not available for the PC Mainframe Link option,
IV INSTALLATION AND SUPPORT
AMS will provide the above stated days of support to be used as customer desires for training, consulting or
installation and conversion support. Standard installation rocedures and two (2) copies of all user and open
clonal documentation are also provided by AMS. Reasonable travel, living and out-of-pocket expense !n pro-
vide'he support will be billed to Licensee at AMS cost, including a ten (10) percent fee for associated adnunis-
trative costs. Additional training and support will be provided, if desired, at standard AMS rates for .
consulting services, The current rate is $75 per hour. An additional 50 days of extended support will be pro-
vided for $27,500. i
V. TERMS OF PAYMENT OF SO17WARE LICENSE FEE
80% of License Fee upc n execution of License Agreement and delivery of software and documentation.
20% of License Fee upon delivery of AMS assistance.
Expense reimbursement or additional support due upon receipt of monthly billing.
A finance fee of two (2) percent per month will be due for any amounts not paid within thirty (30) days of due j
date. i
NUCLS SUBILCT TO CHANGE M111OUT N'OTKL
NEW PORK C CHICAGO r= DFNVER ~ HOWTON c SAN FRANCISCO
1212) f4-0,w (31,41269-0275 (303) 9,89.7065 (713) 2709095 (415) 5954W
y
MINUTES
CITY OF DENTON
DATA PROCESSING ADVISORY BOARD
September 5, 1986
Called meeting c. the Cite of Denton
Data Processing Advisory Board, Friday,
September 5, 1986 at 7:00 a.m. at the
Ramada Inn, Denton.
Members Present: Jim Kuykendall
Dale Maddry
Ronald McDade
Charles Ridens
Others Presents Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
Gary Collins of the'City staff'.
Gary Collins explained that the #31,875 costs associated with the software
maintenance contract for the financial system known as "LGFS" was the same
price as last year. Gary Collins also explained while this contract was
our most expenaive contract, the financial system encompassed the General
Ledger, Accounts Payable, Purchase Orders, Fixed Assets and Performance
MeasuremenL areas, Gary Collins indicated while the cost of the AMS main-
tenance contract would cover the cost of a programmer to perform maintenance
functions it would not cover the cost of additional staff members in the
user departments to monitor and evaluate new regulations of such items as
FERC Accounting, Dale Maddry made a motion that the Board recommend the
City Council enter into a contract with American Management Systems for
a one year maintenance contract on the financial system known as "LGFS".
The motion passed unanimously,
Gary Collins discussed the need for a software maintenance contract with
TRES Corporation for the Payroll/Personnel package known as "EIS". Ron
McDade asked if the maintenance costs associated with the tax updates wero
necessary due to Federal tax being the oily taxes associated with City of
Denton payroll. Gary Collins explained thbt the need for tax updates may
be more necessary this year than any other due to the anticipated changes
associated with the Federal tax reforms. Dale Maddry made a motion that
the Data Processing Advisory Board recommend the City Council authorize
the City to enter into a one year maintenance contract with TRES Corporation
for Payroll/Personnel system known as "EIS" and the associated tax updates.
The motion passea unanimo-,ialy,
Gary Collins reviev,ed the proposed 1986/87 budget with the board and pointed
out the major increases were due to requested funds for two new anticipated
software packages and requested funds for a new Programmer Analyst III
position.
Minutest page 2
Lloyd Harrell invited the Data Processing Advisory Board's input on the
subject of controls regarding the acquisition and use of personal computers
by user departments, Gary Collins suggested the Board at a future meeting
review the current policies and suggest improvement to the policies based
upon the board members' experience in their own organizations,
There being no further business the meeting was adjorned.
ti:
c
qssyst "ENC.
a Contfd ow Company
16716 Add1w Road
Dallis, Tox&s MW
214/2466131
INVOICE NUMBER: 040011
April 17,. 1986
CITY OF DENTON
324-A East McKinney
Denton, Texas 76201
Attention: Mr. Gary A. Collins
Invoice for the TRES Employee Information System License
Material Maintenance in accordance with Primary Agreement
No. 758..
MAINTENANCE PERIOD
July 1 1986 thru June 30, 1987
TOTAL INVOICE $17,000.00
Please remit to:
TRES SYSTEMS
Department 0016
Dallas, Texas 75284-0016
W-
C*VM DDaata Comp"
18775 Addlew Ao6d
Dallas, Tons .7524!
214/246.037
INVOICE NUMBER: 040012
April 17, 1986
CITY OF DENTON
324-A East McKinney
Denton, Texas 76201
,Attention: Mr. Gary A. Collins
Invoice for the TRES Employee Information System Tax Service
Maintenance in accordance with Primary Agreement No. 758.
I4AINTENANCE PERIOD
July 1, 1986 thru June 30, 1987
TOTAL INVOICE $3,000.00
Please remit to:
TRES SYSTEMS
Department 0016
Dallas, Texas 75284-0016
r
J
ti' r _ -1.1 W-11
rA ,
Wy i \ Y
S
Service Fee Schedule
JOB TRES SERVICE
LEVEL CLASSIFICATION VOLUME I VOLUME U VOLUME III VOLME n
I Project Officer $131,00 $126.00 5121,00 $114,00
2 Sr. Consultant 115,00 110,00 105.00 100100
3 Proj, Director/
Consultant M 100.00 96.00 92,00 87,00
4 Consultant 11 88.00 85,00 81,00 76.00
5 Consultant I 78,00 75.00 72,00 68.00
6 Analyst M 68.00 65.00 62.00 59.00
7 Analyst A 58.00 56.00 54,00 51,00
8 Analyst I 48.00 46.00 44,00 42,00
9 Programmer 11 42.00 40,00 38.00 36.00
10 Programmer 1 39.00 37.00 35.00 32.00
11 Technician 30.00 29.00 28.00 26,00
12 Clerk Typist 30.00 29.00 28.00 26.00
DEFINITIONS
Volume Level f (1.149 Hours); The service of each individual required for a period from I through 149 hours of work. Billing
will be for hours worked calculated to the nearest hour with a minimum charge of 3 hours per call,
Volume Level 11 (150-499 Hours): The service of each individual required for a period from 150 through 499 consecutive
hours of work to be performed in eight (8) hour ships (plus a meal period not to exceed 1 hour per day) within the hours of
7:00 a.m, to 6:00 p.m, during normal work weeks, excluding vacation time, sick leave, and holidays. A normal work week is
defined as 5 consecutive calendar days of work followed by 2 days off, The customer will be billed for hours worked
calculated to the nearest hour with a minimum charge for at least 150 hours for the service ordered.
Volume Level III (500999 Hours): The service of each individual required for a period from 500 through 999 consecutive
hours of work to be performed in eight (8) hour shifts (plus a meal period not to exceed I hour per day) within the hours of
7,00 a.m. to 6;00 p.m. during normal work weeks, excluding vacation time, sick leave, and holidays. A normal work week is
defined a~ 5 consecutive calendar days of work followed by 2 days off, The customer will be billed for hours worked
calculated to the nearest hour with a minimum charge for at least 500 hours for the service ordered.
Volume Level IV (1,000.2,000 Hours), The service of each individual required for a period from 1,000 through 2,000
consecutive hours of work to be performed in eight (8) hour shifts (plus a meal period not to exceed I hour per day) within the
hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6-00 p,rn, auring normal work weeks, excluding vacation time, sick leave, and holidays. A normal work
week is defined as 5 consecutive calendar days of work followed by 2 days off. The customer will be billed for hours worked
calculated to the nearest hour with a minimum charge for at least 1,000 hours for the service ordered.
TRES SYSTEMS
A PROFESSIONAL F,RVICE
OF CONTROL DATA CORPORATION
Vii, . .
I IV eg
Job DescHpitions
JOB
LE'V'EL JOB DESCRUMON
I! Project Officer
Works with Project Directors to identify department and project goals and develops plans to accomplish thou
goals. Coordinutes all resources to ensure goals are met within cost and schedule constrainm. Monitors all projects
at least quarterly with client executives as to the execution of overall project objectives,
2 Senior Consultant
Applies and/or develops advanced technology, scientific principles, or highly complex business solutions within
the Individual's field of specialization. Solution: normally require complex integration of information which
extends the existing boundaries of knowledge in the field.
3 Prnect Directors/Consultant II1
Works with multiple Managers to identify the goals of development projects, and the management plans to achieve
those goals. Coordinates resources for multiple projects to assist the project managers to execute the plans for the
accomplishment of goals within cost and schedule constraints. Monitors assigned projects at least monthly.
Develops new thcoric;r and principles for the solutions to complex business and scientific problems within the
field, Develops information which extends the existing boundaries of knowledge in the field. Designs subsystems
as applicable to his knowledge or field of expertise,
4 Consultant 11
Provides technical services in major application areas or industry disciplines from defining system or abstract
problems through solution implementation, Analyzes application requirements and objectives in relation to avalla-
ble computational capability, Performs evaluations of data processing operations and system and develops im-
provement strategy.
5 Consultant I
Designs an(, clops computer application systems. Modifies existing systems to provide additional capability
requirements; this may include integration of several existing subsystems,
6 Analyst IN
Formulates statements of management, scientific, and business problems; devises procedures for solution of
problems by use of electronic data processing systems and applications. Analyzes the business, scientific, and
technical requirements for the design of application software,
t
7 Analyst 11
a, System Analyst
Devises and prepares layouts for computer system requirements and develops procedures to process data.
Analyzes problems in tcrtrs of requirements to determine techn°ques and formulates solutions most feasible for
processing data. Prepares problem definition, together with recommendation needed for its solution, from
which the programmer prepares now chart and computer instructions,
TRES SYSTEMS
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE
OF CONTROL DATA CORPORATION
No.
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT
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 bide for the purchase of necessary materials, equip-
ment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedures of
state law and City ordinonaes; 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 ProposalsS' submitted therefor;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has go 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
$l0,000; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.04 of the City Charter requires that
every ant 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 numbered items in the following numbered bids for
materials equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the "Bid
Proposalsh attached liareto, are hereby accepted and approved as
being the lowest responsible bids for such itemef
BID ITEM
NUMBER NO. VENDOR AMOUNT
9647 19294 ROCKWELL METERS 5821812.50
~j .1 q 6,1 NE,Mr MtT RS 3{29R_9n
SECTION _11.
That by the acceptance and 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 contained in the Bid Invitations, Bid
Proposals, and related documents.
SECTION III.
That should the City and persons submitting approved and
acceptdd items and of the submitted bide wish to enter into a
PAGE ONE
formal written agreement as a result of the acceptance,
approval, and awarding of the bide, 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, quantitie■ and speoifiad
sums' contained in the Bid Proposal and related bid documents
herein approved and accepted.
SECTION IV.
That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered
items of the submitted bids the City Council hereby authorizes
the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in
accordance with the approved bids or pursuant to a written
contract made pursuant thereto an authorized herein.
SECTION V.
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 1_ day of september ,
Tay'p ns, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
MARLOTTE ALLEK CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON,pTEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMi
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCN, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
PAGE TWO
DATE: September 16, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: BID # %47 MATER METERS ANNUAL CONTRACT
RECOIVENUATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest bidder
meeting specification fication as indicated below;
1. 5/8" - Rockwell $18.95 5. 3" - Neptune $ 840.00
2. 1" - Rockwell 47.50 6. 4" - Neptune 1,200.40
3. 1 112" - Neptune 135.00 7. 6" - Neptune 2,410.00
4. 2" - Rockwell 180.00 8. 2"Fire Hydrant- Neptune 370.00
SUIVARY: Estimated quantities for the year would be $116,110.70.
This bid is for the purchase of the annual requirement
for water meters. These meters are Warehouse stock and are purchased on
an as needed basis. Our evaluation included cost, trade-in value, delivery,
accuracy, parts and service.
OACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet
PROGRANS, DEPAR114ENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Warehouse Working Capital Inventory and
Water Utility Department
FISCAL 111PACT:
Working Capital Inventory 710-004-0582-8709
Respe tfuily submitted:
- "ZoE:jVFd=1%
L d V. Harrell
C ty Manager
Prepared by:
Name: Tom D. Shaw, C,P.M.
Title: Assistant Purchasing Agent
Approved:
Name: Tom D. Shaw, C.P.M.
711W Assistant Purchasing Agent
- - -
I i 1 I
DID N 9611 1 NEPTUNE I 6ADOER I ROCKWELL I
K;
610 TITLE HATER METERS I i I 1
OPENED 9/4/86 2100 P,M. I I f I
ACCOUNT# I I I 1
I I r 1
•--I I I I
t I QTY I ITEM DESCRIPTION I VENDOR I VENDOR i VENDOR I
I--------- I-------------------------- I-------------I-------------I-------------1
A, I I NEW METERS I I I I
1. 1 15/8" 1 19,00 1 19,25 1 18195 f
2. 1 11' 1 49,00 1 46.60 1 47.50 1
31 1 11 112" 1 135.00 1 137,62 1 137,00 1
4. 1 12' f 185.00 I 1u7.54 1 180,00 1
5, t 13' 1 840.00 I 769.00 f 790.00 1
6. 1 14" 1 11200,40 1 11170.00 1 11200,00 I
7, I 16" 1 2,410,00 1 21290.00 1 21300,00 i
8, i 12" FIRE HYDRANT METERS 1 370,00 1 I 390.00 1
1 f 1 1 I I
5, 1 1 TRADE IN SALVAGE METERS I I I I
1. 1 1518" 1 4.00 1 3.00 1 4.00 1
21 1 II' 1 8,00 1 0.00 1 1100 1
3. 1 i1 1/2" 1 15.00 1 12.00 1 12.00 1
4. 1 12' I 20,00 I 18.00 1 20.00 1
I f i i I I
1 f I I I I
C, I IVANDALIIED REGISTER I I f i
I IEXCHANUE PRICES
1. I i5/8" I 11.00 f 7,50 f 10,00 1
2. 1 It" 1 18.70 I 7,50 1 10,00 1
3. f 11 112" 1 18.70 1 7,50 1 10.00 1
4. 1 12" 1 18.70 1 7.50 1 10.00 i
I 1 I I
I I i I I
D, I ICHANDER EXCHANGES PRICES I 1 1 I
I, 1 1518" I 1110D 1 8150 1 9.50 1
2. 1 Ill 1 30.00 1 11.00 1 23,55 1
3. 1 II 1/2' I 73.95 1 21,50 1 83.50 1
41 1 12' I 101.36 1 44.00 1 102,75 1
I i 1 ! I I
I i I I 1 l
I I DELIVERY 1 30 DAY 1 1 30-45 FLAY I
I I f I I i
U923L
NO,
AN ORDINANCE PROVII,ING FOR THE EXPENDITURE or FUNDS FOR
EMERGENCY PURCHASE,°, OF i`ATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR
SERVICES IN ACCOR;IANCE WITH THE PROV181UNS OF STATE LAW
EXEMPTING SUCH PURCIMZS 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 hs4 th of the citizens of the
cit or in case of unforeseen damage to public property,
machinery 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 snall be by ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL Of 'THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAIN3r
SECTION 1.
That the City Council hereby determined that there is a
public calamity that makes it necessary to act at once to
appropriate money to relieve the necessity of the citisens 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 following emergency purchases of materials,
equipment, supplies or services, as described in the "Purchase
Orders" attached hereto, are hereby approved:
PURCHASE
ORDER NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT
74967 ADYANC=D COMM ffSTMO 812§.274.00
73002 .T AG-CM 1c0DI!MM CO. , INC. 12.000.00
SECTION 11.
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 therefore in the
amounts therein stated, such emergency purchaser being in
accordance with the provisions of state law exempting such
purchases by the City from tho reyuireoents of competitive bids.
PAIng ONg
S'sCT1UN 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 payroant therefore in the
amounts therein stated, such emergency purchases being lli
accordance with the provisions of state law exempting suutt
purchases by the City from the requirements of competitive bids.
SECTION III.
That this ordinance shall become effsc'.L~s leeedistely upon
its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the 16 day of 8epr.eaber , 1986.
MATM
WTENTON, TEX'AS
ATTEST:
CHMLOTTE , CITY
;4E~AE'fici A4
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM?
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF UENTON, TEXAS
BYl
DATE: September 16, 1966
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell. City Manager
SUBJECT: P.O. 1 74967- ADVAwzD cONTROL SYSTWS
RECOMi4ENDATION: We recommend that this one source electronic equipment
be approved for the purchase of additional computer equipment to
add the new sub-station, etc. This includes both the needed hardware
and thn software less Crade--in of some equipment.
SUMMARY: The initial system was purchased in 1974 and upgraded
in 1981. The new system will have the capability for expansion.
BACKGROUND: Purchase Order #74967
Memo from Ray Wells
PRr__QGRAMSs DEPART14ENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Electric Systems operations and future Load
Management Programs
fIscAL IrwACT:
There is no additional impact on the General Fund
Respect ally submitted:
Llo V. Hareli
City Manager
Prepared by:
ante: John J. Marshall, C.P.M.
Title: Purchasing Agent
Approved:
I
OW: oha J. Marshall. C.P.M.
tr
OI i DMOR, TOX"
901.11 TEXAS STREET PURMWE ORDER DIWON, TX 76201
7 1
E P.O.SNNU~MBER DATFdjjq 9 jpO. S22 DOCUMENT
74
EE ~~Rg ADV49000
~DYAF4GEU CONTROL SYSTEM 'CITY NIPDTAYONs RAY WELLS
Po0e 8CX 47824 CENTRAL RECEIVING
ATLANTA# GA 30362 901 TEXAS $Te
DENTON# TX 76201
BID/REF. fT
ITEM ACV,4W' NUMBER UNITS NUMBER DESCRIPTION BID NO. LINE AMOUNT
Ol 611 008 0253 9217 E362 1 OPT #I"NP1M-7035 MASTER STATION 148#298+00
02 611 008 0253 9217 E362 2-A600 COMPUTERS 11/1024 KaYTE5
03 611 0013 0253 9217 E462 2-55*1 MEGBYTE WIN* DISC CRIVE.
04 611 00@ 0253 9217 E362 C/8 EQUIPPED FOUR POFTS#RT2-A
05 011 008 0253 5217 4362 OPERATING SYS9 SYS 0000MENTATN
06 611 00d 0253 9217 E362 I SC12TWARE MODULES PER QUOTE 24#500.00
07 Oil 008 .0253 9217 6362 1 REMOTE TERMINAL CChVEASIONS 26#4160.00
LOSS MST30 818101 TUDO IN - 20
TOTAL" 8179,274.00
FfN\ P.47. 1999658.00
The City of Denton, Texas Is tax exempt • House Bill No. 20,
Reference P,O, Number on ell B/L,Shipments and Invoices
Shipments are FAB. City of Denton, or as Indicated. By
Send Invoices T0: Direct Inquiries TO:
City of Denton, Accounts Payable John J. Marshall, C.P.M. Purchasing Agent
216 E. McKinney St., Denton, TX 76201 Tom D. Shaw, C.P.M. Asst. Purchash%g Agent
(or as Indicated on Purchase Order) 817/608.8311 D/FW Metro 287.0042
The City of Denton is an equal opporiunlty employer
CITY ~)F DENTON
uY>l~'tSS M Z 'M 0 R A N D U M
rrrrr►r►rrr r►-.r.-rr rrrrr-. r,..rrrwrr►r►.--.r rrrrrwr rwr-.y r+r rrr rw r... rwrrrrrr~.r
TOs R. E. Nelson, Director of Utilities
FROM: Ray Do Wells, Superintendent of Electric Metering/Substations
DATES August 60 1986
SUBJECT: S.C.A.D.A. System Master Up-Grade and Duplex
As you are aware, we have discussed the up-grade and duplexing of our
vaster for quite sometime. We have allocated some $200,000 for this
project in our C.I.P. for the Fiscal Year 1987. we have also discussed
functions we would like our system to perform ranging from computer
aided distribution to mapping. I have ask for, and received, quotes
from the two leading companies in this field. They axe TEJAS out of
Houston, Texas, and ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEMS o,.t of Atlanta, GA.
The quotes are as follows:
TEJAS quotes two systems, One quote is for their "generic" system,
and they provide system support.
TEJAS second quote is for a "DEC" system with support by "DEC".
The TEJAS quote includes four new CRT's and two new printers.
The quoted prices are $210,000 for the system they support and built out
of "DEC" and third party vendor items. The prices for a total "DEC"
system is $245,219.00. Both systems have a $31,4:2.00 adder for spare
parts.
The only problems I see with TEJAS is the fact we would be operating
with two different protocols (B.W.T.-BASIC and A.C.S.), and we would
eventually operate with three until E.W.T,-BASIC, and R.T.U.'s could be
replaced. The quoted price for system one (1) is also higher than the
A.C.S. quotes.
1. The A.C.S. quote has two optionsi Number (1) is $1790275.00.
Thic; is based on HP-A600 CPU's.
2. Number (2) is $251,595,00. This is based on HP-A900 CPU's,
A.C.S. has a spare part option quote of $3,386,00 if required.
A.C.S. will change out our B.W.T,-Basic, R.T.U.'s and turn them into
A.C.S.-R.T.U,'s for the price quoted for option l or 2. This is a real
advantage since we would only be using a single protocol, and the R.T.U
parts would then all interchange. This is a real plus from our
operations stand point.
Based on these facts and figures, I strongly recommend the A.C.S. quote
be accepted for option (1) at $1790275.004
CITY Or DE44TON
UYt~ MEMORANDUM
rrwrwrarwrrwwrwra rrww r~.rrrrrrr r-r-..u rarrra rr rr.wrarr..wr w.. w.wrrr rrwr+rr...~wrr
TOs CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
FROMs Ray D. Wells, Superintendent, Metering & Sub Stations
THROUGH: R. E. Nelson, Director of Utilities
SUBJECT: Support/Background Information - S.C.A.D.A. System
The following background information is intended to inform the Board
members of our previous S.C.A.D.A system purchases, costs and problems.
The electronics industry has, for many years, been a fast changing
industry. I sometimes think that the electronics firms market planned
obsolescence. However, I suppose like many other businesses and
services, new developments are faster cowing and carry more profound
impact than others.
A) First actual S.C.A.D.A. systems purchased in 1974 with final
equipment delivery and on line operational use being 1979. The supplier
was B.W.T. - Basic of Houston, Texas, and Black and Veatch was the
consultant firm for specifications. The cost of the original system was '
in excess of $400,000.00 with about $200,00A.00 directly attributable to
the master station, we had many problems primarily with the software.
A fixed hard program was utilized not allowing access to the software
for changes or expansion. This turned out to be very expensive and not
a system we could live with, We learned a very important lesson.
B) Second S.C.A.D.A. system purchased in 1982 with delivery and on line
use some four (4) months later. The supplier was Advanced Control
Systems, Atlanta, Georgia. We did not use a consultant. All
specifications were generated in house, and installation was with our
own personnel. The cost of this system was $101,045.00. This has been
a very good system. At the time it was purchased, it was top of the
line offering as many functions as were available. We have just
outgrown the system's capabilities and have developed a greater need for
total reliability thus the duplex requirement.
The need for our upgrade and duplex of the master station, which is the
brain of the system, is based upon the following needs:
1. Our systems dependence on outside power generation to meet our
system demands.
2. Multiple interconnection points between our system and the power
pools.
77
3. Requirw unt and ability to know instantly what is happening
throughout the systems
4. Need to expand into areaii of load control and management.
S. Need to update engineering data requirements.
The system we now~have will not do all of the above requirements.
RDN:bw
I'~
DATE: September 16, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell. City Manager
SUBJECT: P•0.i75002 - Ac-CHRM WPKW Co., loco
REC #1ENDATION: We recommend this emergency purchase order to Ag-Chem
Equipment Co., Inc. for an estimated amount of $12,000,00,
R MY.: This is for repair parts to repair the Big A truck
located at the Landfill. It is a sludge infection vehicle. It is necessary
for proper disposal of sludge at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. This
axle is a major part and should increase the life usability of this
vehicle.
BACKGROUND: Purchase Order #75002
Memo from Wastewater Treatment Department
PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
This equipment definitely affects the operation of
the Wastewater'Treatment Plant.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Thera is no additional impact on the General Fund.
Respectfully submitted:
e& _4 /Z -
7rel KIN4a Ha t 1
41y nager
Prepared by:
amen John J, Marshall, C.P.M.
Title:Pnrehasing Agent
Approved:
J n J. Marshall, C.F.M.
/86
CITY Vp DENTOK Tom
901.e TEXAS STREET PURCHASE ORDER D WON, TX 74401
7550o2MBER DATF~ t R~ 10. C14 oocuMEi.r T
E ::1 AGC49000
E~p~
ZI-NNIM EQUIPWENT CO. INC• 'VENICNIPNTA NTSNANC£
3600 BRANPALL AD* CONFINMATION ONLY
SAL1NAs KS 67401 DO NOT DUPLICATE
1
BID/REF. N
ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER UNITS NUMBER DESCRIPTION BID NO. UNE AMOUNI
01 710 002 0580 8702 1 COAPLETE DIFFERENTIAL ASSEMBLY 120000.00
+ 1
1
The City of Denton, Texas is tax exempt • House Bill No. 20. .o• 11. oon.oo
Reference P.O. Number on all 3/Ohlpments and Invoices
Shipments are F.O.B. City of Denton, or as Indicated. gy
Send Invoices TO: Direct Inquiries TO;
CO of Denton, Accounts Payable John J. Marshall, C.P.M. Purchasing Agent
216 E. McKinney $t., Denton, TX 78201 Tom D. Shaw, C.P.M. Asst. Purchasing Agent
(or as indicated on Purchase Order) 817/688•$311 D/FW Metro 287.0042
The City of Denton Is an equal opportunity employer
•
M E M Q R A N D U M
Tot Rs H. Nelson, Director of Utilities
thru David Haw, Assistant Director Water/Wastsaeter
Fromi Asa Brown
Dates August 229 1986
Subje Emergency purchase of rear-end for sludge injection vehicle
Two days ago the rear axles on the Big As sludge injection
vehicle, broke and rendered the vehicle helpless concerning land
injection of sludges The reason the axles broke is due to a worn
out rear-end, in addition to the over-all worn out condition of the
vehicle.
We can purchase • new rear-end for 23% la=ss than the usual
cost. Our cost would be $ll95MeO0. Total cost including freight
would be !!29000.00. This would increase the vehicle value by
B15,000.00. Delivery time would be one weeke kk;t have the money in
our vehicle and equipment accounts
We are at a critical time concerning sludge df.sposais We are
cleaning beds in preparation for the rainy season and land injection
of the sludges is critical for us to be prepared f or4 the wet season.
We, therefore, respectfully request that we be permitted to
purchase the rear-end assembly for the Big A immediately on an
emergency basis waving the public bid requirement.
Thank you for your support concerning' this matters
Asa Drown, Buperintendent, Dave Ham, Assistant
Wastewater Treatment Division Director Water/Wastewater
cce Jack Jarvis, Vehicle Maintenance Superintendent
David Ham, Assistant Director Water/Wastewater
Wesel
f 1i36L
NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER S OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE
' CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS TO PROVIDE FOR ADOPTION OF THE UNIFORM
BUILDING CODE, 1985 EDITION; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS THERETO,
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $I,000.00 FOR
VIOLATION THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING
FOR A REPEALER CLAUSE; AhD PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS;
SECTION I.
That Article I of Chapter 5 of the Cade of Ordinances is
amended to read as follows:
ARTICLE I. BUILDING CODE
Section 5-1. Short Title
This article may be known and cited as the Denton Building
Code,
Section 5-2. Adoption of Uniform Building Code
The Uniform Building Code, 198S Edition as recommended by
the International Conference of Building Ottficials, a copy of
which shall be filed with the office of the City Secretary as
Document No, 2 and be available for public inspection Is hereby
adopted and designated as the Building Code of the City of
Denton, Texas, the same as though said edition of such code were
copied at length herein, subject to the deletions end amendments
enumerated in Section S-3 hereafter.
Section S-3, Deletions and Amendments
The Uniform Builaing Code adopted by section S-2 is amended
as followst
1. Section 204, Board of Appeals, is amended to read as
followst
(NOTE TO CODIFIER--FOLLOWING LANGUAGE OF SECTION UNCHANGED]
Building Code Board--Crtion, There is hereby
create a building ode eaoar consisting of five
(S) members, each to be appointed by the city
council for a term of two {2) years, and remov-
able for cause br said council after public
hearing, initially, however, all five (5)
members t;.1411 be appointed for a term to expire
coincidently with other city boards, to serve
until their successors are appointed. To the
extent that persons are available within the
city, said board shall consist of one general
contractor one architect, one engineer, and two
(2) additional members, who shall all reside
within the city. Provided, however, that the
city council may appoint two (2) alternate
members of the building code board who shall
serve In the absence of one or more of the
regular members when requested to do so by the
city manager, as the case may be, so that all
cases to be heard by the building code board
will always be heard by a minimum number of four
' (4) members, The alternate members, when
appointed, shall serve for the same period as
the regular members, which is for n term of two
(2) years and any vacancy shall be filled in the
some manner and they shall be subject to removal
the same as the regular members. The city
council may appoint ex officio members to this
board, to have a voice in all matters before it,
but who shall have no vote. The chief building
official shall be an ex officio member of the
board,
Same--Procedure and Powers. The board shall
adopt ru es to govern Its proceedings pro,,ided
that same are consistent with the Code of the
City of Denton and statutes of the state of
Texas. The building code board shall have the
same powers and duties on matters concerning
Chapter Five of the Code of Ordincnces as the
board of adjustment has on matters concerning,
and arising from, the Zoning Ordinance,
including the following;
a. Elect a chairman, who may administer, oaths,
and compel the attendance of witnesses;
b. Hear and determine, by a four-fifths (415)
vote of the members, appeals from any
decision of the chief building official me.de
pursuant to Chapter Five other than Article
IV after proper notice has been given;
c. By a four-fifths (4/$) vote of the members,
grant variances to any provision of Chapter
Five, other than Article IV, subject to
appropriate conditions and safeguards, and
after a determination by the board that a
hardship exists which would be cured by the
particular variance sought;
d. Maintain jurisdiction of questions involving
Article IV of said chapter as authorized
therein,
2. Section 301(&), Permits, is amended to read as follows:
Permit Re uired$ Except +s specified in
subsection (bi of this section, no building
or structure regulated by this code shall be
erected, constructed, enlarged altered,
repaired, moved, improvfd, removed, converted
or demolished unless a separate permit for
each building or structure has first been
obtained from the building official; provided,
however, that the building official may issue
a single building permit for an apartment
complex consisti,ig of one or more buildings,
PAGE 2
3. Section 304(c), Plan Review Neep, is deleted.
4, Section 304(d), &xuir$tion of Plan Review, is
amended to read as follows,
• Application for which no permit is issued
within 180 days following the date of
application shah. expire by limitation, and
plans and other data submitted for review may
thereafter be returned to the applicant or
destroyed by the building official.
S. Section 304(£)(3)0 Fee Refunds, is amended to read as
follows:
The building official shall not author120 the
refundingQ of any fee paid except upon written
not later than filed 180 days hafteoriginal date perofmittee
payment,
6. Table No. 3-A, Building Permit Fees, is amended to read
as follows:
(NOTE TO COOIPIBR--FOLLOWING TABLE UNCHANGED)
a. Total Valuation hu
$1 to $Soo $S
$SOl to $2,000 S for the first $SOO, plus
11 for each additional $100
or fraction thereof, to and
including $2,000.
$2,001 to $250000 $20 for the first $2,0001
lus $4 for each additional
1,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including $25,000.
$25,001 to $50,000 $112 for the first $15,000,
1 lus $3 for each additional
1,000 or fraction thereof,
to and Including $100,000.
$50,001 to $100,000 $187 for the first $50,000,
lus $1 for each additional
I1,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including $100,000.
$100,001 to $SOO,000 $287 for the first $100,000,
plus $1, SO for each addi-
tional $19000 or fraction
thereof, to and including
$500,000,
$SOO,OO1 and up $887 for the first $500,000,
plus $1 for each additional
$1,000 or fraction thereof.
To establish building permit fees for all now
construction and additions, multiply eleven
dollars ($11,00) by the total square footage,
i
PAGE 3
enter that valuation into the above schedule
and then increase the results by one-half.
To establish building permit fees for all
alterations, fire damage, repairs, remodeling,
and accessory buildings, multiply six dollars
fifty cents (66,50) by the total square
Footage, enter that valuation into the above
schedule and then Increase the results by
one-half.
b. Other Inseection Pees
(1) Inspections requested and performed before
or after normal working hours (m).nimum
charge of one hour), per hour . . . 61S.00
(2) Reinspection fee assessed under the pro-
visions of Section SOS(g), each . . 615.00
(3) inspections for which no fee is specifi-
cally indicated (minimum charge of one-
half hour), per hour . . . . . . . 615.00
(4) Certificate of occupancy inspection for
other than new buildings, each , . $18.00
7. Section S03d, Fire Ratings or ccu anc Se orations,
Exception item , is amen de to rem as o ows:
(3) In the one-hour occupancy separation
between a Group R, Division 3 and M
Occupancy, the separation me), be limited
to the installation of not less than
one-half inch thickness gypsum board
construction on the garage side and a
weather-stripped door will be permitted
in lieu of a one-hour fire assembly.
Fire dampers shall not be required in
ducts piercing this separation for ducts
constructed of not less than No. 26 gauge
galvanized steel.
8, The second paragraph of 511(x), Access to Water
Closets, Is amended to read as follows:
Where toilet facilities are provided on any
floor where access by the physically handi-
capped is required by Table No. 33-A, at
least one such facility for each sex shall
comply with the requirements of this section.
Separate facilities shall not be required in
retail stores and office-type occupancies hav-
ing not more than 15 employees. Exeent in
dwelling units and uest rooms, such facili-
ties must be availstle to all occupants and
both sexes. All doorways leading to such
toilet rooms shall have a clear and unobstruc-
ted width of not less than 32 inches, Each
such toilet room shall have the following:
9. Section 705, Light ntilation and Sanitation, is
amended by adding the following EXCEPTION between the
fourth paragraph and the fifth paragraph:
PAGE 4
i
EXCEPTION. Retail stores and office.-type
occupancies having not more than 1S employees
shall provide at least one water closet.
' 10. Section 709(c), Construction, is amended to read as
follows:
Construction. Construction shall be of non-
con ust a materials, Open parking garages
shall meet the design requirements of Chapter
23. Ramp-access open parking garages in
which motor vehicles are perked above ground
level shall be provided with steel or concrete
guardrails not less than twenty-four (24)
Inches it height and designed to withstand a
static lead of six (6) tons applied at any
point on the guardrail, such guardrails
shall 1>e located and adjacent to all outer
walls and along the per phery of all above
ground level open decks, floors and roofs
used for parking. Mechanical-access parking
garages shall be provided with curb guards
not less than eight (8) Inches In height
approximately three (3) feet from the outer
edge of each above ground level deck. Ground
level parking areas shall be provided with
wheel guards not less than six (6) inches in
height so located as to prevent automobiles
from encroaching on adjacent public or
private property.
11. Chapter 17 is amended by adding a new Section 1717
to read as follows:
Section 17179 liner Conservation in N w
Building Construct on. ste a ow are
i n mum requirements for control of air
infiltration.,
a. Exterior bottom plates must be sealed with
construction adhesive or caulking,
b. Door and window frames must be sealed and
caulked.
c. All exterior wall penetrations, (pipes,
etc.) must be sealed and caulked.
d. All i,oles or spaces in top plates must be
sealed.
e. All exterior wells must be insulated with
insulation having a minimum R11 value.
E. Attic areas must bu insulated with
insulation having a minimum R19 value.
S. No craclxs shall be permitted in exterior
wall sheathin All joints in sher.thing
not over solid framing shall be sealed
with materials to stop air infiltration.
12, Section 2506(h), _Lateral Support, is amended to read
as follows.
PAGE S
Lateral Support. Solid-sawn rectangular
us er Desist rafters and joists shall be
supported laterally to prevent rotation or
lateral displacement In accordance with the
following:
' if the ratio of depth to thickness, based on
normal dimensions, is:
a. Two to 1, no lateral support is required,
b. Three to 1 or four to 1, the ends shall be
held in position, as by full-depth solid
blocking, bridging, nailing or bolting to
other framing members, approved hangers or
by other acceptable means.
c. Five to 1, one edge shall be held in line
for its entire length or by other
acceptable means.
d. Six to 11 bridging, full-depth solid
blocking, cross bracing installed at
intervals not exceeding 8 feet unless both
edges are held in line or by other
acceptable means.
e. Seven 'to 1, both edges shall be held In
line for their entire length or by other
acceptable means.
13. Section 3201 is amended to read as follows:
Roofs shall be as specified in this code and
as otherwise required by this chapter.
Untreated or fire-retardant treated wood
shingles or shakes shall be prohibited.
EXCEPTION. The roof covering on existing
dwellings rr.d structures with wood shingles
and shakes may be repaired with factory
treated fire-retardant wood shingles or
shakes. The roof covering on additions made
to existing dwellings and structures with
existing wood shingles or shakes may be of
factory treated fire-retardant shingles or
shakes.
14. Section 3306(c), Rise and Run, is amended to
read as follows:
The rise of every step In a stairway shall be
not less than four (4") Inches nor greater
than seven and one-half (7 11211) inches.
(f), Except
run shall permitted be not Subsections
ten )(1011)
inches as measured horizontally between the
vertical planes of the furthermost projection
of adjacent treads. Except as permitted in
subsections (d), (e) and (f) the largest
tread run within any flight of stairs shall
not exceed the smallest by more than three
eighth l3/8") inch. The greatest riser
height within any flight of stairs shall not
exceed the smallest by more than three eighth
(3/8") inch.
PAGE 6
rsT1' v7w
.
E7(CEPTION. where the bottom riser adjoins a
slop ng public way, walk or driveway having
an established grade and serving as a landing,
a variation In height of the bottom riser of
not more than 3 inches In every 3 feet of
stairway width is permitted.
I5. Section 4305(x), General, is amended by deleting
therefrom the second pa agraph.
Section S-4. Issuance of Bulldin Permit where Flood Hazard
xsa.
A buildint permit shall be issued only after the building
official has determined that the proposed building site is
reasonably safe from flooding; or if a flood hazard exists, any
proposed new construction or substantial improvement (including
prefabricated and mobile homes) must;
(a) Be designed (or modified) and anchored to prevcr,t
flotation, collapse, or lateral aoveuent of the
structure;
(b) Use construction materials and utility equipment
that are resistant to flood damage; and
(c) Use construction methods and practices that will
minimize flood damage.
Section S-5 - 5-6. Reserved
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.
SECTION III.
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 IV.
That the repeal of any ordinance or any portion thereof by
the preceding sections shall not affect or impair any act done
or right vested or accrued or any proceeding, suit or
prosecution had or commenced in any cause before such repeal
shall take effect; but every such act done, or right vested or
accrued, or proceedings, suit or prosecution had or commenced
shall remain in full force and effect to all intents or purposes
as if such ordinance or part thereof so repealed had remained in
force.
PAGE 7
I
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 1986.
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLUTTE ALLEN CITY SECRITM
CITY OF DENTON,,TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCN, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY: cl)
PAGE 8
7114
...HS;
MINUTES
Building Code Board
March 26, 1986
PRESENT: Robert Horn, Bob Miller, (arrived at 4:30), Cliff
Reding, Jackie Doyle-Building official
ABSENT: Mike Lewis and John Mozingo
I. Motion was made by Reding and seconded by Horn that the
minutes of March 19, 1986 be approved as written. Motion
carried unanimously.
II. The Board reviewed chapter 1 of the 1985 Uniform Building
Code and recommends its adoption as is.
The Board recommends that section 204 read as presently
written in section 5-3 of the Code of Ordinances. The
remainder of Chapter 2 shall remain as written.
The Board recommends amendment of section 301 (a) by
adding a sentence at the end which reads as follows: The
building official may issue a single building permit for
an apartment complex containing one or more buildings.
The Board recommends that current amendments to section
304 (a) of section 5-3 of the code of ordinances be
deleted and left as is in the 1985 Uniform Building Code.
Amend third sentence of section 304 (b) of the 1985
Uniform Building Code by deleting the words "and building
plan review" and by changing the word "fees' to "fee" in
the third sentence. Delete current amendment of section
304 (b) as shown in section a-3 of the code of
ordinances. Delete section 304 (c) of the 1985 Uniform
Building Code. Amend section 304 (d) of the 1985 Uniform
Building Code to read as currently stated in section 5-3
of the code of ordinances.
Delete section 304 (f) 3 of the 1985 Uniform Building Code.
Amend Table No. 3-A of the 1985 Uniform Building Code to
read as presently written in Section 5-3 of the Code of
ordinances.
The Board recommends adoption of Chapter 4 of the 1985
Uniform Building Code as written.
The Board began reviewing chapter five and will continue
at its next meeting starting with section 505 (e) 3.
III. The Board could take no action on agenda items 3, 4 and 5
since at least 4 Board members are required to vote on a
variance request. Glenn Rucker of Glenn Rucker Associates
was present and relayed to the Board members present his
L! W 742
Minutes
Page 2
reasons for his variance request at 205 N. Bonnie Brae,
a 110 bed nursing home and at 207 N. Bonnie Brae, a 50
bed hdspital. Mr. Rucker stated the Life Safety Code
did not require closers on patient room doors opening
into corridors. Mr. Rucker was of the opinion if
closers are used staff personnel will keep doors
propped open. Robert Horn stated that since the City
has not adopted the Life Safety Code some Board members
felt the variance should not be granted,
The Board agreed to meet again on Wednesday, April 2, 1986 to
consider agenda items 3, 4 and 5 and continue review of the 1985
Uniform Building Code.
Meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m$
17738
MINUTES
Building Code Board
April 2, 1986
PRESENT: Robert Horn, Bob Miller, john Mozingo, Ed Stout, Mike
Lewis and Jackie Doyle-Building Official
1. Miller Moved and Mozingo seconded a motion to table
approval of the minutes of March 260 1986 until
corrections are made. Motion carried unanimously.
Ii & III. The Board reviewed a request of Glenn Rucker,
Associates for a variance from section 3304 (h) of
the Uniform Building Code at a nursing home at 205 N.
Bonnie Brae and at a hospital at 207 N. Bonnie Brae.
Mr. Rucker, at the March 26 meeting stated the NFPA
Life Safety Code did not require closers on interior
door corridors in hospitals and nursing homes. He
felt a variance from the Uniform Building Code should
be granted and indicated that the nursing staff could
look after patients better if the doors did not have
closers.
Robert Horn and other Board members felt since the
City had not adopted NFPA. 101, Life Safety Code
should not be a factor in their consideration of a
variance. Mozingo moved and Miller seconded a motion
to deny the variance request at 205 and 207 N. Bonnie
brae Street. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. The Board considered the request of Mr. Amos Schwartz
for a variance from section 1710 of the Uniform
Building code which prohibits roof eaves from
projecting more than 12 inches in,-.o areas where
openings are prohibited. This request concerns the
Lee Meadows Subdivision which is a planned
development district which allows one side wall of
each house to be located on the property line with
the other side wall being at least 6 feet oft the
property line. Mr. Schwartz proposed to hold the
zero lot line wall one foot off the property line and
the roof eave would be at the property line. This
would result in a minimum distance between building
walls of seven feet and a minimum distance between
roof eaves of five feet. The Board felt Mr. Schwartz
proposal was better than Uniform Building Code
requirements which would allow a minimum separation
between unprotected building walls of six feet.
Lewis moved and Stout seconded a motion to grant Mr.
Schwartz a variance from section 1710 of the Uniform
Building Code. Motion carried unanimously,
V. Board members were provided copies of the 1982 and
1985 Analysis of Revisions to the Uniform Building
Code.
ss7
Minutes
Page 2
VI. The Board asked the building official to check with
other area cities to see if they required a 1 hour
separation between a Group R Division 3 occupancy and
a Group M occupancy.
VII. The Board recommends that chapters 6-11 of the 1985
Uniform Building Code be adopted as written.
1773g
MINUTES
Building Code Board
April 9, 1986
PRESENT: Robert Horn, Bob Miller, !like Lewis Ed Stout, Jackie
Doyle-Building Official and John Mozingo
ABSENT:
1.
II. Stout moved and Miller seconded a motion to amend section
503 (d) Exception 3 of the 1985 Uniform Building Code as
recommended by the North Central Texrs Council of
Governments. NCTCOG's proposed amendment reads as follows:
"In the one-hour occupancy separation between a Group R3
and M Occupancy, the separation may be limited to the
installation of not less than one-half inch thickness
gypsum board construction on the garage side and a
weather-stripped door will be permitted in lieu of a
one-hour fire assembly. Fire dampers shall not be
required in ducts piercing this separation for ducts
constructed of not less than No, 26 gauge galvanized
steel." Motion carried unanimously.
III. Miller moved and Lewis seconded a motion to amend section
709 (c) of the 1985 Uniform Building Code as recommended
by the NCTCOG's. NCTCOG's proposed amendment reads as
follows:
'Construction:
Construction shall be of noncombustible
materials, Open parking garages shall meet the design
requirements of Chapter 23. Ramp-access open parking
garages in which motor vehicles are parked above ground
level shall be provided with steel or concrete guardrails
not less than twenty-four (24) inches in height and
designed to withstand a static load of sic (6) tons
applied at any point on the guardrail. Such guardrails
shall be located and adjacent to all outer walls and along
the periphery of all above ground level open decks, floors
and roofs used for parking. Mechanical-access parking
garages shall be provided with curb guards not less than
eight (8) inches in height approximately three (3) feet
from the outer edge of each above ground level deck.
Ground level parking areas shall be Irovided with wheel
guards not less than six (6) inches in height so located
as to prevent automobiles from encroaching on adjacent
public or private property." Motion carried unanimously.
IV, Horn moved and Lewis seconded a motion that chapters 12
and 17 of the 1985, Uniform Building Code be adopted as
written. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned #6 5:10 p.m.
1773g
MINUTES
Building Code Board
April 16, 1986
PRESENT: Robert Horn, Bob Miller, Mike Lewis, Jackie
Doyle-Building official
ABSENT: Ed Stout, Cliff Reding and John Mozingo
I.
II. Miller moved and Lewis seconded a motion that chapters
18-30 of the 1985 Uniform Building Code be adopted as
written. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
1773g
J
MINUTES
Building Code Board
April 23, 1986
PRESENT: Robert Horn, Bob Miller, Ed Stout and Jackie Doyle,
Building Official
ABSENT: Mike Lewis and John Mozingo
1.
II. The Board discussed section 2506 (h) of the 1985 Uniform
Building Code and agreed to continue review of this
section at the next meeting.
III. Miller moved and Horn seconded a motion to amend section
3306 (c) of the 1985 Uniform Building Code to read the
sections 3300 (c)7exception numbers one `of ethers 1985 Uniform
Building Code. Motion carried unanimously.
IV, Miller moved and Stout seconded a motion to adopt the
remainder of chapter 33 as written. Motion carried
unanimously.
Meeting adjourned 5:00 p.m.
1773g
MINUTES
Building Code Board
April 30, 1986
PRESENT: Robert Horn, Mike Lewis, Ed Stout, Jackie
Doyle-Building Official
ABSENT: John Mozingo, Bob Miller and Cliff Reding
I.
II. Lewis moved and Stout seconded a motion to amend section
2506 (h) 31 4 and 5 be amended to read as follows:
A. Five to 1, one edge shall be held in line for its
entire length or other acceptable means.
B. Six to If bridging, full-depth solid blocking, cross
bracing installed at intervals not exceeding 8 feet
unless both edges are held in line or ot..ier acceptable
means.
C. Seven to 1, both edges shall be held in line for their
e
em it length or other acceptable means. Motion
carried unanimously.
III. Stout moved and Lewis seconded a motion to delete the
second paragraph of 4305 (a). Motion carried unanimously,
IV. Stout moved and Horn seconded a motion to approve chapters
34-54 as written except as amended in section 4305 (a).
Motion carried unanimously.
17738
MINUTES
Building Code Board
June 10, 1986
PRESENT: Robert Horn, Ed Stout, Cliff Reding
ABSENT: MiKe Lewis
1. Motion was made by Reding and seconded by Stout that the
minutes of March 26, April 2, April 9, April lb, April 23
and April 30, 1986 he approved as written. Motion carried
unanimously.
2. The Board could take no action on agenda item number one
because at least four board members are required to vote
on a variance request and only three members were present.
3. Stout moved and Reding seconded a motion to amend Section
3201 to read as follows: Roofs shall be as specified in
this code and as otherwise required by this chapter.
Untreated or fire-retardant treated wood shingles or
shakes shall be prohibited.
Exception: The roof covering on existing dwellings and
structures with wood shingles and shakes may be repaired
with factory treated fire-retardant wood shingles or
shakes. The roof covering on additions to existing
dwellings and structures with existing wood shingles or
shakes may be of factory, treated firs;-retardant shingles
or shakes, Motion carried unanimously.
003101
1S5pL
' Lb/•~
NO.
AN ORDINANCE ALTERING THE PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ESTABLISHED
FOR VEHICLES UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 169(b) OF ARTICLE
6701d, VERNON'S TEXAS CIVIL STATUTES, UPON PORTIONS OF F.M.
HIGHWAY NO. 2181, WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF
DBNTON, AS SET OUT IN THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING A PENALTY OF
A FINE NOT TO EXCEED $200.00 FOR THE VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE
AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Section 169(b) of Article 67014, Vernon's Texas
Civil Statutes, provides that whenever the governing body of the
City shall determine upon the basis of an engineering and
traffic investigation that any prima facie speed therein set
forth is greater or less than is reasonable or safe under the
conditions found to exist at any intersection or other place or.
upon any part of a street or highway within the City, taking
into consideration the width and condition of the pavement and
other circumstances on such portion of said street or hi hway,
as well as the usual traffic thereon, said governing body may
determine and declare a reasonable and safe prima facie speed
limit thereat or thereon by the passage of an ordinance, which
shall be effective when appropriate signs giving .totice thereof
are erected at such intersection ce other place or part of the
street or highway;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS,
SECTION I.
Upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation
heretofore made as authorized by the provisions of Section
169(b) of Article 6701d, Vernon's Texas Ci01 Statutes, the
following prima facie speed limits hereafter indicated for
vehicles are hereby determined and declared to be reasonable and
safe; and such speed limits are hereby fixed at the rate of
speed indicated for vehicles traveling upon the named streets
and highways, or parts thereof, described in Section II.
SECTION II.
No motor vehicle shall be operated along and upon F.M.
Highway No. 2181 within the corporate limits of the City of.
Denton in excess of the speeds set forth in the following limits:
(a) Beginning at said point (Station 0+00) being at the
intersection of U. S. 77 thence continuing along
F.M. 1181 in a Southerly direction for a distance
of 0.814 mile, approximately, a maximum speed of 30
MILES PER HOUR.
(b) Thence continuing along P.M. 2181 In a Southerly
and Easterly direction for a distance of 1.650
miles, approximately, a maximum speed of 40 MILES
PER HOUR,
(1) The maximum speed limit of 2S MILES PER HOUR
when so signed to apply during school hours for
F.M. 2181 East bound and P.M. 2181 West bound,
.
(c) Thence continuing along F.M. 2181 in a Southerly
direction for a distance of 0.681 mile,
approximately, said point (Station 166+58) being
the South City limits of Denton, a maximum speed of
SS MILES PER HOUR.
SECTION III,
The Mayor of the City of Denton, Texas is hereby authorized
to cause to be erected appropriate signs indicating such speed
zones,
SECTION IV.
Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance
shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction
thereof shall be fined in any sum not to exceed Two Hundred
Dollars (;200.00),
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
publishes 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 5, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLEN, CITY AR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY: Z 4 ^
PAGE 2
{ -r ...,r - -..-mss
71
w1L'!r
CITY 01 DaRtrON DMNTON, TMX" Tel"!
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 4, 1986
TO: CITIZENS TRAFFIC SAFETY SUPPORT COMMISSION
FROM: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Speed zoning/F.M. 21vl (Teasley Lane) Between Dallas
Drive and Ryan Roau
The State Department of Highway and Public 't'ransportation has
set speed zoning of. F.M. 2181 (Teasley Lane) between Dallas
Drive and Ryan roar) and request an ordinance be implemented.
Four speed zones have been identified which are:
1. 30 MPH between DaJ.las Drive and Savannah Trail both
directions (0.824 miles)
2. 40 MPH between Savannah Trail and a point 700 feet west of
Bent Oaks Drive, both directions, including a 1,800-foot
school zone around Sam Houston Elementary school (1.650
miles).
3. 25 MPH school speed zone both directions from Sam Houston
Elementary school for a distance of 1800 feet inside .one
M2 above.
4. 55 MPH from a point 700 feet west of Bent Oaks drive to
Ryan road both directions (0.681 miles).
These peed limits were set based nn analysis of roadway
conditions, accident records, and prevailing speed of prudent
drivers. The staff agrees with this speed zoning and therefore
recommends approval of the ordinance.
Ci yE a kt F.E.
"eer
U405E
r
r
i
I
f /
1 w
J L , - 1! Mr>>~ Oft. 0•
46
j 'tiar.rr ~ E
a{' ale°24 MILE 1, 6SO MILES
TEASLEY LANE
i
~I
.rrr , .
• I p..,,~ ! 1 1
COMMISSON STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS aNCSM+En~ aIRECTOR
ROWT C. LAMER, CHAOM N AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MARK 0.0000E
THOMAS M. OuNNINO P. 0. Box 3067
RAY ITOKIIR, JR. Dallas, Texas 75221
June 18, 1986
IN NFLY REFER TO
FILE No.
Control 2054-2
P.M. 2181
Denton County
Mr. Paul C. Iwuchukwu
Traffic Engineer
City of Denton
s
Municipal Building +
215 East McKinney Street
Denton, Texas 76201
subjeots Speed Zoning in Denton
Dear Mr. Iwuohukwur
Attached for your information and further handling is a blua line print of
the speed zone study on P.M. 2181 in the City of Denton. We believe the
recommended speeds will correspond closely to the speeds at which the normal
and prudent driver will drive under the existing conditions,
Also attached for your information is a speed zone ordinance that might be
used or serve as a guide in the preparation of your speed zone ordinance. We
will also furnish and install the necessary signs at the proper locations
upon receipt of a copy of the signed ordinance from the City of Denton
establishing the new speed limits.
we appreciate the interest you have shown and the cooperation you have
given. If we may be of further assistance, please feel free to contact Mr.
John H. Miller, Jr., District Traffic Engineer, at the above address or by
telephone at 214/320.6236.
Yours very truly,
Robert L. Yieldf
District Engineer
Attachments
r
=~-LOPrv*ENT ~~S
_ ZES S GHT+_pIfTAty'CE
BA';K or ADVISORY 5PEE0
CJa'lE5 OVER
1 ~G s aL~ER 3 %
$~J4 'i'~ICr T H AND TYPE B LOW
f( ti ()7 iD RIB Wf5TH
w = D E N f S_
IWO-
4S MILE
"Zvl~jE SPEEDS MP
TO ►yA RD
U. S. 77 8tlS.
C L . ~•~c;s Fe Mo 2181 0
roioo
w
TGYRO b'
a'
I [CORINTH - -ro
cam' LE' ; L!$
rSMILE
MAY 8J _ _
,MOTH
SUR, ~ VLTH 4,44D TYPE
GPADE~ OVER 3!;
w'~n'1rS OVER .2..,
E=: L 3•:'.K or RY SPEED
_ T '"ANCE
0E`VEL0PNOENT - -
DIST NO. I8 COUNTY DENTON w.tivn ~ DATE
HJGH'OVAYFM, 21€31 C!•fY DENTON pcP~.ccr; DATE
N +PfPLICC'D •r DATE
OCE OF SURVEY . g 8 st~irft ~ 300 '
c.+:r.to er a.TE
LIMITS QF _ZONE
SECTJON. ONE LENGTH MILESSJECTJON TWO LENGTH MILES
St. QA M / G'%T 69fa ..rrRGdECT.1 ;TA ON lr♦ cmrb stcT Pop~ECT
Its"
&two
rrr.n.....r.~
ausl
M
H
44
I .a
ai0o +oc
30 +00
40+00 50+0
► 4 ►
O 00 O O
42 85 PERCENTILE SPEED L~
62 TOP SPEED MEASURED F+' M* 2181
►25 NUMBER OF CARS CHECKED)
0 FATAL ACCIDENT SPEED
Z-
E5 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENT CONT.
PROPERTY 'DAMAGE 2054-1
ACCIDENT
C' INDICATES SECT(div
BY COMMISSION, MINUTE NEp
- Z77.
pl,
vs
4 db M,PH
4 WWI
t
L
50#00 A 60,00 70400
60+00 90+0
.
4 ► 4
MAO
Q 3 3 8
50
0 P~ N ZONE
1 - S EG 02
a
1 Will
.
r
KM
YH
Ao.
s ~ ~ ~o +1
100+00 110400 130400 13040
a+oa i
1 W RD.
SC"06L 4
s2 ► a r
12
M.p
----1 a• + .oar
- - OPFN - -
L ji. AI 44 ,u ,C
nRA6 wy
7aoar u Rat ~J ~csha c
Al , '
1
r
130+00 '
140+40 IS +00 •1140+00 V•, •1
A Y i~~r
ILE-
S „QPE N
~RES
-717 .p
1
r
t
ms H,
rr~
130 i00 I O 400 V• ,r ` .~V1+~vfYl
i
AO ~ ~
i
~~r~w
Sheet 1 of 3
NO.
SPEED ZONE ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE ALTERING THE PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS
ESTABLI THE PROVI OF
SECTIIONS169(b)ROFEARTICLEU6701 di VERNON'SOTEXAS
CIVIL STATUTES, UPON F.M. HIGHWAY NO.
2181 OR PARTS THEREOF,WITHIN THE IN.
CO"MTE LIMITS THE CITY SET OUT IN THISFORDINANCE;OAN T0
PENALTY OF A FINE NOT TO EXCEED $200.00 FOR THE
VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE.
WHEREAS, Section 169(b) of „rticle 6701 d, Vernon's Texas Civiq
Statutes, provides that whenever the governing body of the City shall determine
upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation that any prima facie
speed therein set forth is greater or less than fa reasonable or safe under the
conditions found to exist at any intersection or other place or upon any part of
a street or highway within the City, taking into consideration the width and con-
dition of the pavement and other circumstances on such portion of said street or
highway, as well as the usual traffic thereon., said governing body may detenmine
end dAclare a reasonable and safe prima facie speed limit thereat or thereon by
the passage of an ordinance, which shall be effective when appropriate signs
giving notice thereof are erected at such intersection or other place or part of
the street or highway; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF DENTON TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
Upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation hereto-
fore made as authorized by the provisions of Section 169(b) of Article 6701 d,
Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, the following prima facie speed limits hereafter
indicated for vehicles are hereby determined and declared to be reasonable and safe;
and such speed limits are hereby fixed at the rate of speed indicates! for vehicles
traveling upon the named streets and highways, or parts thereof, described as
follows:
A. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
K NTON TEXAS:
1, That from and after the date of the passage of this speed
speed zone ordinance, n^ motor vehicle shall be operated
along and upon F.M. Highway No. 2181 within the
corporate limits `o?th City of Mn o£'n in ex-
cess of the speeds now set forth n t e ow ng imits:
Sheet 2 of 3
(a,) Beginning at said point (Station 0+00) being at the intersection of
U.S. 77 thence continuing along F.M. 2181 in a Southerly direction
for a distance of 0,824 mile, approximately,.,. a maximum speed of
30 MILES PER HOUR;
(b.) Thence continuing along F.M. 2181 in a Southerly and Easterly dir-
ection for a distance of 1.650 miles, approximately,.., a maximum
speed of 40 MILES PER HOUR AND;
* SCHOOL SPEED LIMIT OF 25 MILES PER HOUR WHEN SO SIGNED FOR F.M. 2181
EASTBOUND AND F.M. 2181 WESTBOUND
25 m,p,h, from Station 89+35 to Station 107+35 a distance of 1800 feet
(c.) Thence continuing along F.M. 2181 in a Southerly direction for a dist-
ance of 0.681 mile, approximately, said point (Station 166+ro8) being
the South City Limits of Denton, a maximum speed of 55 MILES PER HOUR.
i
SECTION 2.
The Mayor of Denton is hereby authorized
to cause to be erected, appropiate s:nns n cain`g such speed zones.
SECTION 3,
Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordin-
ance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof
shall be fined in any sum not to exceed Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00),
PASSED AND APPROVED THIS DAY OF ,A.D.,19
Mayor
City cf Denton Texas
Sheet 3 of 3
ATTEST:
MY Secretary
City of Denton Texas
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: APPROVED:
City Attorney y anager
City of Denton Texas City of Denton Texas
I' City Secretary of the City of
Denton Texas, hereby certify that the above
and foregoing is a true and correct copy of Ordinance No.
adopted by the City Council of the City of Denton
Texas,, A.D, 19
To certify which, witness my iiaid and seal of office this day
of , A.D.19 .
My secretary
City of Denton Texas
J
Paso 5 of 7 pages
ITBH 1►~1 JOB HOPXIN OF THE NEW XIBLBR OFFICE SUPPLIES
IMST FOR "NO PARKRU"unlmu;
Paul Iwuchukwu said Mr. Hopkins was requesting the
west side of Austin street between Pecan and Oak be
designated as no parking. Vehicles have been
blocking the entrance and exit to the garage and
limit visibility in the general area cresting a
safety hazard.
STAFF RECOMMENDED: Approval
COMMISSIONERS: Wayne Autrey mede a motion to
approve the request of "No
Parking" for 3 spaces. Gene
Gohlke seconded the motion.
Motion passed unanimously.
IThM 010 SPEED ZONi4G/P,M. 2181 (TEASLEY LANE) BETWEEN DALLAS
DRIVE AND RYAN ROkD:
Paul Iwuchukwu said the State De artmont was
requesting a speed zoning of F.M. 2181 Teasley Lane)
between Dallas Drive and Ryan road.
Vivian Edwards asked for clarification on request.
Paul said speed limits are based on accidents that
are caused in a particular area, driver behavior and
geometrics of the highway and prudent safe driving
speeds. The staff has reviewed the highway
departments study and agrees with the speed zoning
recommendation.
STAFF RECOMMENDED: Approval of ordinance
COMMISSIONERS: Virginia Ga?lian made a motion to
approve the ordinance. Doris
Chipman seconded the motion.
Motion passed unanimously.
Item ll MC4AMAAA ENGINEERING'S kEQUhST FOR DRIVEWAY VARIANCE
FUR BONNIE BRAE ADS 0
Paul Iwuchukwu presented a view graph showing the
proposed driveways. The request was to install two
driveways on 135 E service road and another driveway
on Bonnie Brae, a minimum of 100 feet from the
intersection of Bonnie Brae and 135 E service road.
Jerry Clark said the staff could allow only one
driveway along 135 E service road to minimize traffic
disruption in the area. It was the staff's position
that a traffic impact analysis should be submitted
showing the installation of a driveway on Bonnie
Brae, a minimum of 100 finet from the intersection,
would not cause hsrm to traffic flow.
'I
f
DATE:
9/3/86
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM, Jerry J. Vincent, Superintendent, Denton State School
SUBJECT: Mutual Air Agreement: Denton State School and City of Denton
RECOMMENDATION: To adopt the ordinance and approve the Mutual Aid
Agreement for Denton State School and City of Denton.
SUMMARY: This agreement provides the City of Denton equipment and
additional personnel as available during times of disaster.
Denton State School (DSS) also may receive additional
personnel and equipment from the City of Denton during
disasters. LIAbility is assumed by the State if either
jurisdiction responds when requested by the disaster district
chairman in Hurst, Texas.
BACKGROUND: The Texas Disaster Act, 1975, Section 14 encourages this
agreement.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS AND GROUPS AFFECTED:
Emergency Management, Fire Department, Public Works, Public
Utilities, Parks and Recreation and volunteer groups. Resource
lists would be exchanged.
FISC_AL_ IMPACT: This agreement provides additional resources for disaster
use with little or no impact on DSS or City budgets. If
enough of these agreements were pursued, disaster
assistance funds for resource usage would be greatly
minimized.
Respectfully submitted:
I Uq ( z . ~
J y J. c :t, Ph.D.
S erinte:d t
Prepared by:
a ouglas Welch
Title: Safety Lector
Denton State School
1D OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
MEMORANDUM
TO. Ross Litman, Emergency Management Coordinator
FROM: Joe D. Aorris, Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT: Ordinance $ Mutual Aid Agreement
DATE: August 15, 1966
Attached is the v iginal and one copy of the above-referenced
contract and a copy of the ordinance approving same. Please
have the original contract ex`cuted by a representative of the
Denton State School and return the original contract to this
office. After the contract is executed, submit a signed copy of
the contract and the ordinance to Charlotte Allen to be placed
upon the City Council agenda. Should you have any questions
relative to same, please advise.
M~ el J7 F. JDM:js
xc: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
Attachmonts
i
1541E
R E S 0 L U T i 0 N
WHEREAS, the Cil,y of Denton, Texas and the Denton State
School wish to enter Into a Mutual Aid Agreement to provide
mutual assistance during times of catastruphic events or
disasters;
NON, THEREPORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF DENTON:
SECTION I.
That there is hereby approved the attached Mutual Aid
Agreement between the City of Denton, Texas, and the Denton
State School to provide for mutual aid during catastrophic
events or disasters.
SECTION II.
That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon
Its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1986.
RAY STEPHENS, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CITY OF DENTON,tTEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
X11 v1 anti
1:
.'wy wpm ".!1:C
THE STATE OF TEXAS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT
THE
COUNTY OF DENTON BEAND DENT
ONCSTATLFSCHOOLN
1. Parties and Purpose.
This agreement is entered in'.* betwe7n the city of
Denton, Texas, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred
to As "City", and the Denton State School, a facility owned
and operated by the Texas Department of Mental Health and
Mental Retardation, hereinafter referred to as "School", to
provide for mutual assistance during times of catastrophic
events or disasters.
2. Mutual Assistance in Public Emergency.
In the event of occurrence of a tornado, earthquake,
storm, aircraft disaster, explosion, toxic gas leak, or other
similar catastrophic accident, natural disaster, or
emergency, which cannot be met with the usual resources and
facilities of the parties hereto, the city and school agree,
upon request of the other, to furnish the assistance provided
for herein. Notwithstanding any other provision setting
forth the assistance to be provided for herein, the extent or
ability to prolpide such assistance shall be determined solely
by the party from whom assistance is requested or furnished,
and it is unCerstood that the assistance requested or
furnished may be refvied, limited or recalled at the sole
discretion of the party from whom assistance is requested or
furnished.
2. Assistance by City.
Should the School suffer a catastrophic event, natural
disaster, or other similar occurrence within the contempla-
tion of this agreement, the City shall, upon the request of
school, subject to the limitation:: of this agreement, provide
the following:
a, Available vehicles required for evacuation or trans-
portation of the School's personnel and clients.
b. Assistance in coordination and arranging for tt„npo-
rary lodging of School's personnel and clients when
evacuation of School's facilities is required.
c. Assistance in providing for the furnishing and
delivering of food, medical supplies and personnel,
and other necessary emergency equipment, supplies
or personnel, to the School or to temporary lodg-
ing sites in cases where the School's facilities
are required to be evacuated.
d. Emergency clearing and control personnel at the
School's facilities, to remove rubble, remove or
replace damaged utility lines, control traffic and
provide other services as needed to provide emer-
gency care to School's personnel and clients.
e. Any other services, personnel, equipment, or mate-
rial that is warranted and available under the
circumstances,
.
:a
3. Assistance by School.
Should the City suffer a catastrophic event, natural
disaster, other occurrence within the contemplation of this
agreement, the School shall, upon the request of city,
subject to the limitations of this agreement, provide the
followings
a. Temporary lodging facilities in School's facilities.
b. Available vehicles for emwtrgency transportation.
o. Available surplus fond, supplies, and equipment not
immediately needed ry School.
d. Available fire personnel and equipment.
e. Any other services, personnel, equipment, or mate-
rial that is warranted and available under the
circumstances.
4. Coordination and Planning of Assistance under Agreement.
City hereby authorizes and directs its Director of the
office of Emergency Management, and School hereby authorizes
and directs its designated officer or employee, to mutually
plan for, establish, a:id coordinate the details of imple-
menting and furnishing the services and assistance agreed to
be provided for in this agreement.
5. No Duty Imposed.
This agreement shall not be construed as or deemed to be
an agreement fnr the benefit of any third party or parties.
Any performance undertaken pursuant to this agreement shall
be pursuant to the governmental function of providing emer-
gency services to the public in general and this agreement is
not meant to and shall not be construed as imposing any duty,
public or private, on any party hereto to provide any
assistance, aid, or care to the other party or to any third
party.
6. Term.
This agreement shall continue in effect until terminated
by either party hereto, by such party giving thirty days'
written notice to the other of its intent to terminate this
agreement.
Executed the day of 1986.
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
sYi
Y STEPHENS, MAYOR
ATTESTI
CHAR iE ALLEN, CI SECRETARY
.
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
By
r' -~~~1 r n b 1
DM W STATE SCHOOL
r
BY:
ATTEST: `
SECRETARY _
86-343.TXT
DATE: September 16, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend Council approve the proposed contract and ordinance
for health services for fiscal year 1986-87 with the County Health Department
SUMMARY: Recent reorganization proposal for the County Health Department
provides new assessments for all participating municipalities.
BACKGROUND: Staff recommends contr&cting with the County Health Department
or scat year 1986-87 at new assessment of $51,742.00. We will continue
to research our options for in-house operations.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
FISCAL IMPACT: $519742
Respect.ful.;, submitted,
V
Lloyd V, arrell y
City Manager
Prepared by:
•
Paulette R.~ wens-aolmes
Program Administrator
Approved:
Itit,
L
NO.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DENTON COUNTY FOR HEALTH SERVICES,
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1.
That the Mayor and City Secretary are hereby authorized and
directed to execute and attest, respectively, an lnterloca)
cooperation agreement between the City of Denton and Denton
County for health services under the terms and conditions being
contained in said agreement which is attached hereto and made a
part hereof,
SECTION II.
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of September, 1986.
RAYS" TM , MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CM 0p; CITY SECRETW
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAr lORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
1586L
THE STATE OF TEXAS 5 INTERLOCAL C00?ERATION AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF'DENTON AND
COUNTY OF DENTON I DENTON COUNTY FOR HEALTH SERVICES
WHEREAS, the Denton County Commissioners Court, pursuant to
Article 4436b, "Local Public Health Reorganization Act," V.T.C.S.,
has organized the Denton County Health Department, hereinafter
called "Department"; and
WHEREAS, the Denton County Commissioners Court has designated
Dr. W. H. Cripe, a Licensed physician, as director of the Depart-
ment and Health Authority for the County; and
WHEREAS, Denton County and the C of Denton, Texas, mutually
desire to cooperate in providing public health services to the
citizens of the City of Denton, Texas and Denton County, Texas;
and
WHEREAS, Interlocal Cooperation Agreements between counties
and incorporated municipalities to provide public health services
are authorized by Article 4413(32c) and Article 4436b, V.T.C.S.;
NOW, THEREFORE, Denton County, Texas ("County") and the City
of Denton, Texas, a Municipality located within Denton County,
Texas ("Municipality"), hereby enter into this Interlocal Coope-
ration Agreement for Health Services and mutually agree upon the
following terms and conditions:
The effective date of this agreement is October 1, 1986, and
this agreement shall automatically terminate on September 30, 1987
unless extended or renewed by written agreement of the parties.
II.
For the purposes and consideration stated herein, Denton
County, through the Department, shall provide the following
public health services for the citizens of the Municipality to
the maximum extent authorized by this agreement, without regard
to race, religion, color, age, or national origin; to-wit: (1)
Environmental Health Services including restaurant and grocery
store inspections, septic system inspections, food handler health
card inspections, swimming pool inspections, water well inspec-
tions, day care facility inspections, school inspections, foster
home inspections, rabies inspections, citizen complaint review,
and all necessary administrative services; (2) Clinical Health
Services including immunizations and injections including HIB,
Gamma Globulin, Yellow Fever, Cholera, Typhoid, well-child
clinic, prenatal clinic, venereal disease clinic, TB, diabetes,
lice, blood pressure, and allergy screening, and all necessary
administrative services.
III,
The Municipality hereby designates Dr. W. H. Cripe, or his
successor as Director of the Department, as Health Authority with-
in its jurisdiction and authorizes Dr. Cripe and the Department to
administer and enforce all state statutes and local ordinances
pertaining to public health within its jurisdiction and the Health
Department specifically agrees to enforco the provisions of the
Smoking Ordinance No, 86-69 and such other ordinances adopted by
the City Council of Municipality. The Authority and the Department
shall not exceed its authorized budget to enforce local ordinances.
IV.
The Municipality agrees to pay the County for the full perfor-
mance of this agreement the total sum of Fifty-one Thousand Seven
Hundred Forty-two and No/100 Dollars ($519742.00) payable as
follows: $12,935.50 on or before October 100 1986; $12,935.50 on
or before January 1, 1987; $12,935.50 or, or before Aril 1, 1987;
and $12,935.50 on or before July 1, 1987•
V.
The CouiAy agrees to utilize all sums received frcr: file
Municipality and all sums received as fees for services so:aly to
provide the above-described public health services through the
Department. The County agrees to assess fees for services
according to a uniform schedule throughout the County and shall
not deny services because of inability to pay.
VI.
The undersigned officers hereby certify that they have been
properly authorized to execute this agreement on behalf of the
parties hereto and that all necessary resolutions or orders have
been duly adopted.
EXECUTED in multiple originals on the d4y of September,
1986.
DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY,
B HONORIBEE r o.DD O E HONORABLE RAY S EONS
COUNTY JUDGE MAYOR
APPROVED:
DR: .
ED
WY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 70201 / TELEPHONE (817) 680-8307
Office of the City Menogor
M E M O R A N D U M
1"i: Mayor and Members of the City Council
ARUM: Rick Svehla, Assistant City Manager
DATE: September 12, 1986
SUBJECT: Proposed modification to highland Street
Several additional studies have been performed at the Highland
at Welch street intersection due to the concerns expressed in
the Council meeting of September 2, 1986. Also, an additional
letter from the North Texas State Police chief is enclosed
attempting to address concerns about access to parking lots,
vehicle stacking at the Highland/Welsh intersection, and
especially the problems being created by the segmented two-way
sections on Highland street.
Our 24-hour traffic counts show the intersection does not meet
traffic signal warrants. The traffic counts taken show that
left and right turns from east bound Highland to Welch street
are not a major movement. The enclosed traffic count chart
shows the ratio of turns onto Highland versus those from
Highland to Welch is close to 10:1 during peak 15 minute
periods. We feel the safety gained by eliminating the two way
section overshadows the inconvenience as shown by the
comparisons in the chart.
North Texas State University made the request to change
Highland street to a continuous one way street from Welch to
Avenue h. It is consistent with this master plan if a couplet
is created with Maple. (Highland one way west and Maple one
way east). The Maple issue will be addressed later by North
Texas State University if the Highland Street plan passes.
This couplet allows the North Texas State University planners
to have the proper consistency when they look at access to new
buildings or modifications to old. One way streets also
reduce the need for traffic signals since they have fewer
conflicting movements. They also are more efficient in
carrying traffic through an area when major traffic flows are
the goal since the side streets can have the stop signs. The
side street crossings are much safer because the driver has to
check only one directional flow before making the movement.
Proposed Modification to Highland Street
Pagel
Avenue A, Avenue C, Avenue D, and Central street, provide local
two way access to avoid major inconveniences of having to
travel completely around several blocks to get to a desired
location on the NTSU campus in this area.
In summary, the proposed changes to Highland increase safety
greatly, promote consistent high volume traffic patterns, and
elimina es short-cutting in parking lots.
kick e a
Assistant City Manager
sj
3077M
- Addm
Cffy M DNNTON Ort 70Ns M US 76,101
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 12, 1986
TO: Jerry Clark, City Engineer
DRUM: David Ayers, Engineering Tech I/Plan Review
SUDJECT: Traffic signal warrants on Welch and Highland
Traffic counts were taken on Sept. 9 and 11 on the Welch and
Highland intersection. Reason for these counts was to warrant
signalization at that intersection. Traffic volume on Welch
met and exceeded minimum standards for the major street.
Highland did not meet minimum for a minor street. Pedestrian
volume was not a concern since most pedestrian traffic is north
of this intersection. In summation, using the Texas Manual of
Uniform Traffic Control Services this intersection does not
warrant traffic signalization.
If I can be of further assistance, please contact me.
Sin evely,
D s
Engineering IV Plan Review
is
0413H
.o
C ~~f111~t
APPENDIX G r '
• • err ~
AFLO
COLISEUM
30
i
U
J
w
3
2
1
00000000000
HIGHI-AND 000000000 o
`"Y B
A
4
PEAK HOUR FLOW
tZ V•N./NOUee Iv{p~/6M*,NT A
Z!3 va "I HOC ri. v 8
P. M Z8 v®H./HOUPL a
46 Mt H/Wc w v 8,
~4 - Houre voL.ur~
L, ~2 3Co
3. 28 7
4. Ao 4 24
CAOUJVT Um
a:g wa NPR 5r3
`rim a* A1aHLI►ND M NiGH6ANP V4LLCIA WELCH
L 5 R L 5 R L S R L S K
7:30 - 7.45 it 5 0 1 4 U 5 190 43 7 3 9
7 45 - 8'• 00 3 o f to q 5 141 30 II 2 5 37
8 Qe - 6: 16 4 0 1 8 5 0 73 5 y 2z zz
6~15 - 8''30 3 3 O o 4 ♦ 120 24 8 18 38
8',30 - 6'45 7 7 3 3 11 is 10 165 z8 G io +9
8;49- 9'0e 7 '7 3 3 G Mz 7 49 3 7 3$ 37
9 00 - r5► 8 7 o 2 b 8 2 43 6 7 25 3-
9 15 - 9'30 = 1 0 1 rl 1 72 7 4 19 17
?;4S s 3 2 q II 10 11q Z8 8 ze 20
9'45 - WOO II b (o ~ 14 3 Is 72 +3 12 4°J 40
11too- 11;IFj 4 o I + 5 A 2 39 7 s3 G7 20
111~~ - II' s;C b 4 z 7 5 3 4 GO 9 2 3g %4
+I .3o - +t 4G✓ !3 2 eD i 11 9 50 8 12 24 zo
11 '46 - r2 0o Is ~1 7 3 I B 3 Z 67 to ~).7. m
IZ oo - 1215 18 6 4 3 3 56 5 12 75)
lz 1!- Iz J f o $ 2 3 42 7 7 z 3
12'36- rz'.45 9 l0 3 3 17 5 3 7(o 1+ 11 45 3s
12:49- 1'4 12 8 7 0 14 15 107 9 19 8~ 54^K..
l'`.. t. ~ ~1. LJ f~'~ ~ ~-1~ 1 ~ J ~ ~ 1 ~ A ~ a ~ ~ L ~ / I a 1 I I r 1 ~ ~ ~ rf
1-70 -7
~ fx' ~ 3 - f~-• < cam., ~ b tz~~ ,
~pn~11
5o~ et e i 1 {7GArn fief ~Gt.Lt.r.a S Pf-^1~._• C
r r I L4.55
` I flo '
4 ~
,C,, JI c6
. 'IV
I
1
I
' I
_w
t
f I
z-, 3.7
E
f ~
I.rvJ • ~ 4 Ts ~ C, J ~ 4to
` f
01
f ~ I
. 1549E
NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR
ONE-WAY TRAFFIC WEST BOUND ON HIGHLAND STREET FROM WELCH STREET
TO AVENUE A AND ON HIGHLAND STREET FROM AVENUE D TO AVENUE E;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $200.00 FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOi; AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
That west bound traffic on Highland Street from Welch
Street to Avenue A and on Highland Street from Avenue D to
Avenue E is hereby restricted to one-way traffic,
SECTION II.
That when signs are in place giving notice thereof, any
person who shall violate the provisions of this ordinance shall
e guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding
Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00).
SECTION III.
That such signs shall not be erected until signalization of
the intersection of Welch Street and Highland Street has been
accomplished.
SECTION IV.
That this ordinance shall become effective upon the
installation of signalization, 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 data of
its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the , day of , 1986.
RAY STEPHEN90 MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLENo CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM!
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY: r~
DATE. September 16, 1986
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORKAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: PROPOSAL OF ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER & CO., TO PROVIDE INSURANCE AND BROKERAGE
88HVICES
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends purchasing broad comprehensive insurance coverage
from Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. (a brokerage firm representing
Lloyds of London, International Surplus Lines and Appalachian
Insurance Company).
BACKGROUND: For the past three (3) years, the City of Donton has been
contracting with Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., for the services
described in the proposal under consideration. For each of those
years, Arthur J. Galla"'her & Co. survived an evaluation by staff
to locate the most %-ost effective and beneficial insurance
available. However, due to changes in our insurance program,
brought on by the present insurance crisis, and the fact that
their three (3) year contract will expire September 30, 1986, the
City of Denton went out for bid.
Out of five (5) responses to our bid, we received only one (1)
broad ca,,prehensive insurance quote which was from Arthur .l.
Gallagher ti Co. The second most competitive quote excluded major
lines of Joverage such as Public Official Liability .nj' Law
Enforcement Liability.
FISCAL IMPACY: Acceptance of Arthur J. Gallagher & Company's quote would mean
expending $517,464. This amount would pay for brokerage fees,
administrative services, primary insurance as well as excess
insurance. The City would also establish a $375,000 Loss Fund,
pectfully submitted:
Lloyd V. Harrell
City Manager
Prepared y:
%
Harlan L. J son
Administrative Asristant
A prov d:
J hn F. McGrane
erector of Finance
HLF:af
1429F
1S87L
NO.
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE BID OF ARTHUR J, GALLAGHER 4 COMPANY
' FOR CERTAIN INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR THE CITY OF DENTON; AUTHORIZING
THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I,
That the bid of Arthur J. Galla 0et 4 Company for the following
types of insurance coverage is hereb,, atceptedi
Property
Automobile Liability
Automobile Physical
Crime Stock
General Liability
Public Official's Liability
Law Enforcement Liability
Mobile Bouipment
SECTION It.
The expenditure of funds therefor is hereby authorized.
SECTION 111.
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and approval.
i PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of Septeaber, 1986,
I
CITY OAF DBNT7N, TES 3
I
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLIN CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON,sTEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCHs CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTONs TEXAS
B Y : ~ ~C. i~ A!
Wow
i 1149L
NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1985-86 BUDGET OF THE CITY OF DENTON,
TEXAS BY APPROPRIATING THE SUM OF ONE MILLION ONE HUNDRED AND
EIGHTY-TWO THOUSAND AND ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-TWO DOLLARS
($1,182,182) FROM REVENUES, AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
• THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
The 1985.86 Budget of the City of Denton, Texas is hereby
amended by appropriating the sum of $1,182,182 from the following
funds due to increased revenues:
{ 1985-86 AMENDED
i FUND BUDGET APPROPRIATION 1985-86 BUDGET
Revenues:
Recreation $ 257,000 $ 900000 $ 347,000
Working Capital 2,765.OSS 1,091,182 3,857,237
f Total $3,0221055 $1,182,182 $4,2041237
Expenditures:
Recreation $ 2430019 $ 90000 $ 333,019
Working Capital 2,765,055 1,0920,182 31857,237
Total $300080074 $10182,182 $4,1901256
SECTION 11.
i
That the City Secretary 1- directed to attach a copy of this
ordinance to the original budget and cause this amendment to be
E published once in the Denton Record-Chronicle.
SECTION III.
That this ordinance shall become effective from and after Its
date of passage, and it is so ordained.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1986,
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLEN CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON,$TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:~
i
- f
rt 1,
i
R B S 0 L U T.1 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, THAT:
SECTION I,
The budget adjustments, as Indicated on Exhibit A, attached
hereto and inc.uded by reference herein, for the fiscal year
198S•86 are heroby, in all things, approved and ratified.
FASSED AND APPROVED this the day of September, 1986.
CITI OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
+f
I
CITY OF DENTON$ TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY
i
i
i!
f
I
EXIHIPIT A
GENERAL Fl!:W BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
FlSi,AL YEAR 1985-86
Cl1,Rf;ENT 1 TRANSFER MODIFIED
URBANIZATION / FUND BUDGET D AMOUNT WOW
LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 272,429 212,424
LEGAL MUNICIPAL COURT 129,858 124 858
EMERGENCY MANAOEMENT '
85,152 85,152
ENGINEERING 743,423 A I 10,132) 7339291
INSPECTIONS 407,434 401,4.34
TRANSPORTATN EN81NEE81NS 3249191 524,191
AIRPORT 82,466 A 11720 84,186
PW / ADMINISTRATION 134,273 A 129 134,402
STREET PATCHING 705,459 705,459
SWEEPING / DRAINAGE 314,057 319,057
STREET CONSTRUCTION 139,925 A 81283 748,208
STREET LISHTINB 350,000 350,000
ANIMAL-CONTROL 193,066 193,066
GENERAL GOVERNMENT 328,477 528,477
BUILDING OPERATIONS 621,173 621,173
OP ANALYSIS/ENROY MNBMNT 105,185 105,183
WORD PROCESSING CHTR 181,892 1811892
PERSONNEL 326,512 326,512
DATA PROCESSING ADMIN 701,094 701,094
PARKS I RECREATION ADMIN 204,891 204,891
RECREATION 740,774 B 20,000 760,774
PARK MAINTENANCE 743,405 B 1 20,000) 723,405
LIBRARY ADMIN 181,400 C 21350 1839150
SUPPORT SERVICES 1780148 C 4,050 182,198
ADULT SERVICES 246,485 C 81545 255,030
CHILDREN SERVICES 1110298 C 1 10,330) 100,948
FINANCE ADMIN 161,241 161,247
PURCHASING 181,052 187,052
CUSTOMER SERVICE 636,65' 636,657
CASHIERING 145,812 145,812
ACCOUNTING 279,533 279,533
TAX 110,108 110,108
PLANNING I CON DEV 347,944 D 71429 355,373
FIRE ADMINISTRATION 252,081 E ( 34,553) 217,528
FIRE OPERATIONS 3,110,501 E 36,756 31147,257
FIRE PREVENTION 145,497 E f 212031 143,294
POLICE ADMINISTRATION 183,453 F 2,441 185,900
CRIMINAL INVESTI8ATION 6291484 F ( 21447) 627,042
ADMINISTRATIVE 439,683 439,683
PATROL DIVISION 21386,756 21386,756
FIN ADMIN MISC 8239930 D 1 714291 816,501
FIN ACCT M18C 7171695 C 1 4,595) 713,100
PLANNING MISC 131,807 131,807
GENERAL FUND --•~--_i....
20,046,712 20 046 712
DATE. +4~
CITY COUNCIL RRPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit
to the Department of Housing and Urban Development an Amendment
to the Final Statement of Objectives & Projected Use of Funds
RECOMMENDATION: for the 86-87 grant year.
The Cur unityI)evelopnent Block Grant Committee
recam:ends approval.
SUMM AR Y: Thia resolution completes the city's CDBG application to
I= and allows an additional $87,000.00 in previously
deferred funding to be released for program use.
BACKGROUND: The Community Development Block Grant Committee approved
of the additional funds being allocated to the areas
of Administration and Neighborhood Center in its
July 31st meeting.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
The CDBG Section of the Planning and Community Development
Department will administer the program.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be no impact on the General Fund.
Respectfully submitted:
I V P40, /.0/
'AL
!~E Prepared by: Harrell
city Manager
Barbara Ross
cement Coordinator
Appr e
Jeff Meyer
Planning and Community Development Director
I
1045L ,
R E S 0 L U T 1 0 N
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO SIGN AND SUBMIT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT A FINAL STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES AND PROJECTED USE OF
FUNDS WITH APPROPRIATE CERTIFICATIONS, AS AUTHORIZED AND REQUIRED
BY THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974, AS AMENDED.
WHEREAS, the City of Denton, Texas, is concerned with the deve-
lopment of viable urban communities, including decent housing, a
' suitable living environment and expanded economic opportunities;
and
W11BREAS, the City of Denton, Texas, has a special concern for
persons of low and moderate income; and
WHEREAS, the City of Denton, Texas, as an entitlement City, has
prepared, through a citizen participation process, a program for
utilizing its first year entitlement funds in the approximate
amount o£ $S57,384; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing will have been held in accordance
with the law; and
WHEREAS, the Act requires an application and appropriate certi-
fication; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, THAT:
I SECTION I,
The City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, authorizes the
City Manager to sign and submit to the Department of Housing send
Urban Development a grant application and appropriate sssurantes
for entitlement funds under the Housing and Community Development
Act of 1974, as amended.
SECTION Ii,
3 That the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, authorizes
the Director of Planning and Community Development to handle all
fiscal and administrative matters related to the application, the
Housing Assistance Plan and the assurances.
{ SECTION 111,
i This this Resolution shall take effect immediately from and
after its passage.
SECTION IV,
That the City Secretary is hereby authorized to furnish copies
of this Resolution to all interested parties,
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of September, 1986.
RAY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CHARLOTTE ALLBN CITY NECR8TARY
CITY OF DENTON,OTEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY: Agd~
AMENDMENT TO'FINAL STATEMENT OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES
AND PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS
This is an amendment to the Final Statement submitted to the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on June 16,
1986. The City of Denton has received an additional $87,000 of
funding making a total of $557,384. These additional funds will
be divided between two projects already established in the Final
Statement. The following identifies the project changes.
1, Neighborhood Center - Phase II $ 69,600.00
Costs for the initial construction phase of the Community/
Recreation facility to be located of Newton Street between
Morse and Wilson Streets,
Objective: To improve the quality of life and promote
neighborhood stabilization in the targeted area.
Total funded $195,984600
2. Administration $ 17,400.00
Program management, coordination, monitoring and evaluation
associated with carrying out eligible grant activities.
Total funded $111,400.00
Any citizens or groups wishing to comment on the proposed
Community Development Block Grant projects should contact the
City of Denton, CDBG Office, 235 W, Hickory, Denton, Texas 76201
or phone 566-8480.
0241o,
I'
Y
OFFICIAL MINUTES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT COMMITTEE
July 31, 198'6
Present: Lucy Campbell, Birdell Carstarphen, Don Chipman,
Sibyl Evans, Dante Ferrara, Jo Luker, Lorie Price,
and Connie Wells.
Absent: Rosemary Rodriquez
Present From Staff: Elizabeth Evans, Community Development
Managers Barbara Ross, Community
Development Coordinator and Penny Black,
Clerk.
1. Co-Chairperson, Lucy Campbell, called the meeting to
order at 5:38 p.m. Ms. Campbell directed the committee
to begin with Item II on the agenda because Mr. Meyer
was absent.
II. Ms. Liz Evans gave an update on the 1984 and 1985 CDBG
projects. She briefed the committee of the additional
grant mDney from the overturn of the $500 million
deferral and the 1986 activities. Ms. L. Evans said the
Parks B7ard had named the center site Martin Luther King
Park and City Council had approved it.
Ms. Wells arrived at 5:40 p.m.
III. The review of the center Requests for Proposals from
interested architects was discussed. Ms. L. Evans said
3.6 million was recommended by the Planning and Zoning
Commission for two centers costing 1.8 million per
center. Some City Council members felt 1.2 million per
center should be set aside in the Capital Improvement
Plan SCIP) for another center, so three centers would
possibly be built totaling 3.6 million.
Ms. Carstarphen asked in what areas of the City would
these three centers be built.
Ms. L. Evans replied, 1) the Morse Street Center in
southeast Denton, 2) the Northeast Center located north
of Windsor Street by the new school and Loop 288 and, 3)
south of Denton by the Lillian Miller Road. She also
said the cost of the CIP would possibly increase,
therefore, since a larger portion of the City would
benefit it might have a greater chance of passing, The
Blue Ribbon Committee is working on plans to approach
the Bond issue,
i
Official M,iriutes
July 31, 1986
Page 2
Ms. Campbell asked how much would the schematic phase
for the Morse Street Center cost.
Me. L. Evans said the architects fee was approximately
60 of the 1.2 million for that specific center if the
Bond Issue passed.
Ms. Campbell expressed her concerns for the CDBG funds
being spent on planning phases (schematic) and if the
Bond issue did not pass leaving the City with no money
to build anything.
Mr. Ferrara asked if one design could be used on more
than one center.
Ms. L. Evans said possibly.
Ms. Luker explained to Ms. Campbell that the 1985 funds
had $52,000 allocated for architectural designs and the
1986 funds of $136,000 for actual construction remained
untouched.
Ms. L. Evans Paid the Executive Staff felt the CIP would
pass easier if architectural plans were available while
campaigning for the Bond Issue.
Ms. Campbell asked the staff if they knew of the results
of the telephone study conducted by the City regarding
the Bond Issue.
Ms. L. Evans and Ms. Ross both replied they were not
aware of the telephone survey.
Mr. Chipman asked for clarity on the number of buildings
for the Southeast Denton Center.
Ms. Evans said the proposals were for one building of
two different sizest one of 20,000 square feet and a
second one of 30,000 square feet.
Ms. Wells said until the Bond Issue idea came about the
Southeast Denton Center was only the committee's
concern. Presently, because of the Bond Issue, in order
to get more approvals the (CIP) will possibly list three
centers.
Ms. Luker asked could a larger building be constructed
if the bond issue passed.
official minutes
duly 31, 1986
Page 3
Ms. Evans said possibly a larger kitchen facility, more
furnishings and more park equipment could be added to
the facility if the bond passes. Ms. Carstarphen asked
could qualified supervision and management be guaranteed
from the funds requested in the CIA.
Ms. Campbell informed Ms. Carstarphen that the Parks
Department would run it.
Mr. Ferrara asked if there were any plans for the center.
Ms. Evans said the CDBG staff had no guarantee of
receiving funds from year to year, therefore, the City
will try to get a bond issue passed so the center can
definitely be built. Also, she mentioned the Parks
Board had possible plans.
Ms. Luker asked if any of the members could explain the
negative attitudes of the citizens towards the Bond
Issue and if they still wanted it removed from CIP.
Ms. Campbell said possibly they were concerned with the
economy's tight financial situation and were afraid the
Bond Issue would not pass unaware CDBG funds were
allocated and available to still build a center.
Ms. Carstarphen said she was not aware of whether the
citizens wanted it removal or to remain on the CIP.
Mr. Ferrara felt the committee should publicize the Bond
issue so people would get out and vote.
Ms. Wells said the citizens needed to be educated more
about the project considering it is a no lose situation.
Ms. 8. Evans asked who would staff the child care area.
Ms. L. Evans said the Parks Department would be
responsible for that.
IV. Ms. Evans discussed the additional $87,000 in CDBG funds
the City was awarded. she said the first item was for
relocation of the CDBG office and explained the areas
investigated and the one chosen by the staff.
Ms. Wells asked how much of a difference in money the
new rental rate would call for.
Ms. L. Evans said possibly $6,000 out of the $87,000.
Official Mire
July 31, 1 8
Page 4
Ms. Wells asked could this left over money be used for
the recreation center.
Me, Ross' request that we needed to put in $7,400
allowed administration cost in the budget.
Me, L. Evans said she would make an amendment to the
final statement for the 1986 funds allowing flexibility
so that if the Bond issue passes additional funds of
$69,600 will be put into housing rehabilitation and if
the Bond Issue does not pass, the additional funds will
go into the construction of the recreation center.
V. Ms. Wells opened the floor for election of officere6
Ms. Price nominated Ms. Wells for Chairperson and
Me. Campbell for Co-Chairperson for service of another
term and they were accepted by the committee by
acclamation.
Vi. The meeting adjourned at 6:53 p.m,
0259k
1S7$L ~ .
R E S O L U T I O N
WHEREAS, Section 6.03 of the Charter of the City of Denton
• authorizes the City Council to appoint a City Judge to preside
over the Municipal Court; and
WHEREAS, the Council is desirous of making such appointment;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DENTON:
SECTION I.
That Sandra H. White is hereby appointed City Judge of the
City of Denton, Texas, effective October 1, 1986.
SECTION II.
That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute a letter of
agreement between the City of Denton and Sandra H. White as City
Judge relative to the terms of her employment, a copy of which
is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION III.
This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its
passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of September, 1986.
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST.,
CHAROTTE ALLEN$ CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
Ciry of DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 1 TELEPHONE (817) 56643%
Office of the Mayo.
September 10, 1986
Sandra H. White
Attorney at Law
P. 0. Box 31512
Dallas, Texas 75231
Re: Your Appointment as Municipal Court Judge
Dear Ms. White:
The City Council of the City of Denton is delighted that you
have accepted the position of Judge of Denton. With regard to
your employment, the following are conditions surrounding your
employment with the City of Denton:
1. Employment Date: Your employment date is October 1, 1986.
2. Salar : Your salary will be $35,000 annually, payable in
nlments at the same time as other employees of the City
are paid.
3. Duties: Your duties include those duties enumerated in your
o escription, a copy of which is attached hereto and
marked Bxhibit "A". In addition, the City Council has
requested that you devote your best efforts to work closely
with the Municipal Court Clerk's office to revise Court
procedures, recordkeeping procedures and implement the
municipal court computer system#
4. Chan es in Pay:, Any changes in pay will be discussed with
the City olancil each October, when your performance will be
reviewed by the Council.
S. Benefits: You will be entitled to all benefits, i.e. health
insurance, worker's compensation, vacation and sick leave,
retirement and pension plan contributions provided to other
employees of the City. You shall be entitled to receive the
same vacation and sick leave benefits as are accorded other
department heads, including provisions governing accrual and
payment therefor on termination of employment.
Ms. Sandra H. White
September 10, 1986
Page Two
6. Separation From Employment: Pursuant to Section 6.03 of the
City Charter, as un c pal Judge, you serve at the pleasure
of the City Council and may be separated from employment at
any time. For these reasons, the terms of your em loyment
shall not be subject to the Disciplinary Policies of the city.
7. A ointment of Assistant City Judges: Pursuant to the City
charter, the City council is authorized to appoint Assistant
City Judges to perform the duties and functions of the City
Judge to act in your temporary absence or disability. The
Council may ask you from time to time, to interview
applicants and make recommendations relative thereto to the
City Council, for the position of assistant judge or judges.
You shall be responsible for coordinating and supervising the
duties of the assistant .judges.
8. Professional Develo went: It is recognized that you have to
evote a great ea o your time outside normal office hours
to business of the City, and to that end, you will be allowed
to take compensatory time off as you shall deem appropriate
during said normal office hours; provided, however, you shall
devote your entire time to the performance of the duties and
shall not spend more than ten (10) hours per week in teaching,
consulting, or other non-City connected business without the
prior approval of the City Council.
The City Council hereby agrees to budget for and pay our
travel and subsistence expenses for professional and official
development to adequately pursue necessary official and other
functions for the City, including, but not limited to, the
Texas Bar Convention, Texas Municipal Judges Association and
training seminars, regions;,., state, local, legal or
governmental groups and committees thereof which you serve as
a member.
The City Council also agrees to budget for your travel and
subsistence expenses for short courses, institutes and
seminars that are necessary for your professional development
and for the good of the City of Denton.
The City Council agrees to budget and pay the professional
dues and subscriptions necessary for your continuation and
full participation, including the holding of responsible
offices in national, regional, state and local associations
and organizations necessary and desirable for your continued
professional participations growth and advancenep.t, and for
the good of the City of Denton.
Ms. Sandra H. White
September 10, 1986
Page Three
9. Relocation Ex A You shall be paid your relocation
expenses w~~'espact to your move to Denton pursuant to city of
Denton Personnel policy No. 101.05.
If you have any questions about the terms of this letter of
agreement, please do not hesitate to let me know. Please
indicate your acceptance by signing below.
Sincerely,
Ra rtephans, Y Mayor
City of Denton
RS:js
Enclosures
xc; Personnel File
Debra A. Drayovitch, City Attorney
I agree to accept the terms of employment as set forth herein.
1578L
D11Tat 9/10/8bM
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT r
r I
TOs Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECTI ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING F '3RANT IN AID FROM THE
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AIRPORT
IMPROVEMENTS.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Airport Advisory Board and City staff recommend adoption of the resolution.
SUMMARY:
The funds from this grant will allow for the construction and marking of three
taxiways on the southeast section of the airport; the construction of an aircraft
holding apron for Runway 17; and the construction and marking of a helipad and
connecting taxiway. While we have not received the final cost estimates and grant
offer from the FAA at this time, we anticipate that the offer will be in the
neighborhood of $250,000 and will require approximately $26,000 in matching funds
from the City. The completion of these projects will significantly enhance the
City's ability to develop the east side of the airport.
BACKGROUND:
Those projects were selected by the FAA for funding based upon the City's preap-
plication for Federal assistance which was submitted last year. In late June, the
FAA notified the City that they had some funds remaining in the ADAP program for
this fiscal year and that they would be preparing a "last minute" grant offer for
the City. In order to secure these funds, it is imperative that the City accept
the offer prior to September 30, 1986. The FAA has assured us that they will have
the final cost estimates and paper work to the City on Friday, September 12, 1986.
Once these documents are received, the resolution accepting the offer will be
completed and submitted to the Council for consideration.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Denton Municipal Airport
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approximately $26,000 from City Funding.
Res full s ted,
- A6
two . Harrell, Ci Manager
Prepared by:
Bill Ange o
Assistant Director of Public Works
Approved byt~
Bill Anyelo -
Assistant Director of Public Works
air2
MINUTES
AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD
September 9, 1986
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DENTON AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD, TUESDAY,
SEPTEMBER 91 1966, AT 5:00 P.M., IN THE TERMINAL BUILDING OF THE MUNICI-
PAL AIRPORT.
MEMBERS PRESENTi Arno, Carrell, Hayward, Keith, Smith, Williams,
Wright
MEMBERS ABSENT. None
OTHERS PRESENT; Rick Svehla, Assistant City Manager: Bill Angelo,
Assistant Director of Public Works; and Bruce
Cardwell of the City Staff
1. The Board considered the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Au-
gust 12, 1986. A motion was made and seconded to approve the
Minutes as written.
2. The Board considered recommending to the City Council the accep-
tance of the FAA Grant ATP 3-48-0067-03. The Board was informed
that because the Grant had to be awarded by September 30, but
engineering was not yet completed on the project, the Grant would
be awarded by the FAA by estimate. The Board was assured that if
the estimate needed to be adjusted at a later date after the Grant
was awarded and accepted by the City, the FAA would make arrange-
ments to do so. A motion was made by John Carrell and seconded by
Gene Wright to recommend to the City Council the acceptance of the
FAA Grant AIP 3-48-0067-03, based on estimatem. The motion passed
unanimously.
3. The Board considered recommending to the City Council the approval
of financing the Southeast Corner Airport Development. The Boar,1
was informed that the City Staff had met with the City's Financial
Advisor Frank Medanich, from First Southwest, and that financing
was available for development of the Airport. The Board was
presented with two financial packages for developing the Southeast
Corner. The Board felt that as an absolute minimum a financing
package in the amount of $400,000 should be issuedl however, they
felt atrongly that a package in the amount of $500,000 should be
issued to cover the immediate development and equipment needs o
the Airport. A motion was made by Gene Wright and seconded stating
that in order to complete initial development of the Southeast
Corner of the Airport, the Board recommends to the City Council the
AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES
September 9, 1986
Page 2
issuance of Certificates of obligations in the amount of $400,000
to $500,000. The motion passed unanimously.
4. The Board considered the Airport Manager's Report. The acting
Airport Manager stated that he had reconsidered and decided not to
apply for the Airport Manager's position. The Board was updated on
the automated weather system by Handar. The Board suggested that
Handar's system be purchased. The Port A Port Systems hangars were
discussed. The Board expressed an interest in seeing some of their
buildings at other airports. Also, the Board suggested that steps
be taken to locate Port A Port hangars on the South Ramp on a
temporary basis to satisfy the immediate need for hangar space.
5. The Board considered any new business. The Board expressed concern
about the filling of the Airport Manager position in a timely
manner. They were informed about the procedures for hiring. The
Board was again concerned with how they would participate in the
hiring process considering the close working relationship between
the Board and the Manager. They suggested that informal interviews
with the Board or their representative and the top candidates for
the position might be appropriate. Rich Svehla would check into
this possibility and contact the Board Chairman at a later date.
The Board suggested some changes in the wording of the job descrip-
tion for clarification.
6. The Board met in Executive Session to discuss legal and real estate
matters. The Board reconvened in open session.
With no further business, the Board adjourned at 7:40 P.M.
air2
E&M
t . a CANNA 0 NfJ11l a IRa ~1
AMU.
t. full W110M ANMMLLlIO P o = of aIw pFf10mw a DAM ,a M DAIM
f" Now „ Almom hV N" w
dm=* (3 ~Kum O A/RIOATION 1# 86 9 8 MYA AIS to
a.~
't Low aaa~R
&s C ty of Denton, Texas & ~
7 -6ooo514w
6, Or baft LMII a
afta*V-0-ft 215 E, McKinney ~ a NINMI 12101 * 11L 161
a0y Denton aC1wgr Benton
(UN Texas AWOcala 76201 ~CJn4► MLILWU
hftmwftM arwBruce Cardwell a WLE Airport
d rdpwwAUw (817) 566-8419 Improvement Program
7. WU OF AMLMAM'f P AW Nw won N N MY to M poft a Zm; ;;w~ M 0M L TTYII OF APPUC WNAUIW
Construct and mark taxiways H, I and J; construct
I lop -0
holding apron Runway 17; construct and mark helipad and N IMW
connecting taxiway. awr
a1Mw 400P10 Yr
t ARIA OF R1KMI UDACr ff* qf4* wwft aaaa mJ M I I. T IOF ANWA IOM
OF PUNONNNNIN"1~1
a-+rrw~r r s a
City of Denton and Denton County 1000000 aa.w
t! IRO/Oalri!{lIQMq 1s GOg011Lt~lONAIONRIMOflOP fs, row OF APPLICATION
sew
a AIMIDA/ff * NIOWT
APPLIOW 40 A o4 II. YM OF Oww pM /M «
A AO Ii. PROM! MART it I~IIIQ~CTN ~ ~
!Yv ianN de
LOCAL DAM Is 86 11 1'r 6 a-arrrw
4,L ONO 40 fS. OATI ON TO 4ar ~wM dr
TOW Is As Rlp/UL ASINCY ► 1s
it P@Mk AM OY ?0 RaO■M Rlf y IL May" Flow" avifr
ital Administration VVfnPI0ATIONNUa
a OROMaiATKINALLNIIIIM~
Southwest Ile ion Air ort Standards Section 3-48-0067-03
a Federal Aviation Administration, E►TTN: „,AOOIO
P 0 Box 1689
Jog WoXtb. X3 76101
IL Q
TM d* M SO "a~MeweiV a fsNOLI N ORtI Ism PHOC~ ION ROM OR
AMWAW M006wiMYl Miw M M~MwMM OATt
Ow""M so
TW1T► MIAr M ~ a/lrwia ax Mr
Nlrwwppw►Qa,rwMA k N0.+IIOORAMItNOTO"NOw@A. "M O
II sw mww is 000" ON INONNAM NO NOT IIIN lILW= By ITATI Ion Wv 0
~TRVN10 a T'Mla WW MID WU M MNMUnt
rdw- Mr, Bill Angelo
$WAWA Assistant Director of Public Works
a4. ~APPL CAM YW NOW AV A/ /I~UL AIILICATIt7N
REC m Is
V. AD" TAM VW aw AV MTMIb row mono rrw
C& W11010 is DAM 10
D a IIPoilm ITUIM~ NON a raoINAL a As a1. sII~DIgLa Tw rr.w► I.r
AMMl O"Y k AIRIOA/ff TM fMw rt a+YMba SNOW DNA
is
a it PC"~ PON
LCL JIM s lmftm a ITA72 Ao >v. RHAAnKa AQOID
~A~ CW tO t LOCAL
0 a OQ11om ~L .A
O L W"NDPAWW ! TONY 0 40 Y« ❑ w
$TAmW D "ft as PAM I "M 4."
r NOT L,NAMN y
DMARTM/MT OF TRAMlFMAT M • FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRAT11111
OMe No. 00,00104
PART it
PROJECT APPROVAL INFORMATION
SECTION A
Item 1,
Does this assistance request require State, local, Name of Governing Body
regional, or other priority rating? Priority Rating
Yes x No
Item 4.
Does this assistance request require State, or local Name of Agency or
advisory, educational or health clearances? Board
Yes_ X No (Attach Documentation)
Item 3.
Does this assistance request require clearinghouse review (Attach Comments)
in accordance with OMB Circular A•95?
Yes X No
Item 4.
Does this assistance request require State, local, Name of Approving Agency
regional or other planning approval? Dote
Yes x _ No
Item 5,
Is the proposed project covered by on approved Check one: State '
comprehensive plan? Local
Regional
Yes X No Location of plan _
Item b.
Will the assistance requested serve a Federal Name of Federal installation _
installation? Yes X No Federal Population benefiting from Project
Item 7.
Will the assistance requested be on Federal land Nome of Federal Instalfotion
or installation? Location of Federal Land
Yes X No Percent of Project
Item 8. .
Will the assistance requested have an impact or effect See instruction for additional information to be
on the environment? provided.
Yes _x No
Item 9, Number of
Will the assistance requested cause the displacement of Individuals
individuals families, businesses, or forms? Families
Businesses
Yes X No Farms
Item 10,
Is there other related Federal assistance on this See instructions for additional informotion to be
project previous, pending, or anticipated? provided,
Yes X No
FAA Fenn 5100.100 w7si &uPaM$[DES FAA FORM 5100-f0 FAGES 1 tt1RU Y pave
Z
pL►ARTMRNt fJt< TRAMf►ORTATION r V1011RAL AVIATIttk ADWRISTRATIM oaaa ~a ssbor
PART lI • SECTION C (SECTION B OKIITTU)
The Sponsor hereby reprroaents and certifies as follows:
1. Compatible Land Use,-The Sponsor has taken the following actions to assure compatible usage of land adjacent to or in
the vicinity of the airport:
1. Airport height zoning ordinances
2. Noise compatibility and compatible land use plans
3. City annexation programs
4. Commercial zoning around airport
2. Defaults.-The Sponsor is not In default on any obligation to the United States or any agency of the United States Govern•
ment relative to the development, operation, or maintenance of any airport, except so stated herewith:
None
3. Possible Disabilities.-There are no facts or circumstances (includingr, the existence of effective or proposed leases, use
gs)
ements or other legal instruments affecting use of the Airport or the existence of pending litigation or other legal proceedin
Xi ch in reasonable probability might make it impossible for the Sponsor to carry out and complete the Project or carry out the
;
povisions of Part V of this Application, either by limiting its legal or financial ability or otherwise, except as follows;
None
4. land.-{a) The Sponsor holds the following property interest in the following areas of land" which are to be developed
or used as part of or in connection with the Airport, bjet to the folloie nie exceptions, encumbrances, and adverse interests,
all of which areas are identified on the si■n~rimimi property aP dB Exhibit "A"
Attached to the Application for Federal Assistance attached to the Grant
Agreement for ATP Project 3-48-0067-01.
Fee simple title: Parcels 1, 2, 3, 4, 51 61 C and D.
i ale character or property interest in each area and list and (dent, y for each all exceptions, encum4ranres, and odwse Interests
of every, kind end grture, including liens, easements, hoes, etc. he seperale areas of land need only be identified here by the
area numbers shown on the properly map,
FAA font 6100-100 14-n) hp i
l - -
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - FEDERAL AVIATION ADMMISTRATION OMSNO.0a•110RM
PART 11 • SECTION C (Continued)
The Sponsor further certifies that the shove Is based on a title examination by a qualified attorney or title company and that
such allorney or title company has determined that the Sponsor holds the above property interests,
(rb) 1'he Sponsor will acquire within a reasonable time, but in any event prior to the start of any construction work under
the l3roket, the following property interest in the following areas of land* on which such construction work is to be performed,
all of which areas are identified on the aforementioned property mop designated as Exhibit "A":
None
{c) The Sponsor will acquire within a reasonable time and if feasible prior to the completion of all construction work under
the pKoject, the following property interest in the following areas of land* which are to be developed or used as part of or in
connection with the Airport as it will be upon completion of the Project, all of which areas are identified on the aforementioned
property map designated as Exhibit "A":
None
5. Exclusive Rights.-There is no grant of an exclusive right for the conduct of on), aeronautical activity at any airport owned
or controlled by the Sponsor except as follows:
None
*State character of property interest in each area and list and idenyy for each all exceptions, encumbrancer, and adverse interests
of every kind and nature, including liens, easements, leates, etc. The separate areas of land need only be identified here by the
area numbers shown on the property map.
FAA Form 5100-100 (aas) Pain 3b
tY~T T ATM • RIOIRAL AVIATION AVOWI{TRAT Rote r.o. satsotoe
PART Ili - BUDGET INFORMATION - CONSTRUCTION
SECTION A - GENERAL.
1. Fed.ral Domestic Assistance Catalog No..... • _ _2Q„I 06
1. Functional or Other Breakout . . . . . . . . . . . . .
SECTION 8 - CALCULATION OF FEDERAL GRANT
Use only IV revisions
Total
Cost Classification Amount
Latest Appoved Adjustmomt Required
Amount r or H
1. Administration exhensa s S $
2. Prelominary expense
3. Land,structures, right-of-way
4. Architecrural engineering basic fees
5. Other architectural engineering fees
6. Project inspection fees
7. Land development
8. Relocation Expenses
9. Relocation payments to Individuals ana Businesses
10. Demolition and removal
11. Construction and project improvement
12. Equipment
13. Miscellaneous
14. Total (Lines 1 through 13)
15. Estimated Income (if applicable)
16. Net Project Amount (Line 14 minus 15)
17. Less: Ineligible Exclusions
18. Add: Contingencies
19. Total Project Amt. (Excluding Rehabilitation Grants)
20. Federal Share requested of Line 19
21. Add Rehabilitation Grants Requested (100 Percent)
i
22. Total Federal grant requested (Lines 20 & 21)
23. Grantee share
24. Other shares
25. Total project (Lines 2Z 23 & 24) S S S
FAA fertn 511~0•IDO f1 721 IU►LflHtatl sAA FORM 1111100 • t0 PAOL2 I TNRu 7 Pw 4
R '
OVAJIVAINT Of TRANSPORTATION • F1110IIIIIIAli, AVIAVOW ADMINISTRATION
SECTION C - EXCLUSIONS
!lone
Clrssiliewlon Ineligible ra Excluded from
PrrtlelFrNFon C°rningency Provision
f 3
b.
c.
d.
Tolols S 3
SECTION D - PROPOSED METHOD OF FINANCING NON-FEDERAL SHARE
27, Grantee Shale _ S
a. Securities
b. Mortgages _
c. Appropnalions(By Applicant)
d. Bonds _
e. Tax Levies
f. lion Cash
g. Other (Explain)
h. TOTAL - Grantee share
28. Other Shares
a. State
b, Other
c. Total Other Shares
29, TOTAL
S
SECTION E - REMARKS
PART IV PROGRAM NARRATIVE Attach - Sea Instruction
FAA Ferny ShO.Vo wim SUPERIEOEI FAA FORM 1100.18 PAOICI I TNRU 7 Pop 5
PART V
ASSUTANC=S
(Public Agemoy Sponsors of Development or Noise Program Projects)
A. QlN~AL.
1, Tbess assurnscoa shall be oomplisd with in the performance of the following grant agsssmental
Airpor'o development and not" program implementation greats to airport sponsors.
2. These assureneea are required to be submitted Of part of the project application by sponsors requesting
funds mnior the provisions of the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1952 or the Aviation Safety and Noise
Abotemsst Act of 1979. This set of assuramoss inoluden only those assuranoes which are applicable to a sponsor
eta is a public agency with control of a public-use airport,
3. Deleted.
4. Upon acceptance of the grant offer by the sponsor, these assusanoes are incorporstad is and become part
of the grant agreement.
D. DUUTION AND APPLICABILITY.
Al%wrt De►•loDment or Noise Pro was Im lementatioa Pro~eot91 Undertaken bar A Public A sac sponsor. The
tern, con. t oas auwranMses-'o!- • gran agreement sTiif~rma~a'Ta- Moro-i an • sot t rougsout the
useful life of the facilities developed or equipment acquired for an airport development or noise program
a
twenty i (20) ifttallsd
imoomostation N program impljimentntion project, but in• any event o not h to project
of
years from the dat tof
accepiamoe of a grant offer of Federal funds for the project. Hoverer, there shall be no limit on the duration
of the assurance against exclusive rights or the terms, conditions, and assuranoea with respect to real property
ao%aired with Federal f+snda. Furthermore, the duration of the Civil lights asaurans• shall be as specified to
the assurance.
0, 00M CRRTIFICATI00. The sponsor hereby assures and oertifies, with respect to this grant tbats
1. general federal Ae ui,Went all aPPlioable lava, regulations, sxeoutiv
will P11' with
r s It veil ooa orders, po o es, gu • inns and roqquirsmects as they relate to the applioation, acceptance sad use of Federal
!Dada for this project Looluding but not limited to the followings
Federal elation
a. Federal Aviation Act of 1958 - 49 U.S.C, 1301, et s•S.
b. Davis-Baoon Act - 40 U.B.C. 276(a), at seg.
et aygs
o. Federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 133T - 29 U.S.C. 2010
d. Hatch Act - 5 U.S.C. L5010 s-t so q.
Uniform Relocation Assistance Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 - 42 U.S.O. 46010
etas.
f, Iatioaal Historic ?reservation Act of 1966 - Section 106 - 16 U.M. 470(f),
g., Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 - 16 U.S.C. 469 through 4690.
h, Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 - Section 102(a) - 42 U.S.C. 4012a,
1. Rehabilitation Act of 1973 - 29 U.S.C. 794,
J. Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Title VI - 42 U.S.C. 2000d through d-4.
k, Aviatioa Safety and 11oice Abatement Act of 1979, 49 U.S.C, 2101, et ems,
1. Age Discrimination Act of 1975 - 42 U.S,C. 6101, at se
.
Architectural Bavriera Act of 1968 - 42 U.S.C, 41TT, as
n. Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 - 49 U,S,C, 201, st ~me,qq
o. Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 - S•ution 403 --4~U.S-C. 8373.
p, Contract York Hours and Safety Standards Act - AO U.S,C. 327, at any.
q. Copeland Aotikiokback Act - 18 U.B.C. 874.
r, National Nnvironmeatol Policy Act of 1969 - 42 U.S.C. 43210 of _,,,gs .
s, Radangered $pact" Act of 1973 - 16 U.S,C. 668(s), t esq.
t. Single Audit Act of 1984 - 31 U.S.0. 7501, Lt In,
Executive Orders.
Faecutive order 12372, Iste:•govsrental Aevisw of Federal Progress.
Federal Regulations.
a. 49 CFA Part 21 - Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs of the Department of
Transportation - Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil lights Act of 1964.
b. 49 CFR Part 23 Participation by Minority Wei"" Dat•rprise in Dspsrtaeat of Transportation
Progrgrs,
FAA pert 5100.100 (10-55) Development or lot" Program - Public Sponsor Page 6
I
IFE ,
o. 49 CIE Part 25 - Relocation Assistance And Land Acquisition far Federal and Pedet"Aily Assisted
Prsgrama.
d, 29 GFR Part 1 - Procedures for Predetermination of Wage Rates,
29 On Tart 3 - Contractors or Subcontractors on Public buildings or Public Yorks Financed in Whole
or Part by Loans or Greats from U,S,
f, 29 CPR Part 5 - Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering federally Financed aad
Assisted Gcastraotion.
g. 49 on Part 27 - Nondiscrimination on the basis of Nandioap in Progress and Activities Receiving or
beaafitiag frog Federal Pinaaoial Assistance,
h, 41 CFA Part 60 - Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programe, Equal Employment Opportunity,
Dopartaost of Labor (Federal sad federally-assisted Contracting Requiremoats),
is 14 CFR Part 1% - Airport N,)ise Compatibility Planning.
Office of llaaaameant and budget Circulars.
a. A-87 - Cost Principles Applicable to Grants and Contracts with $tate and Local 0overnments,
b. A-102 - Uniform Requirements for Assistance to State and Local Oovernmets.
o. A-128 - Audits !!f State and Local Governments,
Specific assurances required to be included in grant sgreoments by any of the above laws, regulations or
circulars are incorporated by reference in the grant agreement.
2. ResDOmibilitl and Authority of the Snona;
It has legs; authority to apply for the grant, and to finance and carry out the proposed projects that a
resolution, motion or similar action has been duly adopted or passed as on official act of the applicant's
governing body authorising the filing of the application, isoludine all understandings and assuresoes contained
therein, and directing and outhorising the person identified as the official representative of the applicant to
eat is ooaneotion with the application and to provide such additional information to may be vvquired.
3. Sponsor Fund Availability. It has sufficient funds available for that portion of the project costs which
is not to Ps e n t• totes. It has sufficient funds available to assure operation and asintenana•
of items funded under the grant agreement which it will own or control.
4. Good Title, It holds good title, satisfactory to the Seoretary, to the landing area of the airport or
site thereof, or will give assurance satisfactory to the Secretary that goon title will be acquired.
for noise program implementation projects to be carried out on the property of the sponsor, it holds
good title satisfactory to the Secretary to that portion of the property upon which federal Funds will be
expeadsd or will give assurance to the Secretary that good title will be obtained,
5, Preserving Rishta and Powers*
a. It will not take or posit any action which would operate to deprive it of any of the rights and
powers necessary to perform any or all of the terms, conditions, and aesureaces in the grant agreement without
the written approval of the Secretary, and will act promptly to acquire, extinguish or modify any outstanding
rights or claims of right of others which would interNre with such performance by the sponsor. This shall be
done in a manner acceptable to the Secretary.
b. It will not moll, lease, enoumber or otherwise transfer or diepoar of any part of its title or other
interests in the property shown on Exhibit A to this application or, for a noise program implemontation project,
that portion of the property upon which federal funds have boon expended, for the duration of the terns,
conditions, and assurances in the great 3greeaont without approval by the Secretary, If the transferee is found
by the Secretary to be eligible under the Airport and Airway Isprover.Ynt Act of 1982 to assuw the obligations
of the grant agreement and to have the power, authority# and financial resources to carry out all such
ebligstioas, the sponsor shall imaert in the contract or document transferring or disposing of the sponsor's
interest, and make binding upon the transferee, all of the torso, conditions, and assuraaoas contained in this
grant agreement,
a. For all noise program implementation projects which are to be carried out by another unit of local
government or are on property owned by a unit of local government other than the sponsor, it will enter into an
mereemsat with that government. Except as otherwise specified by the Secretary, that agreement shall obligate
that goverm ost to same foram, conditions, and assursnoes that would be applicable to it if it applied directly
to the PAA for a great to undertake the soles progru inplemsstation project, That agreement and abase"
thereto met be satisfactory to the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the local
gawremsmt if there is substantial nonocmpliance with the terms of the agr"Oest.
FAA form 5100-100 (10-85) Development or Noise Program - Puhlia Sponsor page 7
womim
d. for Miss program iaplam"tation projects to be carried out an privately owned property, it will
alter into an agreement with the owner of that property which includes provisions specified by the Secretary.
It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the property owner whas"or there is substantial
tetmempliamoe with the tome of the agreement,
e. Deleted.
f. If an orrengoment is made for sanapssnt and operation of the airport by any agency or person other
that the sponsor or as employee of the sponsor, the sponsor will reserve sufficient rights and authority to
itsmrm that the airport will be operated and maintained in accordance with the Airport and Airway Improvement
Act of 1900 the regulations and the terms, ootditions and assurances in the grant agreement and shall issu»
that suoh arrangement also requlra compliance therewith.
b, 0 a isteao h Loos Plans, The project is reasonably consistent with place (existing at the time of
anbaiwlon e~ppl ea oa or public agencies that are authorized by the state is which the project is
located to plan for the development of the arms surrousdise the airport, for noise program impleme,atation
projmata, other than land acquisition, to be carried out do property not own" by the airport and aver which
prepoto author public agency has land use control or authority, the sponsor shall obtaia from e4,oh such agency
a written declaratlon that such money supports the project and the project is reasonably consistent with the
agnoy's plans regarding the property.
T. Consideration of Local Interest. It has given fair consideration to the tatercat of communities in or
near which pro eo say coated.
S. Conaultetioa with Umare. In making a declatan to undertake any airport development project under the
Airport ac~"I~rt►j .rT yroverw T+ot of 1982, it has u,%"rtaken reasonable conaoltations with affeot" parties
uaiag the airport at which the project is proposed.
9, Public Hoarin a, In projects involving the location of an airport, an airport runway, or a major
rung •tttena own, bias afforded the opportunity for public hearings for the purpose of considering the
ecosomio, social, and environmental effects of the airport or runway Iodation and its consistency with the goals
and objectives of such planning as has been carried out by the community. It shall, when requested by the
Secretary, submit a copy of the transcript of such hearinla to the Secretary.
10, Air and Yates Qwlitr Sfaadarde. In projects l.nvolvine airport location, a major runway extension, or
runway location it wi prow • or the of the, state in which the project is located to certify in
writird to the Secretary that the project will be located, designed, constructed, and operated so as to comply
with applicable air and water quality standards. ire, nay daze where such standards have not bean approved and
where applicable air and water quality standards have been promulgated by the Administrator of the Environnsatal
Protection Aonoy, certification shall be obtained from such Administrator. Notice of certification or refusal
to certify shall be provided witGin sixty days after the project application has been received by the Secretary,
11. Deleted.
12, Terminal Devolo ant Prere uisiter, for projects which include terminal development at a public
airport, 1 s, on the ate of eu itta of the project grant application, all the safety equipment required
for certification of such airport under Section 612 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 and all the security
equipment xequired by rule or regulation, and has provided for access to the passenger enplaning and deplaning
area of P,anh airport by passengers enplaning or deplaning from aircraft other than air carrier aircraft.
13. Accounting System, Audit, and Recordkeaoing Requirements.
a. It shall keep all project accounts and reorrda which fully disclose the amount and disposition by
the reoipient of the proceeds of the grant, the total cost of the project in connection with which the grant is
given or used, and the amount and nature of that portion of the cost of the project supplied by other sources,
and such other financial records pertinent to the project. The ancounts and records shall be kept in accordance
with an accounting system that will facilitate an effective audit in accordance with the U.S. General Accounting
Office publication entitled Guidelines for financial and Comnlianoe Audits of federally Assisted Programs,
b. It shall sake available to the Secretary and the Comptroller General of the United States, or any
of their duly authorised representatives, for the purpose of audit and exasinstios, any books, documents,
papers, and records of the recipient that are pertinent to the grant. The Secretary may require that an
appropriate audit be conducted by a recipient, In any case in which an independent audit is made of the
accounts of a sponsor relating to the disposition of the proceeds of a grant or relating to the project in
connectios with which the grant was gives or used, it shall file a certified copy of such audit with the
Comptroller Oweral of the United States not later than 6 months following the close of the fiscal year for
which the audit was made.
14. Miniaus We Hates. It oball include, in all contracts in excess of $2,000 for work on any projects
funded un •r • gray sgisanrat which involve labor, provisions establishing minimum rates of wages, to be
predetermined by the Secretary of Labor, in scoordaaoa with the Davis-Haaon Act, as amended (40 U,S.C.
276a--276a-3), whiab contractors shall pay to skilled sad unskilled labor, and such ainionm rata shall be
stated in the invitation for bids and shall be Aoludsd in proposals or bids for the work.
FAA form 9100-100 (1)-8S) Development or Noise Program - Public Sponsor pap p
i
lay. Vote a Pr fete It shall include, in all contract@ for work on any projects funded under the
1441 agreement wo o arc ve labor, such provisions u are oeeessary to insure that, is the employment of labor
eseept in exscutivep ada wastrotive, a" supervisory position), preference shall be given to water"@ of the
:10mm are amd disabled votemn as defined is Section R1R(a)(1 and (2) of the Airport and Airway Improvement
Act of 1982. However, this preference shall apply only where the individuals are available and qualified to
perform the work to which the employment relates.
Id. Co o rot S ifioatioms. It will e•eoute the project subject to plan, specifioations,
MW sebedu ea appvo plans aMlyr u plan, speaifications, and sebedules shall be submitted to the
Seorstary prior to ooszssnuwaat of site proparatiom, construction, or other I»rformanca under this grant
agreement, and, upon approval by the Sseretary, shall be incorporated into this grant agreement.
modifications to the approved plan, specifications, and sohedules shall also be subject to approval by the
Secretary and incorporation into the grant agreement.
17. Q t tiara l
0 otio sad A royal. It will provide and maintain competent technical supervision at
the construc on s e ro u project to assure that the work conforms with the plan, specifications,
and schedules approved by the Secretary for the project. It shall subject the corstraotion work on any project
contained in an approved pvpject application to inspection and approval by the secretary and such work shall be
in accordance with regulations and procedures prescribed by the Secretary. Such regulations and procedures
shall require such cost and progress reporting by the sponsor or sponsors of auoh project as the Secretary shall
deem neoasary.
18. Deleted,
19, Operation and Nintenance.
a. It will suitably operate and maintain the airport and all facilities thereon or connected
therevitb, with due recoM to climatic and flood conditions, The airport and all facilities which are necessary
to serve the aeronautical users of tha airport, other then facilities owned or controlled by the United States,
eball be operated at all-time in a safe and serviceable condition and in accordance with the minimum standards
as my be required or prescribed by applicable Federal, state, and local agencies for maintenance and
operation. It will not cause or permit say activity or action thereon which would laterfirs with its use for
airport purposes.
In furtherance of this assuranoe, the sponsor will have in effect at all times arrangements for-
(1) Operating the al.rport'e aeronautical facilities whenever required:
(2) Promptly marking and lighting hazards resulting from airport oonditions, including temporary
conditional and
(3) Promptly notifying airmen of any condition affecting aeronautical use of the airport.
Nothing contained herein shall be construed to require that the airport be operated for
aerot.,utical use uring temporary periods when snow, flood, or other climatic conditions interfere with such
operst.un and maintenance. Further, nothing herein shall be construed as requiring the maintenance, repair,
restoration, or replacement of am structure or facility which is substantially damaged or destroyed due to an
act of Ooh or other condition or circumstance beyond the control of the sponsor.
b. It will suitably operate and maintain noise program implementation items that it owns or controls
upon which Federal funds have been expended.
20. Hazard Removal end aLion. It will adequately clear and protect the aerial approaches to the
airport by removing, owe ring, re acs lag, marking, or 11ghLing or othsrwiae mitigating existing airport Samarda
and by preventing the establishaent or creation of future airport hazards.
21, Comps ible Land Use. It will take appropriate notion, including the adoption of Roving lave, to the
extent reason e, to restr of the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to
activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including landing and takeoff of aircraft.
In addition, if the project is °ar noise program implementation, it will not cause or permit nay obange in land
use, within its juriedieation, that will reduce the compatibility, with respect to the airport, of the nice
compatibility program aeawres upon which Federal funds have been oxponded.
22, Sconomic Mc-ndisoriastion.
a. It wilt. mace its airport available as an airport for public-use on fair and reasonable terms and
without unjust dlso:~imination, to all typesp kinds, and classes of aeronautical uses,
b, In any agreement, contract, lease, or other arrangement under which a right or privilege at the
airport is granted Eo any person, firm, or corporation to conduct or engage in any aeronautiual activity for
furnishing services to the public at the airport, the sponsor will insert and enforce provision requiring the
eostraotor--
FAA Form 5100-100 (10-85) Dsvwlopesat or Was Program - Public Sponor Page 9
(1) To furnish said aervioaa an a fair, equal, and not usjustly discrisinstory basis to all users
tMrsbfr and
(2) To charge fair, reasomable, and not unjustly discriminatory prices for each unit or service,
provided, that the contractor nay be allowed to make reasonable and nondiscriminatory discounts, rebates, or
other similar types of price reductions to volume purchasers.
o. Loh fixed-based operator at any airport owned by the sponsor shall be subjeot to the cams rites,
fees, rsatsla, and other oharyes as are sniformly applicable to all other fixed-bared operators sating the same
or similar uses of such airport and utillsiog the name or misilmr facilities,
d. Loh air carrier using such airport shall have the right to service itself or to use any fixed-based
operator that is authorised or permitted by the airport to serve any air carrier at such airport.
e, Bach air carrier using such airport (whether as a tsaant, nostenant, or subtenant of another air
carrier tenant) shall be subject to such nondiscriminatory and substantially comparable rule, regulations,
ocmditions, rites, foes,.restals, and other charges as are applicable to ell such air carriers, which sake
similar ass of such airport and which utilise similar facilities, subject to reasonable olamsifiestions such a
tenaats or sontenaats, and ocabined passenger and cargo flights or all cargo flights. Classification or status
as temmat shall not be unreasonably withheld by any airport provided an air carrier assumes obligations
substantially similar to those already imposed on tenant air barriers.
t, It will not exercise or grant any right or privilege which operates to prevent any person, firm, or
corporation operating aircraft on the airport from performing any services on its on aircraft with its own
employees (including, but not limited to saintenance, repair, and fueling) that it say choose to perform.
g, In the event the sponsor itself exercises any of the righte and privileges referred to in this
assurance, the services involved will be provided on the same conditions as would apply to the furnishing of
such services by contractors or concessionaires of the sponsor under theme provisions,
h. The sponsor nay establish such fair, equal, and not unjustly discriminatory conditions to be met by
all users of the airport as say be necessary for the safe end efficient operation of the airport.
I. The sponsor may prohibit or limit any given type, kiad, or class of aeronautical use of the airport
if such motion is necessary for the safe operation of the airport or necessary to serve the civil aviation needs
of the public.
23. Exclusive. R1~hto. It will permit no exclusive right for the use of the airport by any persons
providing, or in Nn~ing to provide, aeronautical services to the public, for purposes of this paragraph, the
providing of services at an airport by a single fixed-based operator shall not be construed as as exclusive
right if both of the following applyn (1) It would be unreasonably oostly, burdensome, or impractical for hors
than one fixed-based operator to provide such services, and (2) If allowing more than one fixed-based operator
to provide such services would require the reduction of space leased pursuant to as existing agreement between
such single fixed-based operator and such airport.
It further agrees it will not, either directly or indirectly, grant or permit any person, firm or
corporation the exclusive right at the airport, or at gay other airport now owned or controlled by it, to
conduct any ap onauticel activities, including, but not limited to charter flights, pilot training, aircraft
rental and mightseei,ig, aerial photography, crop dusting, aerial advertising and surveying, air carrier
operations, aircraft sales and services, sale of aviation petroleum products whether or not conducted in
conjunction witb otter aeronautical activity, repair and maintenance of aircraft, sale of aircraft parts, and
any other aotivitisr, which because of their direct relationship to the operation of aircraft can be regarded as
to aeronautical activity, and that it will terminate any exclusive right to conduct an aeronautical activity now
existing at such an airport before the grant of any assistance under the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of
1982,
24. tee and Rental Structure. It will maintain a fee and rental structure consistent with Assurances 22
and 23, for t ac t es and services being provided the airport users which will make tho airport as
self-sustaining ra possible under the circumstames existing at that particular airport, taking into account
much factors as the volume of tr,ffic and eooaory of collection. No part of the Federal share of an airport
development, airport planning or noise compatibility project for which a grant is made under the Airport and
Airwq Improvement Act of 1992, the tederal Airport Act or the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970 shall
bo included in the rate base in establishing teem, rates, and charges for users of that airport.
256 A rt Eevan%*,_. If the airport is under the control of a public &decoy, all revenues generated by the
airport w ix14iW by it for the capital or operating costs of the airport, the local airport system, or
other local facilities which are owned or operated by the owner or operator of the airport and directly related
to the actual tranriportstion of passengers or property, Provided, however, that it oonvewnts or assurances in
debt obligations previously issued by the owner or operator of the sirpcr4, or previsions In governing statutes
controlling the owner or operator's finaaoing, provide for the use of the revenues tros any of the airport owner
or operator's facilities, including the airport, to support act only the airport but also the airport owner or
operator'a geaemrai debt obligations or other facilities, than this limitation on the use of all revenues
generated by the airport shalt not apply.
FAA form 5100.100 110-85) Development or $oiss Program - Public 8pomso.- page I0
1
1
a 7 ,
26. peDOrta cad IamDeotiteu. It will whit to the Sears" mush annual or spseial financial and
oporstioss reporq ms sic r.!ua nq reasonably rpweot, For airport development projsote, it will also who
the airport sad all airport MOM and dsouwts Woo" the airport, including goods, leas", operation and
ma arreonoats, regulations cad other imatiurwto, available for inspection by aa1 duly outhorised *seat of the
georetary upon reasonable request. For noise progroa implowntatioa projects, it will also new resords cad
doounamia relating to the protest cad costiausd oompliaase with the term, ocmditiou, and asauranow of the
:rout agreement imoludiag d"As, lasses, agramemts• regulations, and other tastrumeats, svailable for
isapsotioe lv aspr duly awthOriwd agent of thm Saretary upon resaonabls request.
27. des Oor moment Aircraft. It will mako available all of the facilities of the airport developed with
Federal fns ass a am oil those uaable for landing and takeoff of aircraft to the United States for
use by Oweramsat aircraft in common with other airoraft at all times without charge, except, if the we by
Oovens t aircraft is substantial, *barge may be made for a reasonable share, proportional to such wee, for the
coat of operating and saistaining the faollitise used. Unless otherwise determined by the Ssorstary, or
etbersise agreed to bg the sponsor and the using ogemoy, substantial use of ma airport by government aircraft
will be eemsiderad to exist rhea operations of snob aircraft are in excess of those whiob, in the opinion of the
unduly with use of the land! arena other authorised aircraft, or du
!tare , would y ng by ring nay
aaleslar moth that--
.
a. Fire (S) or more government aircraft are regularly based at the airport or on lead adjacent
therotot or
b. The total a-rmbor of movements (counting each landing as a movement) of government aircraft is 300
or acre, or the gross accumulative weight of government aircraft using the airport (the total movements of
goreramemt aircraft multiplied by gross weigbtm of such aircraft) is in exoosa of five million pounds.
20. Lang for federal laoilities. It will furnish without cost to the Federal Government for use in
o0swatioar control or air navigation activities, or weather-reporting and communication
aotivitia related to air traffic control, nay arena of land or water, or estate thoraio, or rights in buildings
of the sponsor as the Secretary considers woessary or desirable for construction, operation, and maintenawo at
Fadesa expense of space or facilities for such purposes. Suob areas or say portion thereof will be made
available a provided herein within four months after receipt of a written request from the Secretary,
29. A ors Layout Plan. It will keep up to date at all times an airport layout plan of the airport
showing oundariss of too airport cad all proposed additions thereto, together with the boundaries of all
offsite areas owned or oontrolled by the sponsor for airport purposes and purposed additions tborstol (2) the
location and nature of all existing and proposod airport facilities and structures (such as runways, taxiways,
aprons, terminal buildlne, hangars, cad roads), including all proposed oxtensicas and reductions of existing
airport faoilitiesl and (3) the location of all existing and proposed nonaviation areas and of all existing
improvemonts thereor. Such airport layout plan snd enah amendment, revision, or aodifiostion thereof, shall be
subject to the apprcvaI of the Secretary which approval shall be evidenced by the signature of a duly authorised
represeststive of t o Secretary on the faoe of the airport layout plan. The sponsor will not asks or permit any
rbaages or alterations in the airport or in any of its facilities other than in conformity with the airport
layout plan as so alproved by the Seoretary if such changes or alterations night adversely affect tho esfety,
utility, or sffioier,oy of the airport.
30, Civil Rights, It will comply with such rules an are promulgated to assure that no person shall, on the
grounds of, race, oroed, color, national origin, sex, age, or handicap be excluded from participating in any
activity conducted with or bsnsfitiag from funds received from this grant. This assurance obligates the sponsor
for the period during which Federal financial assistsnoe is extended to the program, except where the Federal
financial assistance is to provide, or is in the fort of personal property or real property or interest therein
or structures or improvements thereon, in which case the assurance obligates the sponsor or any transferee for
the longer of the following periodsc (1) Us period during which the property is used for a purpose for which
Federal financial a,rsistows is extoaded, or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or
bswfits or (2) the period during which the sponsor retains ownership or possession of the property.
FAA ports 52W-100 (a04K) Development or pot" Program - Public Sponsor pop 11
ASSURANCE 31
Policies Standards and Specifications. It will carry out the project in accor-
dance with policies, standards, and specifications approved by the Secretary
including but not limited to the advisory circulars listed below, and in accor-
dance with applicable state policies, standards, and specifications approved by
the Secretary.
Number Subject
70/7460-1G Obstruction Marking and Lighting
150/5200-23A Airport Snow and Ice Control
150/5210-5A Painting, Marking, and Lighting of Vehicles Used on
an Airport
150/5210-7B Aircraft Fire and Rescue Communications
150/5210-10 Airport Fire and Rescue Equipment Building Guide
150/5210-14 Guide Specification--Airport Firefigher Protective
Clothing
150/5220-4A Water Supply Systems for Aircraft Fire and Rescue
Protection
150/5220-10 Guide Specification for Water/Foam Type Aircraft Fire
and Rescue Trucks
150/5220-11 Airport Snowblower Specification Guide
150/5220-12 Airport Snowswesper Specification Guide
150/5220-13A Runway Surface Condition Sensor--Specification Guide
150/5220-14A Airport Fire and Rescue Vehicle Specification Guide
150/5220-15 Buildings For Storage and Maintenance of Airport
Snow Removal and Ice Control Equipment; A Guide
150/5300/2D Airport Design Standards--Site Requirements for
Terminal Navigation Facilities
150/5300-43 Utility Airports--Air Access to National Transportation
150/5300-12 Airport Design Standards--Transport Airports
150/5320-5B Airport Drainage
150/5320-6C Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation
150/5320-12 Methods for the Design, Construction, and Maintenance
of Skid Resistant Airport Pavement Surfaces
150/5320-14 Airport Landscaping for Noise Control Purposes
150/5325-4 Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design
150/5340-1E Marking of Paved Areas on Airports
150/5340-4C Installation D+tails for Runway Centerline
Touchdown Zone Lighting Systems
150/5340-5B Segmented Circle Airport Marker System
150/5340-14B Economy Approach Lighting Aide
150/5340-17A Standby Power for Non-FAA Airport Lighting Systems
150/5340-1'SB Standards for Airport Sign Systems
150/5340-19 Taxiway Centerline Lighting System
150/5340-21 Airport Miscellaneous Lighting Visual Aide
150/5340-23A Supplemental Wind Cones
150/5340-24 Runway and Taxiway Edge Lighting System
150/5340-27 Air-to-Ground Radio Control of Airport Lighting
Systems
FAA Form 5100.100 (3-86) Development or Noise Program - Public Sponsor Page 12
, 'nl
Number Subject
150/5345-3C Specification for L-821 Panels for Remote Control
of Airport Lighting
150/5345-5A Circuit Selector Switch
150/5345-7D Specification for L-824 Underground Electrical
Cable for Airport Lighting Circuits
150/5345-10E Specification for Constant Current Regulators and
Regulator Monitors
130/5345-12C Specification for Airport and Heliport Beacon
150/5345-13 zpecifieation for L-841 Auxiliary Relay Cabinet
Assembly for Pilot Control of Airport Lighting
Circuits
150/5345-269 Specification for L-823 Plug and Receptacle, Cable
Connectors
150/5345-27C Specification for Wind Cone Assemblies
150/5345-28D Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) Systems
150/5345-39B FAA Specification L-8531 Runway and Taxiway Center-
line Retroreflective Markers
150/5345-42B FAA Specification L-857, Airport Light Bases,
Transformer Houses, and Junction boxes
150/5345-43C Specification for Obstruction Lighting Equipment
150/5345-44D Specification for Taxiway and Runway Signs
150/5345-45 Lightweight Approach Light Structure
150/5345-46A Specification for Runway and Taxiway Light Fixtures
150/5345-47 Isolation Transformers for Airport Lighting Systems
150/5345-48 Specification for Runway and Taxiway Edge Lights
150/5345-49 Specification L-854, Radio Control Equipment
150/5345-50 Specification for Portable Runway Lights
150/5345-51 Specification for %ticharge-Type Flasher
Equipment
150/5370-6A Construction Progress and Inspection
Report--Federal-Aid Airport Program
150/5370-10 Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports
150/5370-11 Use of Nondestructive Testing Devices in
the Evaluation of %irport Pavements
150/5370-12 Quality Control o: Construction for Airport Grant
Projects
150/5390-1B Heliport Design Guide
FAA Form 5100-100 (3-86) Development or Noise Program - Public Sponsor Page 13
STANDARD DOT TITLE VI ASSURANCES
The City £ gnton. Texas (hereinafter referred to as the
Sponsor) hereby agrees that as a condition to receiving Federal financial
assistance from the Department of Transportation (DOT), it will comply with
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1364 (42 U.S.C. 2000d at s and all
requirements imposed by 49 CPR Part 21, Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted
Programs of the Department of Transportation Effectuation of Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations") to the
and that no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or
national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of,
or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity for
which the applicant receives Federal financial assistance and will immediately
take any measures necessary to effectuate this agreement.
Without limiting the above general assurance, the Sponsor agrees concerning
Project No. 3-48-0067-03 (hereinafter referred to as the Project) that:
1. Each "program" and "facility" (as defined in Sections 21.23(e) and
21.23(b) will be conducted or operated in compliance with all requirements of
the Regulations.
2. It will insert the following notification in all solicitations for bids
issued in connection with the Project and in adapted form in all proposals for
negotiated agreements:
City of Denton. Texas , in accordance with
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.O. 2000d et seq.) and
49 CPR Part 21, Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the
Department of Transportation, hereby notifies all bidders that it will
affirmatively assure that minority business enterprises are afforded
full opportunity to submit bids in response to this invitation and will
not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, or national
origin in consideration for an award.
3. It will insert the clauses of Attachment 1 of this assurance in every
contract subject to the Act and the Regulations,
4. Where Federal financial assistance is received to construct a facility,
or part of a facility, the assurance shall extend to the entire facility and
facilities operated in connection therewith.
5. Where Federal financial assistance is in the form or for the acquisition
of real property or an interest in real property, the assurance shall extend to
rights to space on, over, or under such property.
6. It will include the appropriate clauses set forth in Attachment 2
of this assurance, as a covenant running with the land, in any future deeds,
Page 1
Vases, persits, licenses, and similar agreements entered into by the sponsor
with other partissr (a) fir the subsequent transfer of real property acquired
or improved with Federal financial assistance under this Project and (b) for
the m%struetion or use of or access to space on, over, cc under real property
acquired or improved with Federal financial assistance under this Project.
7. This assurance obligates the sponsor for the period during which
Pedaral financial assistance is extended to the program, except where the
Federal financial assistance is to provide, or is in the form of personal
property or real property cc interest therein or structures or improvements
thereon, in which case the assurance obligates the sponsor or any transferee
for the longer of the following periodse (a) the period during which the
property is used fee a purpose for which Federal financial assistance is
extended, or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services
or benefits or (b) the period during which the sponsor retains ownership or
possession of the property.
s. It will provide for such methods of administration for the program
as are found by the secretary of Transportation or the official to whoa he
delegates specific authority to give reasonable guarantee that it, other
sponsors, subgrantees, oontraetora, subcontractors, transferees, successors
in interest, and other participants of Federal financial ass;stanoe under
such program will comply with all requirements imposed or pursuant to the
Act, the Regulations, and this assurance.
9. it agrees that the United states has a right to seek judicial
enforcement with regard to any matter arising under the Act, the Regulations,
and this assurance.
Ms AsWRMC2 is given an consideration of and for the purpose of obtaining
Federal financial assistance for this Project and is binding on its contractors,
the sponsor, subcontractors, transferees, successors in interest and other
participants in the Project. The person or parsons whose signatures appear
below are authorised to sign this assurance on behalf of the Sponsor.
mm 2A4zr/ffl'/
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
(Sponsor)
my
(signature of Aut rased Official)
Attachments I and 2
Page 2
CONTRACTOR CONTEIACTUAL REQUIRMyT3
ATTACMENT 1 TO STANDARD DOT TITLE VI &SSURAKE
During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its assignees and successors in
interest (hereinafter referred to as the "contractor") agrees as follows:
1. Coa}p}ianou with Regulations. The contractor shall comply with the Regulations relative to
nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs 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, with regard to the work performed by it during the
contract, shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in the selection
and retention of suboontraotore, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The
riontraotor 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 Subcontract, Including Procurements of Materials and Eouipment. In all
solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotation made by the contractor for work to be
performed under a subcontraot, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each
potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the contractor of the contractor's obliga-
tions under this contract, and the Regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race,
color, or national origin.
4. Information and Reports. The contractor shall provide all information and reports required
by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto and shall permit auoess to its books,
records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the
oponaor 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 possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the oontraotor
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. Sanctions for Noncompliance. In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the
nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the sponsor shall 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. Incorporation of Provisions. The contractor shall include the provisions of paragraphs 1
through 5 in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless
exempt by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. The contractor shall 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 including sanctions for noncompliance. Provided, however, thAt
in the event a contractor becomos involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a sub-
contractor or supplier as a result of such direotion, the contractor may request the sponsor to
enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the sponsor and, in addition, the contractor
may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United
States.
(11-82)
CLAUM » ~ams,ToIgMp kgMs =a-- OR IMMUMMM
ATTACHMENT 2 to STANDARD DOT TITLE 'VI ASSURANCES
The following clauses shall be included in deeds, 11censea, leases, permite,
cc similar instruments entered into by CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
pursuant to the provisions of Assurances 6 (a) and 6 (b).
1. The (grantee, licensee, !onooo, permit""' etoo# as appropriate)
for himself. his heirs, personal representativesf successors in
interest, and assigns, as a part of the oonsideration hereof, does
hereby covenant and agree (in the come of deeds and leases add
"as a covenant running with the land") that in the event facilities
are constructed, maintaineds, at otherwise operated on the said
property described in this (deed, lioanse, leasep permit. *too) for
a parr w for which a WT program or activity is extended or for
another purpose involving the provision of similar services or
bentlits► the (grantee,, licensee,, lessee, permitee► etc.) shall
maintain and operate such facilities and services in compliance
with all other requirements imposed pursuant to 40'CFR Part 211P
Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Progress of the
Department of Transportation, and as said Regulations may be amended.
2. The (grantee# licenaee, lessee, permitee, *to,, as appropriate)
for himself, his personal representatives, successors in interest,
and assigns, as a part of the consideration hereof, does hereby
covenant and agree (in the case of deeds and leases add •as a
oovenant running with the land') thati (1) no person an the grounds
of race, color, or national origin shell be excluded from par-
ticipation in, denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected
to discrimination in the use of said faoilities, (2) that in the
construction of any improvements on, over, or under such land
and the furnishing of services thereonj no person on the grounds
of race, color, or national origin shall be excluded from
participation in, denied the benefits of, or otherwise be
subjected to discrimination, (3) that the (grantee, licensee,
lessee, permit**, etc.) shall use the premises in compliance
with all other requirements imposed by or pursuant to 49 CPR
Part 21, Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of
the Department of Transportation, and as said Regulations may
be amended.
(11-82)
1SBJL
R E S O L U T I O N
WHEREAS, the City of Denton has submitted to the Federal
Aviation Administration an application for Federal Assi.strnce
dated September 9, 1986 for a grant of federal funds for a
project for development of the Denton Municipal Airport; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Aviation Administration 1,as approved a
project for development of the Airpor,: consisting of the
construction of an aircraft parking ap,,on, construction and
marking of a connecting taxiway; and construction of a hetipad;
and
WHEREAS, the Federal Aviation Administration has submitted
to the City of Denton a Grant offer In the amount of
t e construct ono such improvements; 0
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL Of THE CITY OF DENTON%
SECTION 1.
That the City of Denton hereby accepts the Grant Offer and
agrees to co+p~ly with all of the assurances and conditions
contained in tt,e Grant Application and the Grant Offer, and the
City Manager of the City of Denton or his designee is hereby
authorized to execute such agreements.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the . day of , 1986.
RAY STEPARNS, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CITY OF DENTONa TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY:
G5Yr'r
1459E
NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF
THE CITY OF DFITON, TEXAS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE COST OF FURNISHING
AND INSTALLING STREET NAME SIGNS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I.
That Article 4.03 (J) of Article III of Appendix A of the
Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton. Texas, is amended to
read as follows:
(J) Street Names and Name Signs. New streets shall be
name y t e eve oper, subject to commission
approval, by placing the street name on the
required plat. A street which is a continuation
of an existing street shall bear the same name.
Names shall be sufficiently different in sound and
spelling from other existing street names so as
not to cause conflict or confusion.
Street name signs shall be installed by the deve-
loper at all intersect:ons within or abutting the
subdivision prior to the acceptance of any public
improvements. The name signs and location of the
signs shall be constructod, located, and installed
in accordance with written specifications on file
with the City Engineer.
SECTION It.
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1986.
PAY
MAYO
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ATTEST:
CITY OF DENTON,OTEXAS S R Y
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH,.CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BY: 91