Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970 V1 ` ,I;F7t1a C / r t ~wn:: 4 c 1,d s w t' i F n f : 11?' rr}M ° t.R,T[~ t V . `.✓~f IIT.,.j~ .f't.~yy,' 4~ ;I e+ 1, N ~,w, ~f fgyf ~x ~',e },<r Y { 'W . !¢Ix. ~L}q"'r.h i11~t+~:, <5r Nw^" S~ SS :a 1 -I'A iK.. ~1"i''t w7. t~'y+!/.'Tfr rVl tiiy 5 '."e r. qq"h4'-,.'1..~, t ~f~ .F. f t ~74r y ,~f• w r Y' Yrh 1~ l~I: f~`.'i.}~ y '1 ,.,AI v:~, e. N.~l,~~a♦ .}•t~..~•,,.l~r~ Idl'. r, r I t Yu ~Y.:,;. r'.'~ M . ,p 1',f. i ;7~!...F r ~1. 14°~wby .,,rt. ' ,l 'i':'N 1 w t'i Fe .C~ ..yi?iF f i y.d 3,. :'.V A "ILA. ,...1 t. I `r i i r~h, yt Y: ,n {°'i... e~~ ~~";;~N YKl ry•v+ .r r'~ ° Yf. • i ^'~'-4ra x ~f.,,r tt F%.., ~;.t 1 y,.. ~ '✓N.a; 1'" nn! 5r. r'. d. 1'i~ nF. v 1"~' e p.'r < r. r~r .-a. 'r d. rr., v4}rr. 5¢ d ,{i ::~lp 1 ~:r'. r ~ J•" fir''.r rr .,w f. q;•~fi C'',n ,4~, :.C /J a.;.~y.~~ Yv~ t~. }v C i'P 'v .I.r.•. P, ',I:y b i7A ~ ,f ~j 1 il: N;. V f<.. J L. Yr ~ I r t,fl 2p ~ r.~,T a i... •'i~. ~P~:j 6(} r r' v~},w4i ~C, ~ ni •.I': ir1.L ,'..~d-r Y.".t' i (o ~p"w ~l. ?J' n`r t ~ie Y.' 1 {S ~ ~'r 'rl :Y»•,. 'w { P.. t 'rp14 Y : f.~r r y + ✓ - J r,'. r v.- s': v k i1.5 r L .k " r . e . v .f.,f f~ .r .I ♦ . J ns:,.d. +~t 'A t r Sr .Tx M.. 1 r i.d r.. p e p,,~ V 1 f tr I'd pYd~ : W r ^'"r J. 5 r ~ .f c Y a t x yr ~ }~r. ~f I b r. d v eet f ~,i .5; l t v i f U r f f Fr ~~rp0. / f IF 4 1 n i y ~ ~ ,r e • x ~ (y l ~'4w :y } I~ Y S ~f .F rr ! i ~ ' 4 yr, ~ t r `rr ~ r 4pi , " r -41 6 I' 1e , r 1t.9 . r v ` i 4~ i v/ r v 1• ~ ~ ly' fr+f x / ' J'+~ t t +~r r w II e r r• e uil k f1 I• 1 ~ P t .l t rJ i w }~uq I < ~ r ( ,k r 'v f 1 r J, r e JL I 7^!t ~V~~~ I: ~ 1 S .R1 ~ is / v f r ~J'. ' r- .f ~'f 4~!,! I' I+ If e f ~i rlrr F vir r, f q}: 1 r .r r y Yr t Y } r pY ~N,' J ti 7 S ~i; I P, t iyY`(}~'iN V •I I, a I'1 e f ' f p, d.Y r + w r ~r N""~''~~ rM+ n1{ ^t a~. rr 1 `ir `r f `Ife_ r ~ 'I ,I a -~r ~w r e t ,Ci, t .r Ir i.r ° nYl f„f•~'r r t +'~~~~r`y.~ f,rY,r~;Jt rs 6._b. f~f f• .c, lr n A "fY` tm ` /r r° 6: .>r, ( t. ~ 1 4a/ ...n Il~r~li lN = IT,i t~L ~Y`''is r' o b: w L / ' ~;'d' J ~ ~~rt . J ' ✓ °',r * '~,a 'i., '::y t J °r''l ~ ✓ v r *11 , +,.I w i ,i \a + r ~w y r r 7 ~ t ~ a• i n. < r y r 1, s r 4 .:/t / 1 r dl 7 l v 'I f v 1 F' e. i.'j',' ~ 4~ r t r I 1~x ~ y v, f f y v- i t r 1 4 v, i. a Y w fl',,. d w v 1~4~~~~y tr _ r iu f J r' rF y I c:,~~ ~p h it , y- r ii ra. o _,lEwf I. ~+tl '~r tip,. J e ( ' t f7~ -~:~~q y t Y1 ~'lm ^ F " 1 1 r ¢a '4 1" r}kx'd a[`. e'y r1 C !~*yeF~~r"ir/ 371. r u, x ♦I ~f„ v~~. t /-111 : rp'ff„ ii 'tP 1`.t.'. d Lr ,t 1'~i y. Xjn.i~l}i ..'yr~,.`3ld..rlx ri ~r~ ,~v rIJ r ,J, + il_r, i d li a.' : i,f v.w f' ~:ps r.' rte o yr fyn d^r. ~C' r I,r?; .,.r illj' 4. r'i y .,,ly r^ ,,t y,/',1 {e d ~.J'1~~ n .:,,>,^..~f 1 .'r ✓ ,~,1 ,d 'N.tT 44 P~J- Y '.lf+Yi µ•'i I x.I i I:.yy N J f.,,.~, ~ .f)P,; t e'y"~i a r i"f 'b:/ 1 r" r s r, r ,,,y., vg l 'y. it .l;, :iw~ }j~, ; ti, ~ J'`. ;Il+e .y~'r f t r .'r t;~d~"!a7 L1i E,~.q,1 9~ ~'nYY .<I~. "j~' r v`f .d ~~~I „ifr in✓"i.r r 1~ }w -r ~ x rN y~ 1 Y 't r i d~,~~ ~t V t... r• ~1~ .A ! ~ ~ y V~S fd~71 f' w f .I Sd. ' 1 } ~ 'j i 'r .r+ r V. k, r~ Y i+ ry~ Np a~ ~d r4 : 1 { 1 r~ 1 r~ 7'. a r:: ! .l ~r+J r v I ~ w 4t f 1~ r J 1 r a y ~Nf . r ^a, r'i y. `y 4 ri r ff rf'" Y ! r + 1r 1~' 1. iy} y r fiI r I ~ eery r.~r u; y~1i i. rd' }r"i 1, r 'w.v r ~1'r'IS r ...'v r / r.... I' 1 r,(,l ~i. I ''t e .":.+.,r llr ~f.r Lf ,r=.: ~~.'.r. v ..iV,>! F I, 'i r1, ,r r r r w~i r, ~;Nel / ( {r Y~ n n 9 r r r,a: a•5 '~C'i p! ~ •r. .n Ir L 1..' / flrYl, ~v . A w e rN r'n r 4 i. ~ kr-wj Y f } } < ~ y i t' 1' ,l L^i ~'>''Vafvb +1 '}~y f 1 ~~i{ d '4 rr V .Jf yy e` n '7~ ,k~, '~,1 '~i 7• + (''~.'J~ t~ { '~J I / ti,ry 7d i/. pp }~'uF" 4 7+~ 1 ~ ! 4 + IA.~Yi1Y ~y Y ~ ~ r "99 ~ ~ e'~ r v r r t ~ NostTai TBxelj STATE UxivBaanY n DlsrlToN, TxxAn Harch 101 1970 The Honorable L. A. Nelson Mayor, City of Denton ~uJ Municipal Building Denton, Texas Dear Hayor Nelson.t t Tne University has received an informal communication from the office of the Attorney, General,•citing a number of cases relevant to the request for street closing in' the university area, I am attaching a copy of the cases cited by the ?1, Assiotant•Attornsy Cenerol/ knowing that you will realize that this does not con- on atitutq, ,4,n official •Q i6n of `tie Attorney General's office and is properly to be used only lfior internal r: .study by dfficials of the university and of a city government, The,Pr@pident' , d'et,hea di cussed *this report from the Attorney G e' as well as ypi6i P- Li Vii' eR uilby Garrisons At this point wewishatosrequest office formally that the 6ne.04 $~ceed to•iake action on the university's appeal from the Plaguing Oe4 xoD#P dT"""' qgion decision, In keeping with advice of attorney) we would wisi~,to anli6u{CeaY Eheilifverdity is regarded as a proper party in the event that any fnOivl~duAl•ctlt•ledgt,kodih alth the filing of a suit for damages. f. The University would! ~n!$ !Rb r p Vplfttiy tb any such suit and the State of Texas would beepreseq'ted~ltia'~," ~ea $~the office of the Attorney Generals I; hi ht also $ point , RNA, th•4rf` ! ve'bM `advieied that our attorneys might wall have such 4,CpP.g: tak n away 'trop a jGr~'3n'ordelr to receive a summa F;oa q judge bP.' 'ti,>~ A question Qf lAW.! Sie have been advised that suchdaecase gtght.wel trot gat ury on the que4ticn of facts because the law dose not suppprt,tto con ant Qa which .t1}s facts gul'd'bit ebtespting to Provo, ` It'- Js, our earnest hop.. ust t'he Cky 'Council will ba able to pass an ordinance concernini At'rset.ctos'14 and t6--9 s#pnm6t of fftrking and police powers on streets adjacent•to university property in•'nrder that we V ht proceed final implementation of a complete traffic and parking immediately with the fall semester,' lie will be pleased to work in any mannbriwsthoth eityistaff tionthe " cerning the details of implementing the plans incerely yours ,a t, I I. a a L. Rogers'. a-rrefidentol Adsitkt4trat1ve Affaite ja attecha~tie~r,~r~, • 1. ce1 Membere of City Council Ji gWhite/ City Manager--'' Jack Barton, City Attorney' JoIAIAibre.cht, City ?leaner I t .l 4 Ff . 4 4 `Y'II]Q AverORNFY GENERAL OF TFJXAS CHAWr0141► u, MARTIN Avisir,sN, rrmxAm Ts?jtl AYTOIMMWV 433M At, March 6, 1970 Dr, James L. Rodgers Vice President Administrative Affairs North Texas State University Denton, Texas Dear Dr. Rodgers; Your street closing problem has been discussed with,our division chief and the result of the conference seems to be that for the City to abandon streets and the University to take the actual steps of cinsing would not sufficiently change the position of the parties to alter materially the exposure to potential liability, However, we do believe that if any suit is filed that at some point the University will have to be brought into the action for the reason that it is at their request that the streets will have been closed, I will discuss herein pertinent points in several cases which may be of persuasive power for council members, They are= 1, San Antonio ve, pigeon Hole parkin , 311 S,W,2nd 2181 Your mayor ma e "a no a on o s c a on at the time of our discussion and has probably read the case by now, 2Har er vs, City of Wichita Falls, (Civ.App. 1937 1 sow, 743. very c zen as pr mart' r g to use the streets for travel and as incident thereto right of ingress and egress to and from an abutting property, 3. Farmers and Merchants Com real and Warehouse vs, Cit of Dallas, (CIV pp, n ere are wa a inct kinds o rights in city a reefs, that is a public right which orn4 enjoys in common with all citizens and a private right which undar some circumstances may be acquired by adjacent or abutting property owners, and it is only loss of a private right which will support property owners suit for damages against City for closing or obstructin streets. N to: the property owners involved here are neither adlacent nor ~`J bperty owners, Therefore, we contend they are losing no private right and their loss if any is only a private right which the city clearly has a right to remove byy closing or obstru sting a street under the provision of Artiole ll'g 88 l$. f , V r Page 2 b, Jacobs vs. Dennison, (Civ,App, 1952 25 Rehearing en a n s case one entire blockwas,closed8for the benefit of Safeway Corporation whose subsidiary owned all the abutting property on said block. The street was closed by three ordinances. Action was brought against the city seeking injunction and monetary damages. The Court denied injunctive relief and entered "take nothing" ,judgment. Plaintiff appealed and the Court ruled that Plaintiff had no right of injunc';ive relief against City or private property owner for whose henefit ordinance was enacted. Plaintiff's right to an easement was no more than a general public's right of which he could be deprived of by municipality acting in the public interest, Numerous other cases are cited in the Court's opinion, one being Galveston, H, & S, A, nailway Co. (Tex.Civ,App, Simon yr n w c the rule applied as in Lee vs. Cit of Strat ~1~5~Tex, 179; 81 S,W,2nd 10031 see McClellan on mun e a Vol. It, page 279, Sec, 1527, which reads; " p corpora ion, iho other hand u the street directly in fr,nt of one's On the portion vacated is in another block., sorthatshe mayauseoanbt intersecting cross-street, although perhaps it is not quite so short a way nor as convenient, it is almost universally held, that he does not suffer such a special injury no entitles him to damages, And this is so, notwithstanding the new route is lose convenient or the diversion of travel depreciates the value of his property, The fact that the lot owner may be inconvenienced or that he may have to go a more round-about way to certain points, it is generally held, does not bring him an injury different in kind from the general public, but ire degree only. 'If means of ingress and egress are not cut off or lessened in the block of the abutting owner, but only rendered lose convenient because of being lees direct to other points in the city and made so by the vacation of the street in another block such consequence is damnum abeque injuries I"''The Supreme Court concluded by holding that as Lee had no cause of action against; City of Stratford for damages, he is in no position to ques- { tion the validity of the ordinance, i ;J Lee vs. City of Stratford, cited above seems to be directly in point with our own problem, This is not an official opinion of this office, as you know, )jut is a continuation of our discussion with members of the city council, I have no ob eution to your calling Mayor Nelson and ggiving him the last citation of Jacobson vs, 801, in the hopes that he will rea a our DBnisnn, 251 W,2nd entirety. P on in its There is possibility that I will need to be in Denton at least by Wednesday of next week to confer with Mr, Hargrove on another case, If so, I will see you at that time, Yours very truly, i Soott Garrison SGtkg Assistant Attorney General vrH i t I EFEIE I J AH iNYINI A An 0 0:1 CO. ~r , ~ o s ~ 11lIAII _ a r s a3!d m ! w n L'7t1Zd 3 y~ j 9L 3 I d L Es, W a Y J 73V- NY13A310 w (D Iz taJ IA ~ J 1:1 El 9 6 IN n on x J •0.0 •I J N o j O yj N ~ c } ~ u u s e w E7- n~ m 001 Dl a d IJoE a oa N l3 S W Owl a E lost u ~ = W y L LA x ~ ~ xae 1 s H Wi W 49 El NYAY6 i ' Y 'SAY 0 A lYNaON H L___1 Y31110 u O w 0 '3AY w Y3ao VA131av" w" a LIE EA Y y ; ► i yr ! V O 2 EL L ~I y -4 l n 0 7AY L A310yaa W L- 4 7 '3AY tno~ O W M~ Yyr -1 i i ' lIH z F! ff-- w M. F J Rtw H i '~,^f f 4 ,1y r~♦ g T. 17 NORT11 T'ax,►r STATE' UYIVIIItB:'iY - 1)~;~rov,7lsxAK 1'trr. 1',~rwinr.er, Ae~ui.ew.n.~ Are At mm April 28, 1970 Members of the City Council Denton, Texas Gentlemen: Having been sent copies of letters addressed to you this week one from a group of property owners in the western portion of Denton and the other from Mr. L. A. Nelson we naturally undertook a reexhm- ination of the report to you dated April 21. I have confirmed accuracy of each statement contained therein and can reassert that on the basis of all evidence available to us the statement of April 21 is absolutely correct and accurate. I should like also to point out that this previous letter went across the president's desk just prior to its boing mailed to you and carried his endorsement, so the letter constituted an institutional and not a personal position. A conversation with Mr. Jim White, City Manager, last week suggested that there was soma concern that property owners in the block bounded by Avenues B, CO Mulberry, and Hickory had misunderstood the terms of our offer to purchase. Our December statement pointed o>>t that any- one interested in such a process should contact our business manager, As of this date three property owners have done so, one has signed a purchase contract, one has declined a purchase offer, and the third has made a verbal agreement committing to sell. No individual has come forward with a land %ppraisal without prior consultation with the business manager as wits requested in our statement of December, on the basis of the examination and reexamination of these facts we can only conclude that no misunderstanding has taken place in fact, and that our previous communications to you still stand as completely accurate# sincerely yours, /iy1~.C✓ ~ ~Qrt mes L, Rogers ice-President, Administrative Affairs cc: President John Kamerick Vice-President John Carter Mr. John Ilargrova, Business Manager Mr, Jim white, City Monagor y 1, "TIt 777M - L. A. NELSON ATTonNtY AT LAW FMAT /TATL HANK bUILDINO DENTON, T[xA9 76201 P. O. box M April 27, 1970 302-861I w ✓ AAtA e4om #IT Mayor Alexandcr M. Finlay, Jr. Members of the City council of Dar~ton, Texas Municipal Building Denton, Texas Gentlemen: it was myUfondmhopetandmexpectationethatcouncil I would April ha14, ve the occasion to appear before you except with regard to matters uncontested in nature. However, having received a copy of the letter forwarded to you by Dr, James L. Rogers, Vice President, Administrative Affairs, North Texas State University, under date of April 21, and in view of the contents, thereof, I am obviously compelled to appear. On December 90 1969, the Council held a public hearing in regard to the request of North Texas State University to close certain streets in the University Campus area. Dr. . Rogers appeared in behalf of the University, and in a prepared statement said, amcng other things, as followais "•......we are nonetheless making this public announcement at this time to dispell any doubts in anyone's mind as to what the concerns of the private property owner may be and what the in- tentions of the University may be. We will purchase from any property owner in the Block bounded by Avenue B, Mulberry, Avenue C, and Hickory his property at a fair market value based upon an appraisal by a certified land appraiser bearing an MAX certificate." It is significant to note that such ntatement is unconditional and unqualified as to any particular MAX appraiser and by whom he shall have been selected, retained and employed. bP1 r•,~ f' q Fi 1- Mayor Alexander M. Finlay, Jr. April 271 1970 Page 2 The Council will further recall that several persons owning property in close proximity to the streets sought to be closed personally appeared at the hearing and voiced their strong opposition to the request, while other such owners appeared in opposition through their attornoy, who opined as to the legal consequences and resulting damages which would bo suffered by the City if the request was granted. Among the property owners appearing were Mr. Robert H, Caldwell, Jr. and Mr. Lynn Knight. At conclusion of the hearing, action was withheld in order for the Council and administrative staff to have adequate time for study of all aspects of the request, including the legal questions raised at the hearing, as well as the statements and testimony - both for and against -.presented in connection with the request. Thereafter followed many hours of deliberation, study and discussion by and between the Council, the administrative staff, the legal department and representatives from the office of the Attorney General. In all of our deliber- ation and discussion, the sole purpose and desire of the Council was to reach a decision that would be in the best interest of the general public at large, hised upon the statements, infor- mation, and evidence at hand, without regard to personal feelings for any of the parties involved. deliberation and discussion did I dNot e during of etectcany pers nsayl i such aso prejudice, or personal animosity toward ,anyofethepropon ents or opponents of the request, from any member of the Council or administrative staff, Shortly prior to a special meeting of the Council scheduled for March 23, we were advised by the City Manager that he had roceived a request from Dr. Rogers for the University's request to once again be placed on the Council's agenda, and that some action be taken thereon. The request was placed on the agenda for March 23, and at such meeting the Council uaani- mously instructed the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance whereby the request of the University would be granted, and the streets in question would be abandoned. The City Attorney' was further and unanimously instructed to have such ordinance ready for the next regular meeting of the Council on Ziesday, April 14. On Saturday, April 11, I had the occasion to talk with my friend and colleague, Mr. Robert H. Caldwell, Jr., on matters totally unrelated to the subject at hand. As mentioned above, Mr. Caldwell was among the property owners appearing at the public hearing on December 9 in opposition to the University's request. At the end of our conversation, Mr. Caldwell mentioned Mayor Alexanuor M. Finlay. April 27, 1970 Page 3 that it was his understanding that tho University had refused to Purchase the Property of Mr upon ran a theal securd b . Lynn Knight at a price based appraiser bearing an MAX certificate. from a certified land and disappointed to hear such statoriontl was that surprised had relied eli heavily upon the unqualified and unconditional statement by Dr. Roberts in this regard. Having confidence in Mr. Caldwell's memory and integrity, but nonetheless being mindful of the dangers involved in relying on hearsay and third called Mr. Knight on Monday, April 131 andpadvis ed himaofom x conversat Caldwell. Mr. Knight related to me the iollowing=on with Mr. Shortly after the Council meeting and hearing on December 90 19691 Mr. Knightucontacted Mr. John Hargrove, Business Manager,,kjorth Texas State University, and advised him that he was in-lil • atteraespriceted 11ue}established b property to the University Mr. Hargrove advised that the UniversityAwasppraiser. willing to purchac3 on such basis and that he would immedi•.tely order such a On Mr. Knight's property. Someprhraelorefoure - e---lator, Mr. Knight rota ned the setvicea of Mr. Harman E. Guieinger, MAI, of Dallas to make an appraisal of his Texas, ert. February 26, 1970, Mr, Knightrec eived anletter from Mr. Hargrave stating that the appraisal secured by the University had, been returned,-and that based upon such appraisal the University position to offer $38,000.00 in was hisg writtproperty. On March 230 Mr. Might rof Mr. eceived which reflected appraisal rreport from Mr. Guieinger, the h re fl and ppra`sod value of $46,600.00 for for the equipmentpsituated inland attachedato$the000.00 premises. On March 24, Mr. Knight Mr. Hargrove's office and at such timaid e a resentit to his appraisal report received from Mr. Guisinger,d Mr. Hargrove advised Mr, Knight that the University would not purchase his property for the price of $46,600.000 the value set on such property by Mr, Guieinger. Mr. Knight expressed his surprise, acid recited his understanding of the statement ~Rnr, ri"S Mayor Alexander M. Finlay, Jr. April 27, 1970 Page 4 made by Dr. Rogers at the public hearing on December 9 to mean that the University would purchase property based upon an appraisal made by any MAI appraiser, Mr, Hargrove related that this was not his understanding about the matter, and that he was authorized to purchase p roperty upoia an appraisal made by 1n MAI appraiser Mr. Hargroveretained furthern advised employed Mr. K the University, he was not inclined to accept the Uniiversity'sf offer of $380000.00 then he could go ahead and operate his buss loss on the they would forges it, in thatrtherUniversityawas not ready to purchase the property anyway. Mr. Knight then told Mr. Hargrove that he would much prefer to sell his property to the University than to continue to operate the business located on the property, and that he would be willing to take the sum of $46,600,00 and make a gift to the University of the equipment located in the building on the property. Mr. Hargrove said that he had no authority to offer more than $38,000.00, but that he would take the matter up with his colleagues, and contact Mr, Knight in the. future. No mention was made by either Mr. Knight or Mr. Hargrove concerning the possibility of arriving at a price midway between any figures, Mr. called Mr. Hargrove on the Friday after Eastiht er, which was, April 30 to determine whether or not Mr. Hargrove had received an additiona?,..authority, over and abovca the original 38,000.00 offer. Hargrove advised that he had received authorityyMr,. to make Mr. Knight an offer of $420300.00 for his property. Mr. hb ight, feeling he had no other' reasonable alternative, signed a contract of Sale with the University 'for the sale and purchase of said property on Monday, April 13. At the meeting of tho Council on Tuesday, April 14, as the ordinance in question came up on the agenda for discussion, x read to the Council that portion of Dr. Rogers' the Councilstaessentiallytement follows~above, and commented to Mayor Alexander M, Finlay, Jr. April 210 1970 Page 5 That in view of the quoted portion of such statement, it had been zay distinct understanding that the university would purchase the property of any owner lying within the bou:daries desi nated by the "14aster Campus Plan", at a price and value determined by any MAI appraiser, without limitation' or qualification as to by whom the appraiser had been retained and employedi that it had come to my attention that the procedure followed by the University in a recent purchase of property was not in line with my underetandingl that apparently there had been some unfortunate misunderstanding, and the situation should be clarified before final adoption of the ordinance, By unanimous vote the Council tabled final adoption of the ordinance in question, pending clarification of the apparent misunderstanding with regard to the University's policy in purchasing property, In light of the procedure used in purchasing from Mr. Knight, it is obvious that at least that portion ofty the statement made by Or, Rogers on December 9, needs clarificatio: in the following respects: (1) Is is to be the policy of the University to purchase property at a fair market value based on an appraisal by an appraiser bearing an MAI certificate, provided such appraiser is retained, selected, and employed by the University?i or, (2; is it to be the policy of the University to purchase property at a fair market value based on an appraisal by an appraiser bearing an MAI certificate, provided such appraiser is retained, selected, and employed by the property owner?i or (3) Is it to be the policy of the University to purchase property at a fair market value determined midway bntwaen a value based on an appraisal by an MAI appraiser retained, selected, and employed by the property owner, and a value based on an appraisal by an KAI appraiser retained, Aelected and employed by the University? If so, what limitation, if any, will be imposed upon this procedure? (4) If nonA of the above, what, exactly, will the policy be? s 9 pl 4& r Y,, y 'r v" • M is t r. 5 r i_ .'Y," ♦T,7 i- r 4 4 _ . Mayor Alexander M. Finlay, Jr. April 270 1970 Page 6 Though he could have used his letter of April 21 as the vehicle to convey the requested clarification, Dr. Rogers has displayed a mysterious reluctance to do so, and has instead used such letter to launch an unjustified and unwarranted personal attack upon me. My public comments to the Council on April 14 in regard to this matter were completely without rancor, and they could not have been reasonably construed otherwise. Yet, Dr. Rogers alleges my comments and remarks to have been "accusations" and "attacks on the integrity of the university exemplifyafa flag ant, allegations by Ddisregard for the truth. Dr. Rogers' letter of April 21 is repleat with error, inaccuracies, and misrepresentations of fact, most of which will be obvious in view of the contents hereof, and I shall not belabor the Council with their enumeration. I will, however, be more than willing to do upon request, In conclusion, I submit to this Council that in view of the failure and refusal of Dr. Rogers to clarify his statement made to this council on December 9 as to the policy. of North Texas State University in regard to purchase of pro- perty in the "Master Campus Plan area--which atatement considered in its kindest light is highly ambigious--that the Council's further consideration of the adoption of the ordinance in question should be tabled for an indefinite period of time. I further submit, that in view of the inaccuracies and mispresentations contained in the letter from Dr. Rogers to the Council under dale of April 21, reasonable doubt should have now been raised in your minds as to the validity of all other portions of the prepared statement made by Dr. RogArs to the Council on December 9; 1969. Sincerely yours, L, A. Nelson LAN~mr rr.'+r VoRric Tr:xws SrwTu Uxcv111ssin V I)nxrox, TEXAS VICF'PRr.RIorxT, A omixre T■%"ve A rr.imr Lp a April 21, 1970 Members of the City Council Denton, Texas Gentlemen: We learned with regret that the City Council voted to table the ordi- nance authorizing the closing of streets on the intel;ior of the North Texas campus. However, it is understandable that the Council would vote in such a manner when confronted with a statement of the type that was made publicly at the meeting. Unfortunately, the statement omitted the facts necessary to an understanding of what had happened. First of all, it should be made clear that Mr. Lynn Knight, whose property was involved in the statement, telephoned us to report that he did not register a complaint with Mayor Nelson about the property transaot on with us, but that Mayor Nelson called him to seek infor- mation about the transaction.. We regard this sequence of origination of events as significant in understanding the mayor's statement. The statement made in our December presentation was a valid one and still is. Mr. Knight responded to that statement as suggested by approaching the business manager of the university, Mr. John Hargrove. By mutual agreement we engaged the firm of Charles R. Bartlett and Associates of Dallas and H. W. Dunham and Associates of Dallas to appraise Mr. Knight's property at Avenue B and Mulberry Street. These two MAI appraisers gave us valuations of $38,000 and $38,500. The closeness of these independent appraisals is a strong confirmation of their validity. The firm of H. W. Dunham has been our primary appraiser throughout and Mr. Hargrove wrote a letter to Mr. Knight making a firm offer of purchase at $38,000, the figure given us by the Dunham firm. At this point, we had completed the fulfillment of our policy as presented to the City Council-in December. Mr. Knight responded that he thought the price was probably not accept- able and that he would like to hire his own appraiser. Mr. Hargrove said that we would always welcome this action on the part of a property owner. After a time Mr. Knight brought to Mr. Hargrove an appraisal from Harman E. Guisinger, MAI, of Dallas. This appraisal placed the value of the land at $46,600. Mr. Hargrove explained that on the basis of the two appraisals that we had not anticipated paying anything like t}.dt amount, but that he would take it back to Mr. John Carter, fiscal vice-president, to disci+ds the Members of the City Council -2- April 21, 1970 possibility of arriving at a price midway between the two figures. Mr. Knight agreed that this was a good procedure. Even though we felt that our first offer was exactly proper undar the terms of our December statement to the City Council, Mr. Hargrove came back with an offer of $42,300, midway between the first two appraisals and that of the third. Mr. Knight said this was fine and agreed ;:hat he would take it. A contract of sale was signed, and Mr. Hargrove reported to us that the negotiation had been amicably completed and that Mr. Knight was perfectly satisfied. It should be noto d parenthetically that another property owner requested an appraisal, was made an offer, and the offer was turned down because it was not deemed satisfactory. No negotiations were completed in this case. Once again, however, we had complied com- pletely with the letter and the spirit of our statement to the Council of December. These circumstances should make it completely clear that former Mayor Nelson's statement omitted two major items of information necessary to understanding his accusations one, that the purchase contract had been completed, and two, that two MAI appraisals had been made before Mr. Knight came to us with the third appraisal. Thus, tht circum- stances that were made to appear to prevail in the statement before the City Council simply were not in existence. We are at a loss to understand the motives behind that public statement and the inadequacies that it represented in relationship to the facts available to the man who made the statement. Nevertheless, this indi- vidual is no longer a member of the Council and we are sure that the five men who now constitute the Council will, be willing to bring the proposed ordinance off the table and give it full consideration on the basis of the facts now in their possession. We feel fully confi- dent that no present member of the Council will be inclined to engage in attacks on the integritf of the universitf or :.ts staff members without having made a full determination of the facts. Sincerely yours, Jt les L, Rogers VJiIce -President, Ad nistrative Affairs ccs President John K\tmerick Vice-President John Carter Mr. John Hargrove, Business Manager Mr. L. A. Nelson, Attorney-at-Law Mr. Jim White, City Manager , NORTH TY.XA6 STATE. UN1YKRS17Y 1)Y,:YTON, TN.XA8 Vua-i'r VNMEXT, ADMINIMTVAn Vi A►ruu ~pril 2, 1970 Mr. Jim White, City Manager City of Denton Municipal Building Denton, Texas Dear Jim: We are pleased by the City Council vote asking for an ordi- nance to close the city streets in accordance with our request. I know that this operation will involve a great many related problems for you, especially in regard to changing some one- way streets to two-way and perhaps altering the direction of others. We would like to meet with you and any others whom you may designate at your earliest convenience to discuss the imjle- mentation of the plan, including the feature which you and I have discussed several times that of authorizing the uni- versity to enforce parking regulations on the streets border- ing university property outside of the closed-street area. I would like for Mr. John Matt Howard, resident engineer and superintendent of buildings and grounds, to participate in any such planning sessions. We will look forward to hearing from you as to your wishes in tackling these problems. Sincerely yours, kes-pLr;sident, Roe~ Administrativo Affairs ccs President John Kamerick Mr. John Carter Mr. John RAUX&ward NORTH -rnXAB ST.~TI: 1T.~~rr rrsrn DENTUY, TEXAS ~'rc r.-I'm r %mr.r. 1'rNr 41. Arrnrr. May 8, 1910 Mr, Jim White City Manager City of Denton Denton, Texas Dear Mr. White; Since there appears to be some misunderstanding concerning the policy of the University to purchase property in the block bounded by Avenue B, West Mulberry, Avenue C. and Hickory street, this statement is issued to explain and clarify an earlier statement made by the University. The University has offered to purchase any property in the above area from the owners at a price based on a certified appraisal by a firm or person retained by the University bearing M.A.I. qualifications. This appraisal will be at the expense of the University. If the appraisal to unsatisfactory to the owner, then the owner may secure an appraisal of his own. If the appraised amounts are at great variance, then the University requests that the owner of the property, the University, and the appraisers get together and determine if the appraisals cover the same items. After this has been accomplished the University will attempt to arrive at a just and fair price for all concerned. Very truly yours, le .f IN, / John L. Carter, Jr: Vice President, Fiscal Affairs JLC:ct North Texas State University STATEmnNT I)LF'ORE Till'. CITY COUNCIL Or MNTON, TEXAS December 9, 1969 North Texas State University tonic}ht is j Presenting an ap- peal of a docision rendered on Noveral)er 19, 19&91 by the plan- ning and Zoni.llg Commission of this city, We have a rather long series of statements to present: and gill call upon a number of individuals to speak in behalf oi' this aPPeal We would like, first of all to review the steps which have taken pInce in a.rather long and arduous succession of meet. ings held to present the institution's request for clr isinq of certain streets within the campus area. The request originally addressed to the city Planner ,,n July 11, 1969, was based on four years of cooperative work with professional rtrrff• members of the City of Denton, with eleotea members of the City Council, and with appointed members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, from early 1965 on. The orig- anal req est is still our current request. `.'hrough tyre course of, presetting several documents and of five appearances before the Planning and Zoning Commission, we have not altered the nature or the details of the request. Ile asked for the closing of certain streets within the campus area, the closing to take effect prior to the opening of the fall semester of 1969. We asked for city approval of action implementing a portion of our master plan closing the following areas; 1, Chestnut Street, between Avenue A and Avenue C. 2. Awnue 13, between Chectnut Strec; t and Mulberry Street. , 3. Sycamore'Stroet, between Avenue H .and Avenue C. i. 4• Avenue B, between Maple Street and Highland Street. We made this request with the understanding that t},e city would retain easements for all utilities in the affected street areas, that the university would assume responsibility for control and maintenance of the streets, and that the univerr;ity in return would offer future cooperation in providing widened right-of- ways for perimeter streets around the campus area. The long-range campus plan is for the university to remove the asphalt surface and redevelop the street-area for pedestrian use, retaining sufficient hard surfacing to carry all necessary emergency and service vehicles. The immediate plan is to place ,entrance gates to the internal area on Chestnut Street at Ave- nue A and at Avenue C. The Avenue C entrance would be manned during regular business hours for giving information to visitors and for admission to visitor parking areas. Mechanical devices providing for . only would be placed on Avenue B at Mulberry and on ayeamoro••Street at Avenue,C. It is proposed that univer- sity security officers would assume responsibility for patrol ing the enclosed area and enforcing regulations on movement and parking of vehicles, Two construct;ir,:& projects influenced the request for the closing of Avenue B between Highland and Maple, One of these was the opening of the one thousand-student dormitory, Kerr Hall, on Maple last September, and the other is the impending completion this year of the new library and the main pedestrian mall running in'front of it to the administration building. These two factors co;iWned will introduce a major volume of pe- dostrian traffic up the Avenue'B mall which is central to the , i r YS 'a f 7 f master plan development. The w~iversity proposes to close the one-block stretch of Avenue B to vehicular traffic completely and to develop it as an extension of the library mall for pedas~ t-rian use only. After submitting this VrItten requef;t oil July ll, the uni- versity was grrinta d a place on the agenda of the Planning and Zoning Commission on July 16 and at that time presented the general outline of the entire campus plan, pointing out at the same time the features of they street closing request that was pending. • On August 6, 1969 ' ► we appeared before the Planning and Zon- ing Commission to make an oral presentation of the request as outlined in the letter of July 11. We were advised that the r ..a` function of this particular meeting of Planning-and zoning was 'to provide information as to the nature of the request. It was our understanding that no public hearing was required legally and that we would make u public hearing presentation only be- fore the City Council. However, at this August 6 meeting or.u individual challenged the moral right but not the legal right of the Planning and Zoning Commission to act without public hearing. This was followed then by the appearance of several individuals who own property in southwest Denton. Some came forward to ask qu(:sti.ons. Others appeared to make objections to the plan. Accordingly, we were advised that a public hear- ing would be advertised and held on Saptember 3f 1969, by the Planning and Zoning Commission. At th{.6, the only public hear- ing scheduled, Q' • who has no property in the block between Avenues 13 and C from Hickory to Mulberry was one of two spoakors in opposition to the street closing 41 77 request. Ile made two points: a. .}[e threatened that, the City of Denton would be sued if streets were closed. (We will discuss this subject in a moment). b• Ile said that the people of Denton needed to get into the campus in order to transact bu:,ineso. }le said that i. instead of closing the streets, the city should prohibit all on-street parking in the univ:,r.r;ity area. Ile did not explain the logic of his reasoning to show how peo- ple were to transact business from moving vehicles which were forbidden to park. p7k The only other speaker at the public hearing was a y who .appaa~ed-to object-" "to the lack of parking at tt{~ Sam Mauston Elementary School, a cenditi.on which had caused her to get,a parking ticket when she left her car in a no parking zone while entering the school to locate her child who had been reported ill. These two statements constituted the only presentations at the_ _ ;only legal public hearing called by the City of Denton to dis- cuss this proposal. On September 5 the university was notified by the city ' planner that the Planning and Zoning Commission had tabled the street olosing request until a traffic study could be made of the streets 'in question while tLe university was in session. The ne%t communication to the university was a letter from the city planner stating that the'Planning and zoning Commission would discuss the street closing request. The letter said i "Please hive a representative of North Texas State University present to answer any gixestions which tho Planning and Zoning Commission might have." This 'eras not advertised as a public r heara;:g, and wa did not seek, nor were we afforded the oppor- tunity, to make a formal presentation again. At this meeting, i the owner of a piece of rental property on Hickory Street at Avenue C, a location not related to the internal streets which are the subject of this requost, asked that the Planning and k. °d..it. ? e , , 7FNS t .r. 2oninr Commission pos 5 tP"e action on the grovnds that an torneY ap at. resenting himself and some other roper could riot be present. Although there was noly owners and altlioucJli there was no adversary rnlat-ionsh;il)lz` hearing,, 'P involved that required the presence of an attorneY' the the Planning and Zoning Comm ssic,n by a split vote once again voted to postpone the action on the grounds that- the attorney was not present. The university was aclain requested, this time orally, to have a representative present at the meeting of the Plat and Zoning C(mn3.ssion on November lg, Planning . Without any priorrnoti- fication, the chairman of the Commission asked the university representative to repeat the presentation 'and the request for the Planning and Zoning Commission. Since this was the fifth consecutive appearance before the Planning and sion, and since no request had been made Zoning Com~Fis- ahead of the meeting for any presentation, and since no public hearing had been •ad- vertised the ' university representative declined to repi;~,-% any presentation on the grounds that it was not a public hearing and that the request had not changed in any form whatsoever since it had originally been prevented four months prior to that date, At this meeting of November 19, a postponed data which had been selected in order that an attorney might be pre- sent, the attorney did not appear, but this Commission at this time proceeded, nevertheless. A written tnitted in.advance of the meeting by a propertysowne had on sub- of several n behalf property owners. Members of the City Council have beeq furnished with a copy of this protest-, which is an undated docum,.c;,t signed by Earl L. Coleman as attorney for several Denton property owners, A* those varioas meetings the recommendations made 6 Planning and Zoning Conunissio.t have been from At conyic]crable variance one anot'~er. Within the space of only two Weeks, for ey,- ample, the city planner and the traffic engineor moved from position which stated ,It is our recommendation that these clo- sures be approved,". subject to certain conditions most of which had been stipulated b , y the university in its original applica- tion, to a position which stated "Recom,nendations Denial of re- quest." It should be pointed out for emphasis that on August a letter from the city planner stating in part, "The Commission realized that a public hearing at the Planning and zoning level is quite~'unusual,11 We had no objection to the procedure even though it was at variance fr' om that which had been explained to us. The point we are making here is that there was a legally ad- vertised and legally held public hearing and there were oral statements made at that time.in o y two pposition to this request. We were informed after the polio hearing in writing that "The Plan- ning and zoning Commission tabled your request until a traffic study can be made of the streets .in q w uestion bile the university is in session." This was followed two months later b 5 action postponing on the grounds of the absence of an aattorneeY and a November 19 meeting at which a request was denied, Y One of the bases for our appeal to the City council tonight can be summed up in this manners {1) Although there was only ons duly advertised public hearing, opponents of this proposal wore actually permitted to speak on four occasions in Opposition to the (2) postponement was granted once on the grounds of a traffic t ~T 1 71 7 study t I o be made. The city traffic engineer was asked at the November 19 meeting by all opponent of the plan whether such a , study had been made. He did not answer the question but, instead v stated that his office had alternate recommendations to make.' , We would hen call to your attention hd positionOt4rat the city process for consideration of this request to date has not been i conducted appropriately to the problem at handy and th~E this has acted td the disadvantage of a request which 'ins been submitted, which has not been changed at any time, and which has required to date five meetings of the planning and zoning Commission. r 1 ~ _v~ +'Y•l~ ~^i~i•(Y--G~`~.~:.~i ~'CLt~-~Si (~1~.2 ~I ~1 ~ ~}1-C.~'i k.4j`('~, TES t' rn; I W T'.~ ..„A" 3, . • I t Mr' aria r f s ? i ~ 1. The stye at closing ar`cihr'}n'r::r, , G~:.%t4~~ u,vry _~?.r .ones of uevel- 1 Ira, that taken Place over a number of ` lsrs, ye When the college was establisher] with a gift of ten acres in 1gg0 a dirt road for horse and-buggy ran through the cam , PUS on wI-I at s would now be Mulberry Street. It wus subsequently closed both to horses and vehicles. On a number of occasions in the last fifty years the City and the college entered into siW lar agre' ments, with the result that ti. campus now includes as green ` space and building sites portions of what were once Sycamc~,e Street, Prairie Street and Avenue B. Only this summer the City closed Maple Street from Avenue D to Avenue E'as part of coop- erative planning for the devolopmLnt of a coliseum. There is thorofora{ample precedent for the action being requested today. i S I i ' a 1 k 1 ' 4 a The Universitx_mikes this of w.?11-advez'tiucd i)uMic hcari.r a 111licatioro; LCbI; ram ac- ` coup ~s L~~~nti'oth~_r OUblie irifon,,,,rition ste L,; 'd to invoi ve the cominkinit~r In ~'Olrlt lanili.i] the carr~u'y This plan was the subject of well-publicized haarinps in 196& when wand purchase authorxz tion was(iohtained- The plan ap-k~rl rl~ti~~L~1 geared in several newspapers and-c zt~'Lz:; B other publications in J ~✓LS ~ i 19G7, when the planners made their final recommendations. The plan has been made known in detail through city-officials con. tinuously since its early stages. There are no surprises or new details in the current proposal. It is simply one more step in ti series of steps that will be taken over the years in order r to make the University community it better neighbor to the total Denton community, 3. The University has never requested and does not' now ti requ~est _the closing of anv street uno~fch private ro ert y faces. f. It requests control of streets only when they are surrounded en- tirely by land which the people of the state of Texas have al- ready purchased. Thus, there are no private property owners who have any portion of their property contiguous to the portions of the streets for which clos~}is requested. J~'0 o =r 4 tiGccti'l'i' 4~r ye-i ti4l Cv~(~fc. L~~iii 6,;. , ~ u% 1 l tc'.trti~•+ c 4* T,he~Univers i is anxious ) as always to carry its share of the burden In _anY operation affectinf, the Unive 11 '17 is a i7e , ror example, when the city and the -Uni.ver ity jointly arcnt int6 an electrical expansion plan for thcs carl,pUS, the University paid All of the costs of the City for f)crforrainr, the trUrk. 14hen the University desired to have mercury vapor on tha city streets surrounding and through the main carnpiis, the Uni.vcrsity paid the entire Cost of t e~installation of strect lights which are on public streets. When Avenue A was widened bctwecn Chestnut and Mnple Street, the-University paid its part of the cost frorn OWt--~s F%~•~ ~~Salr-~t:~x funds , One more example:. when it was desired to build Ia new highway through the City which eventually,hecame Interstate Highway ~5 g, North Tomas State arranged to have a bill placed before the legislature which would permit it to trans- fer ownership of the land on either side of the present right-of- way to provide for the service roads that- now flank Interstate 35 D. This was not a sale but a contribution:of university-owned land, This type of activity has always been characteristie'of the formation of University policy with due respect,for all other i public po ioies within the-City and County of Denton, 5. In the case of the present clan, we feel that there In ---case ..the _ se are several benefits which the city will .realize ~from the action. First, the taxpayers of Denton will be relieved of all cost of maintenance of the streets affected. This will be assumed by the University, Second, the taxpayers of Denton will be re- lieved of the cost of police protection for all of these streets, ..These would coma under the protection of the University police -forces Third, this closing operation will work further toward: tr the total plan to rvlievc the congestion and burdots on city etrcOts and parkirip, spaces f . 6, The UniJ(!r_ity p t t}ac oblaya- ii_ons to-its L"vatc raciChbors who surround the cr,rr,)us area. In purchasing; land over the years as this growth has taken place, the price paid to land owners has been excoptionjilly fair, as can be substantiated by any system of appraisal desired. Th:s continues to be the policy governing property acqui3ition, At the moment all property purchases are governed by decisions of impartial certified property appraisers with the highest pro- fessional qualifications. In the case of.businesses adjoining the carpus, North Texas takes great care to make sure that its ~ actions are not detrimental to the mutual benefits to be derived both by merchants and members of the University community. The proposal currently before the Commission will, if anything,fhelp ` the businesses in the block bounded by Avenue 8 and,C and Mul- berry and Hickory Streets. ' (a) Between eight a.m. and five p.m, more cars will park within the affected area than do to now. After five and on week- ends the present situati„+ will remain unchanged. (b) The majority of the businesses in this area rely heavily upon walk-in trade between eight and five. Every steP' that improves the parking situation on campus should inorease rather than diminish the vralk-in trade. (c) Those that cannot use walk-in trade, such as a ser- vice station, will have improved access under the proposed system because of the increased traffic flow caused by the chAngo to 7V rt.~u-spay traffic on Mulberry and Avcriue g, S ~2 !d) None of the 1usinesses in the urea outlined will ' I have any, streets r;losod on imy side of the Mock in which they arc located, and autol+jobiles will have > breater access to these business places than is now the case with the present one-way system. Therefore, the proposal before the COttLmiESiOn today can only help and not hurt -any businesses in the block in question. 71. We are. aware that there have been _ports of ad- verse effects on busin_ es Gees to the~ north the COIN wus Burin the cried several ears a,o when construction of the B~ 7Y }3,uildin~ Ode it nec_cssary to close Avenue B ter, orarilY between Chestnut and S camore Streets, }%ven if these reports arc true, there is nothing relevant in the previous condition to the present situation. Tn the curront, rr proposal it is no longer possible for cars to exit vest from Chestnut tq Avenue C as was'the case during the Biology construc- tion closing. The proposed plan now before you does not,p6r- petuate the one-way situation that prevailed during the Biology Building closing. Thie will be entirely changed. Therefore, the example of a temporary street closing for construction is meaningless and irrelevant tod;y. , 8. There have: been some uestion, and obctioris raised fro,,N ro_ erty oy~» s 1,n other areas ad e,cent to the Universe While recognizing that their concerns must be worked out in the r . f W:4 fufiui~;, the Univer-sity would maintain today that 'their, po.itior' is not relevant to the renuect at hand and asks that the.tom,%;~,~ r t si~czn consider ttjis regtjest on its rncrits ae a Carefully steed portion of a Master Plan worked out in cooperation with pro- fessional planners of the City of Denton over a period of years. Careful attention to this logical system over the period of years can but result in greater, progress for the University and the eormunity which it serves and which rcrves it. A i i .et us liOw review the possible grounds for ot,jections to the proposal. y 1. Aye have heard that this would interfere with businesses in I the campus area. Actually, as you can see by looking at the plan, i it would, bring more automobiles parked within walking distance of those places of business than is now possible. 7t" would improve automobile access to any property located within the blo6% at the northwes. of the cam us b { p by virtue of leading to two-way traffic where. only one-way traffic now exists. There is no conceivable: 1 way in which changing the control o the streets can alter the access to the business in the area either by pedestrian rrr by auto- mobile driver. 2. This action constitutes legal damage to property owners' rights. We have been assured by legal counsel that this is not the case. We, were advised some years ago that we would need to r,.,. purchase all abutting property on any streets which we asked the 1 i city to abeuidon: This we have clone. We have been advised that we should do nothing to damage the ingress or egress of any pro per.ty clwnr.r to his private property. This v7e h:)va been careful to avoid in the nature of our request. 11C.- will ark the assistant attorney general. to make €urt1ler statements in the legal area in a Moment , 3. It has been said by so;v,s that "the university, is tying up my property by not buying it. The universitY should be compelled to buy my Property. While we could not . grant that the compulsion from, the city for us to purchase property in any designated area is a legitimate part of this street discussion, we are nontheless making this pt:blio announcement at this time to dispell any doubts in anyone's 'mind as to what the concerns of the private property ownor may be and what. the intentions of the university, may be, We will purchase from any property owner in the block bounded by Avenue U, Afulberry, Avenue C, and tfickoihis r.- Y property at a- fair. market value based upon an appraisal by a certified land appraiser bearing an MAX certificate: University Funds are allocateu for this purpose, and any owner interested in such a sale is invited to contact the business man agar of the univers.ity.immediatelye It should be E+ointed out parenthetically that several property owners in the block in question have already turned down repeated offers to purchase at fair appraised prices, 4, Some meir'oers of the Lity staff have implied at one meeting or another that this step would create more, traffic problems, Actually, exactly the opposite is true, ','Cho intention of the on- tire toaster plan is to make of the campus a destination and to removo from it any suggestion of city thoroughfare, Its entire philosophy is the separation of campus and city street, Thin 'kv' s t NTW11,01 l ;1117VIV, IS TV .r, r. 9Y1 k r first phase 3 proposed is a beginning of the Im 91f~ plcsncni:al:ion of such 6 plan. T,osa, traffic will be generated with the new plan than slow exists on the city utrecats. Students who live in dormi- tories and in other re.idenceS near the campus will be unabli to 1 get parking stickers to park in the interior of the campus. They will have to leave their autano')iles at their place of residence, thus cutlting down on the number of automobile trips generated a day. utomtobiles which have parking stickers in 0 desfgnatedn interior area will move directly to an access point, enter, and park.. There will be no more circling of campus blocks in-a vain search for a hoped-for parking place, Other automobile owners will be able to know where perimeter parking space is available. We now have parking ppace going unused in a parking lot on Ave- nue at Chestnut, just two blocks wost of the Administration Building,. We now have parking.spuce going unused in a parking lot on Avenue A at Maple, just one block from, the Lducation•1;Sild- rT~ ing and new Social Science Building. We expect that usage in such lots will rise as -a systematic metho(; of traffic control can be developed. Furthermore, we should point out, we are studying the question of whether to implement a bus service or a tramtBlephant ''rain)kind of arrangement to bring people from Fouts Field, where 2,000 paved parking spacos are now going unused. If inner streets are closed, it will } o possible to implement such a plan., S'+rith the streets completely open, it is our judgment that we will not be able to do iuiythinq in the way of providing public tr„nsit in- side the campus, We should note also that the implementation of this request will, make it possible for us to create a visitor in- formation booth and a place for nonunivera ty personnel to coma -r- vq7 , y .1 a, . tv, I to find where to ~0l~ go, whore to park, and to provide visitor park- ing inn ways that are not possible when the university does not control, a single street running within its boundaries, ;.IIti has been indicated that the Planning and Zoning Corunission voted as it did because there are inadequate parking facilities at the 4)nivcrsity. We would not deny that thero are insufficient I, parkinglplaces close enough to the various buildings. Nontheless, because of the nature of Our financing system, it is imperative that we gain control g,f the streets before any plan can be imple- mented t~ ` o make an improvement in the control of parking aid traf- fic. We';are not allowed to spend appropriated funds for these purposes, All such operations are financed entirely by the auto- mobile users themselves. For us to implement a systematic control throughout the campus wid one which includes the requirement that • dormitory students park on dormitory parking lots only, it is necessary for us to have control of the traffic and parking-areas, So long as the city denies us this they deny us the means of making the neces~ary improvements-in parking and traffic systems; thus the oppos~.to of this argument is actually the prevailing 'rhe longer this proposal is delayed by the city, the longer it will tako,us to develop further stops in the implementation of the master plan to solve our problems. We originally requested a good many months ago that this plan be put into effect in September. The Planning and Zoning Commission's repeated delaying actions have prevented us from implementing the plan and have delayed that much further into the future any possible solutions to a systematio do- velopmcnt of the entire inner campus area. 6, Some city officials have argued that the university should provide a theroughfaro ground the entire proposed campus developmont S p •_w : v ~+x`' > f:~*.f~ a:! rt ~f~, r,7, r art i`:y) . - r, , 4f l&tnt W • % ~}-sa 2 ~•yu~ ~~._s f ~aY ~ ~.i~r-:`Ic Ei •rl ~ f/. E 1,1+; rat ~ ~ J //y .:+-r.•t 12 IN 7. t,.: I~GI (l,C y.•.•~(t.,.' ' .2.~{lli+i 1 ~L ~~r t•y ••.~r-!^1 f Ily /~C • V , !I •(yl1C•~.'3 .~4... K. ~~Jp area.' ][n our'voiy first requuoi to the Planning and Zoning t Commission, copies of which shoule have been furnished to you by the city planner, we st::pulnted as a portion.of our request. that we would gladly dedicate the necessary right--of-way from our pro- party on tin - y perimeter u trect which the city desired to widcrn.- Beyond this we cannot loyally go. As an educational inst.umentality of the State of Texas, it is not our lawful function to build streets for the City of Denton. do wish to cooperate in long.-range planning; we do wish to cooperate in accommodating city planning to campus planning; we do wish to become a good neighbor to the city in every conceivable way. We think that the examples already cited of the dedication of land for the interstate highway, of the pur- chase of our own public street lights, of other efforts, demonstrate good faith on our part. Tt is both beyond our legal power and be- ycnd our power, of understanding, thovgh,•to adopt the concept that the university should go into the business of constructing streets tr for thoroughfares for the City of Denton. We think surely that up- on due consi43eration, no city official would want to hold this as a serious doctrine. in short, there are no legally or ethi,cally valid reasons why the City Council should not grant this requostii:.~ ,on the grounds that it will benefit the untiro citizenry of the City of Denton and will open the pathway tc future greater progress in planning and development by both the city and the university. This brings us to one set of concluding thoughts. These have to do with the partnership between the State of Texas as rtiprosented by North Texas State University and the people of Denton as repre- rented by the Denton city govo rnment As you all know, the oxiginal campus of what hay become North Texas State University was a gift to the City of Denton. The first building on our campus was con-, structad by public tax funds voted by tno City Council of Denton. e , r-4 1,f he institution became state-.uPPorted when all of the citizens of. Denton Worked together to mcvco a gift of the carrnpus --((I r,q;, to the State of Texas, Since that time the 4 school and the city have each rnade great contributions, one to "0 other. Neither can progress adequately if the other does not progress. The city has over the years abandoned block after: block of streets in order to facilitate orderlY campus cic vclopment, We will be asking that many more blocks of streets be abandoned in the ye-irs ahead in or- der to create the final form of the eanPuc that you see in the master plan. From time to time , the citizens of Denton have donated money to buy land for this university's expansion. The present area between the former Sycamore Street and Chestnut Street be- tween Avenue A and B N, C.) V were purchased with funds from public sub- scription and the contributors to that public the citizens of Wanton, and as citizens subscription were , you have to include, of course, the many faculty members of the normal college who made some of those donations, We would be foolish to deny that the growth of a large uni. varsity within a relatively small community brings many rowi that are very difficult for such a small community l eng pains is not as though this large university campus were located `witt a large metropolis. Nevertheless, the university is here, it is growing, and each twelve months its budget rises by several millions of dollars which are p')?red into the Denton economy, tine continue to have mutual needs and mutual interests, and it would be tragic if we were to fail to work together, Ic is somewhat ironic to road in a rocorrmendation to the Plan- ning and Zoning Commission from t%io city ataff rrembors a statoi"nt r~ n f 'ri riY 'r. M,.. . wo 4 U about traffic which refers to "innocent people driving past the edge of. the campus," as though somc)iow t.hOSe, who were driving with- in this area were not innocent and somellow guilty or sinful. We are, after all, all citizens together and sharo the corramon problems We could take the easy course and not ask for ej.ty streets and not ri-1ke long-range plans. We could sit bactf:l3~the city and the students and all visitors, "We're sorry; we don't awn thesra streets. This is all the problem of the City of. Denton." This we do not wish to do. This is why we have worked hard for five years to im- plement the plan made jointly. This is why we have advert;lsed it %widely and why it is so much a matter of public record and why there have been no secrets and no surprises in its implementation. We 4 have lived together successfully and profitably' for nearly 110 years. The vote which you five members of the City Council must mak on the flituro direction of the university and the community wi-11 be ~fundamental and instrumental in, shaping the policy of the city and the university between now and the time when wo may stand tog6t-her and say we have enjoyed a century of progress and growth together. I think everyone involvoid with this case realizes that it would ;i be entirely possible for,the university to say, "Stand aside, City of Donton. You are an inferior governmental unit, We have the ; powar of the State of Texas behind us and we can compel you to givO us these streets," We could seize tho streets and make them our own, , We could not unilaterally for what might be conceived as the selfish benefit of a single in titxtion within a larger community. This we cannot accept as a course of action unless coerced into it. We refuse to believe that good citizens, whether they wear the uni- V1~Mt='rtJ~ versity label or not, are.oacLvit;ie;-and-tha4=they.`ct' by thoughtful I.171.'i= A ~V; 1 '4 r' ~ . ~ ''?i'. • ~ r 1. T and aireful and unsclfi.sh joint planning a1'rfve ht mutual sol utions to•a oal that will. benefit the entire community. The vote on thin, PlI ticular set of street clusi.ngs thus represcnts more than just a olo on ~~hct happens in the case of Chestnut Street between Avenue A and C or to Avenue j3 f:rora Chestnut to Mulberry. There will be other street closings in years to coin, In step after step after seep, We are not here to debate tonight whr.thor the streets will be closed. We all know that they will be, We are debating when and how and-in what manner. Theiuniversity has by its actions expressed a preference for the professional approach with due consideration for the rights of everyone concerned. No private property owner Is being hurt Imp unfairly in any action brought before you. No ono$s rights are being damaged by any action being broughf•:*'uefore you. There is r,o politi•cal axe being ground in this request before you. The entire request 1:616' the product of a professiorial.planning firm consulting with professional .city staff members over the years in-cooporation with professional educational planners, Your vote symbolizes a vote for every citizen in the city you represent. Your vote comes in terms of a choice between progresL and cleany, we are aAing that you give us a vote for progress for the City of Denton. ~j~}le~~ Mtilr~i n~1' {~~°!.\nn~ ~~ti ~i • SC•e'=~'~C•cVJc.:•!.(~1~ ~~.13~1.(i~-~ !~vf ~-•lti_~ 7:75r1~ Te. .1 r ~ y A NO. *y AN ORDINANCE VACATING '"'}D ABANDONING AS PUBLIC ST FI`S A PORTION OF CHESTN'U'T STREET LYING BETWEEN AVENUE A AND AVENUE C, A PORTION -y OF SYCA14ORE STREET LYING BETWEEN AVENUE B AND AVENUE. C, AND A PORTION OF AVENUE B LYING ti?ETFE&N MULBERRY STR _ET i ,\TD iI?I,P ;_E STREET; SAID PORTIONS BEING FURTHER DESCRIBED THEREIN IN ?'UT,L, A- TJR 7`;D- ING THAT. THE PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY NO LOt~iw'? EE C_Re, THEIR CONTINUED EXISTENCE AS PUBLIC STREETS; uT' 'ft?N-_"Z3 T-721LITY RIGHTS THEREIN; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DA'Z'E. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the public - convenience and necessity no longer require the continued existence of those certain portions of streets described belo,: for general street uses, and that the State of Texas, has a greater iced there- for, which street portions are described as follo,.s: situated in the City of Denton, Texas, and bel::g: 1. Chestnut Street from Avenue n to Avenue C; 2. Avenue B from Mulberry Street to Chestnut Street; 3. Avenue B from Highland Street to '.Maple Street; 4. Sycamore Street fr.-:n Avenue B to Avenue C. 1. Ar.d said described streets are hereby vacated and abandoned in so far as any right, title or interest nay be vested in the publie as a public street, but it is expressly made a part of this ordinance that an all purpose utility and drainage easement is retained by the City of Denton the same as if an casement were granted therefore to the City by the State of Texas, and dcscrib- ing the exact tracts of land herein being vacated and abandoned as public streets, with all rights of ing_ess, egress ?nd regress in, along, upon and across same being retained by the City of Denton until such uses therein are abandoned and -cloca:;ed. It is further provided that this ordinance is conditioned upon the following, which shall be conditions subsequent to the enactment hereof, but shall cause this ordinance to be null and void upon any breach thereof, to wit: A. North Texas State University shall retain all existing on-street parking spaces until such time as additional off-street parking facilities for 300 vehicles are con- structed, since the instant street closure would other- wise result in a loss of approximately 321 par;; ng spaces and would therefore worsen the existing parking conditions in the University area. B. North Texas State University shall consider, as part of its ".aster Plan, the construction of centrally placed r.+ulti-level parking garages within the ca:^pus area, or the initiation of a shuttle bus system *ro-: the existing perking areas around routs Field which would nerm"It utilization of the now unused off-street parking_ w i SECTION II. That if any section, subsection, paragruah, scnte:.c.e, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or appiicatier, thereof to any y person or circumstances, is held invalid by ar,:• court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not a£fec:t the val~_d;ty of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council Of the City' of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have e-acted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity. wi? SECTION III. That this ordinance shall become effective from and after the day of July, 1970, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chroniele, the offi_cAal neosna.per of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of itspassage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the 14th day of April, A. D. 1970. =.r i MAYOR., CITY OF DENTON, ??CAS n ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY, CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPRO D AS TO LEGAL FORM: q a)-7. Y ATTORNEY ITY OF DENTON, TEXAS i wr