Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-11-03 AGENDA PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION City of Euless Counc i I Charters - Building "B* 201 North Ector Drive Euless, Texas 76039 November 3, 1992 5:15 - Pre-.Commission Meeting (Conference Room - Building "B") DISCUSSION OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DOCUMENT 7:00 - Call to Order (Council Chambers - Building "B") PLEA OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Owens INVOCATION - Commissioner Maloney APPR WAL Of MINUTES .. Regular meeting of October 6, 1992 1. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE #92-12 Request of Carter 9 Burgess, Inc. , for Los Prados Development Company, for a change of zoning on 10.2 acres out of the Solomon {Mitt Survey, A-105, Tracts, 6E, 6F, 6B, 6C-1 and 6G, from its present zoning of PO #960 (Planned Development - Single Family Detached, zero lot lines) to PD (Planned Development - Single Family Detached, small: lots). phis property is generally located south of Harwood goad behind Harwood Crossing Shopping Center. II. #92-134V _. FENCE VARIANCE _ LOT 2, BLOCK 31, MIDWAY PARK ADDITION Request of Ms. Keiko Calker for a variance to the Pence Ordinance on Lot 2, Block 31, Midway Park Addition; more generally described as 618 Donley Drive. III. #92-I4SP - SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR CHURCH Request of Barkat Ali for a Specific Use Permit for a church on Lot 3 A-R, Block E, Midway Square Addition--Phase 3; generally described as 700 E. Harwood Road, located on the southeast corner of Harwood Road and Fuller-Wiser Road. Planning Zoning Agenda -2- November 3, 1992 IV.. REPORTS POSTED THIS 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1992, AT _ P.M. JG `IndWidual Postin Nut' e I.t yo,u plan to atimd this�uhlicr� tint and VtsF3 have sidik;b`slity that rc t ir;s s ial ataat3� In at thcgr tang; piav wcantact our ofixe.at(817)W-1626. R nahl�as�camrn xiar�n�wig�� rc�a�i;t�as i t Maur nx�1�. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 3, 1992 The Pre-Commission meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Hill at. 5. 15 p.m. , -in the Conference Room of the Euless Municipal Building. ME1!fIiRS S iA L..PAS NT tMRSS� Letty Lynn Maloney John Deithloff ,Jack Hill Ronald Young Bi.l ly Owens Carl Tyson George Zahn Joe Hennig, Director of Development & Operations Rod Tyler, City Planner Paul Kruckemeyer, City Engineer Linda Lux, Staff Secretary VISITOR Councilman Henry Boatright DISCUSSION OF T E__t#IIFj �AEVEEI#P�IE�T..C�fML QUCUKNT The Commissioners postponed their discussion of the Unified Development Control Document until the next meeting. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CUN NATIIIN QF.....KHE®ULiiD 1"S - COONCIL C##RNNEN.S The Planning and Zoning Commission continued their meeting in the Council Chambers at 7;02 p.m. , for the consideration of scheduled items. YI UHR$ Donald Grantges, Los Prados Development Company Dick Strom, Pulte Homes of Texas Ms. Keiko Colk.er Stan aright Elaine Fries Margaret Martinez Mrs. Jerri Brock Councilman Bobby Baker Councilman Henry Boatrfight PLAW W AND ZONING C IS-SION--, NOVEMBER �......1992 - PAGE _WO PLE# ... L_LEG NCE The Pledge of Allegiance was 'led by Commissioner Owens. NN M IO The invocation was given by Commissioner Maloney. AAFfAt. OF MINUTES The minutes of the October 6, 1992, Planning and coning Commission meeting were approved as written. I. #92--I2-ZC - CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF CARTER A BURGESS, INC. , FOR LOS PRADOS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM PD #960 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, ZERO LOT LINES) TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, SMALL LOTS); MORE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS BEING SOUTH OF HARVOOD ROAD BEHIND WWOOD CROSSING SHOPPING CENTER Chairman Hill stated the rules governing a public hearing and opened the public hearing. Mr. Donald Grantges with Los Prados Development Company, 1901 :Stadium Oaks, Arlington, was present. Mr. Grantges advised the Commissioners that he is proposing to build 52 single-family detached units on smaller lots behind the Kroger shopping center. The entrance to the proposed development will be from Harwood Road. Mr. Grantges stated they have changed the square footage of the homes from 1 ,000 square feel: from the previous development plan to 1,400 square feet. Fir. Grantges advised the Commissioners that adjacent neighbors have been contacted and no concerns were voiced. The developer is proposing a wood with brick columns screening fence along Harwood Road into the addition with Bradford Pear trees planted along Harwood. Mr. Dick Strom, president of Pulte Homes of Texas, 1431 Greenway Drive #700, Irving, advised the Commissioners and audience they will use 80 masonry can the front and sides of the proposed Domes and have a minimum lot sizes of 5,500 square feet but will average about 6,500 square feet over the entire addition. He further stated that all homes will have front entry garages and the average cost of the homes will be $97,000. Chairman Hill asked for other proponents. There being none, Chairman Hill asked if there were any opponents. ftAWIfK-AKD 7 N G ORLISSI EWELL 1992 - PAGE THREE 1. (cont.) #92-12-ZC -- CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF CARTER & BURGESS, INC., FOR LOS PRADOS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM PD #960 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, ZERO LOT LIKES) TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, SMALL LOTS); MORE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS BEING SOUTH OF HARWOOD ROAD BEHIND HARWOOD CROSSING SHOPPING CENTER Ms. Elaine Fries, 117 Stoney Creek (Lot 26) , inquired as to the following concerns: (1) How far back would the houses be from the fences? (2) There is presently about three (3) to five (5) feet between the property of duplexes and the proposed planned development. Whose property is this? (3) How will the excess drainage affect surrounding properties? (4) What about any two-story homes with rear windows? (5) Will there be fences built between the houses and existing duplexes? (6) Are the fences to be made of chain link or stockade? (7) The shopping center is noisy due to the dumpsters and the lights are very bright. Ms. Fries advised the Commissioners that she is in favor of the homes being built. Ms. Margaret Martinez, 201 Stoney Creek (Lot 27) , stated that she had just installed a new fence with a back gate to mow behind her home and inquired as to if the proposed new fences would adjoin the existing fences or be built next to them? She also asked when construction would begin? Ms. Martinez stated she has no objections to the homes being built. There being no further opponents, Chairman Hill closed the public hearing and called for discussion among the Commissioners. Mr. Grantges and Mr. Strom advised Ms. Fries and Ms. Martinez the piece of property in question would be surveyed for ownership, Mr. Grantges further stated that any new homeowners would install their own stockade fences and tie onto the existing ones. Mr. Grantges stated the excess property in question would be surveyed and given to the proper owner/owners. City Engineer, Paul Kruckemeyer, advised Ms. Fries that no detailed studies have been provided at this time but detail drainage studies will be required when this property is platted for development, for the excess drainage and any drainage should not affect the duplexes. Mr. Grantges stated that all the lots on the south which border the duplexes would have a minimum of 15' setback and would have around forty (40) feet between the homes and the back of the duplexes. They also plan to keep as many of the trees as possible on the rear of the proposed development. Mr. Strom advised the Commissioners the streets will be constructed of concrete and will make the addition to the drawing, PLAN i At B ZONI G.-C ISS ON, MOVEMB R...3x X392 - P�iGE�a� I. (cont.) #92-12-ZC -- CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF CARTER & BURGESS, INC. , FOR LOS PRADOS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, FOR A CHANGE Of ZONING FROM PO #960 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, ZERO LOT LINES) TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, SMALL LOTS); MORE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS BEING SOUTH OF HARWOOD ROAD BEHIND HAND CROSSING SHOPPING CENTER Per. Pod Tyler, City Planner, advised the Commissioners that staff has reviewed the plans and recommends approval of this item. He further stated the City received no calls of opposition prier to the public hearing of this item. Commissioner Tyson was concerned with two-story hones being built directly behind the duplexes and suggested that no rear windows be allowed or even prohibiting any two-stories being built. Chairman Hill suggested that Pulte might limit the lots on the south to no more than 50 two-story hones and plant fast growing trees for screening. Commissioner Owens moved to approve Zoning Case #92-12, request of Carter Burgess, Inc. , for Los Prados Development Company, with the following notations on the plans: (1) 80% masonry on the first floor; (2) all lots are to be front entry; (3) concrete streets, and (4) the issue of the extra five (5) feet on the south property line be resolved prior to preliminary platting. Commissioner Maloney seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Owens, Maloney, Young and Zahn Nays Commissioners Tyson and Hill Chairman Hill declared the motion carried. II. #92134V - REQUEST OF MS. KEIKO COLKER FOR A VARIANCE TO THE FENCE ORDINANCE ON LOT Z, BLOCK 31, MIDWAY PARK ADDITION Chairman Hill stated the rules governing a public hearing and opened the hearing. Ms. Keiko Colker, 618 Donley Drive, was present to request a fence variance on her property._ She stated she would like to install the fence which would run along the side of her property, tapering from six feet at the building line to three feet at her front property line. She is wanting to install the fence in order to keep her neighbors trees and shrubs from growing into her yard, since her neighbors do not maintain their yard. Chairman Hill asked for any proponents. PLANNING AND-ZONING C COMMISSION,, NOY .MBER � .199 - PAGE..F E .. II (Cont.) #92-13--FV - REQUEST Of NS. KEIKO COLKER FOR A VARIANCE TO THE FENCE ORDINANCE ON LILT 2, BLOCK 31, MIDWAY PARK AfDDITION Ms. Merry N. Brock, 616 Donley, advised the Commissioners and audience that she has been the neighbor of Pis. Colker for twenty-five (29) years and she has no problem with the proposed fencing. Chairman Hill asked if there were any opponents. There being none, he closed the public hearing and asked for discussion among the Commissioners. Commissioner Young moved to approve #92--13-FV, a fence variance for Lot 2, Block 31 , Midway Park Addition as presented. Commissioner Owens seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes. Commissioners Young, Ovens, Maloney, Tyson, Zahn and Hill Nays: None Chairman Hill declared the motion carried. III. 92--14-SP - CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF BARKAT ALI FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR R CHURCH. - 700 E. HARM ROAD Chairman Full explained the roles governing a public hearing and then opened the public hearing. City Planner, Rod Tyler, introduced this item by stating that all churches are required to obtain a specific use permit in all zoning districts in the City of Euless. Mr. Tyler advised the Commissioners and audience that Mr. Ali is proposing to locate their facility within an existing shopping center and they plan to lease out part of the shopping center. The existing businesses will remain in the shopping center. Mr. Tyler stated that staff had reviewed the application and plans and recommends approval of this item. Commissioner Owens stated he strongly feels that churches should not be allowed to locate on any type of commercial property, since the land could be put to better use. Chairman Hill asked for any proponents. There being none, he called for any opponents. There being none, he closed the public hearing and asked for discussion among the Commissioners. Commissioner Ovens moved to deny Zoning Case #92-14-SP, ,a Specific Use Permit for a Church due to the applicant not being present. RLA)M JXG ZONING COMM ISS1ON,..-1OYEMBER 3. I992 = P--�CE SIX III. (cont. ) #92_14-SP -- CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF BARKAT ALI FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A CHURCH - 7€0 E. HARD ROAD The motion died for a 'lack of second. Commissioner Maloney proved to table Zoning Case 092--14-SP, a Specific Use Permit for a Church, After some discussion, Commissioner Maloney stated she feels this item could be handled by a Certificate of Occupancy and withdrew her previous motion. Mr. Star Wright, the broker of the property, stated he is leasing the property to the applicant for a church. Mr. Wright. advised the Commissioners that the church will only be using a portion, anywhere from ore-third to one-half of the shopping center, and will lease out the remaining portion of the shopping center. Commissioner Tyson roved to approve .Zoning Case #92-14-SP, a Specific Use Permit for a Church as presented. Commissioner Younu seconded the Motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Tyson and Young Nays: Commissioners Zahn, Owens and Hill Abstain: Commissioner Maloney Chairman Hill declared the motion did not carry. Mr. Wright suggested that since some of the Commissioners were concerned about an eroding of the tax base, he suggested granting the Specific Use Permit with the stipulation that the church does not expand to more than 50% of the shopping center. Commissioner Tyson moved to approve Zoning Case #92-14-SP for a Specific Use Permit for a Church, with no more than 5004 contiguous space be used for the church. Commissioner Zahn seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Tyson, .Zahn, Maloney, Young, Owens and Hill Nays: Hone Chairman Hill declared the motion carried. PLANNING AND ZONING..COMMISSION,.NOVEMBER 3.,.-.I99Z - PAGE S .VEEM IV. REFORLS There were no reports for discussion. There being no further discussion, Chairman Hill adjourned the Meeting at 8:50 p.m. C1*1,Pman JaW Hill \lj1\minutes;11-03-92.p&z AGENDA C ty of Rules Courcil Gee s - Building "I" 201 North Ectior Live Biless, Teows 76139 Baer 3, 1992 7:00 -- Call to Order I. CONSIDEPATRU CF RESCEMCK ND. 92-02 CIW axsideratio a of a resolution conveyiV the Capital Improvements Advisory Comruttee Se -A ual Report for the period January 1, 1992, through June 30, 1992 -U. ADJOURNPAW ri�ti� R Hatice i>you Plan to attma this public aloctiag and yon haue a thsability that arrange. teats zit the mm inn, plea:se,coatact our oliict at(:117)485-1626. Reasonah.k.accommodations will be(F3;3de RI'mist you[f1mus. MINUTES OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 3, 1992 MI, TO ORDER The meeting of the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee was called to order at 8:50 p.m. , in the Conference Room of the Euless Municipal Building by Chairman Jack Hill. M T .F PR :SENT MMERS ABSENT slack Hill John Deithloff George Zahn Letty Lynn Maloney Ronald Young Carl Tyson Billy Owens Joe Hennig, director of development and Operations Rod Tyler. City Planner Paul Kruckemeyer, City Engineer Linda Lux, Staff Secretary VISTIfl�tS Councilman Henry Boatright I. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 92-02 CIAC Chairman Hall called for any questions or discussion. There being none, he called for a motion to adopt the resolution, Commissioner Owens made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 92-02 CIAO as presented, replacing Resolution No, 92-02 CIAC approved by this body on October 6, 1992. Co issioner Young seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Owens, Young, Maloney, Zahn, Tyson and Hill Nays; None Chairman Dill declared the motion carried. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVIM Y MOVEW PAGE ADJOMMENT 'There being no further business, Chairman Hill closed the meeting at 8:51 P.M. Chat as Jack H fl I minutes/11-03-92.cip CW-e- TM saff-ANNUAL OEM OF 7W CMTOL m, mmm 10 .M THE DgvSMCrj FM PM 1, 1992, TWO 30, 1-992 Ny `e City MU-ril Of � City Of l , �s, has ado the ,,Capital .mvEve3t Plan / Water and wastewater im.pact Study" (hereiTkifter referred to as n pj_ta Wrsvema� a g required Chair 395 of the TqWas i al C werrzwnt¢�e for � . r� ����r� �� ��� � ��� �� � �it�t sewer ��ilsi and EMS, the city Co il, in ocnpj.ji.ance with Chapter 395, bas appointed a Capital jrprmem F s Adv.1sory COMIttee to mautor aad evalLate upf.emmtat on of the Capita mgt Plans; and MU;MS, chapter X05 requires the Capit,31 juprovements, Mvisory Comittee to file i-annLul repot to the City with respect to the Prvgress Of the Capital €pr-oxemmt plain and any perceived jxwquitles in iaplemoltlxq this plans or imposing the jrqk fir and WMMS, t l_ Capz.tal lrjpt- � has monitored and � evaluated the ippleu vnntation of Capital TMPMJ£merit Plate arJd iMP05't on Of iFP` ,tfEli-IS mw p BE IT RE9CLVED By TM QWML DrFoVHffiVM ADVL9 TEECXESS, a SOCITM I. That adequate praqress is beeing mode to irplerent the capital DqxaM.nt Plans for prvvid-iM facilities nex-,-essitate by arK1 attributable to nod devalap- M Et 2 11be Capita L jggzo,,Tezents Advisory Cwmttc t"inds no i nequ-.t l 1n ilpll-r— nenti.YY4 the. Capital Txprovememnt Plans or h%x)2ang the inva tom. 3. Further, the Capin �0v ant.- isO,y Ce-, t� finds, �� '° a llc.�f arse's all fuxxLs colleuted are J�incj maintained in a - .- with the. law, sWnCK 4. It i4 romrmrxideA tlot— r, chaMt-- U-, rade to the Larxi Use A-S-S aaVIC-i.0M, t;.apitat, lra4proven, t Plan, or � -,t f'ees ad fisted tb.0 fib¢ SEMCK 5. °; z yeti zz -arara=�a report-, zttaehad hezeto as I:�hi.f it truss arYd the at�panYira4 pxh.i bits l thy'oly4h 3, are her&� cot rvoyecf to the City CU- i l 01 the City of pASSFD AND ADCpTm tit.a s 3 day of 1992- Exhibit "A" SEMI-AMXIAL REPS JANUARY 1, 1992, THROUGH GH JIM 30, 1992 BY THE CAPITAL. IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE CI'T'Y OF T:ULESS, TEXAS NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PURPOSE This semiannual report was prepared by the Capital Improvements Advisory Commit- tee to advise the City Council of the progress of the "Capital Improvement Plan / Water & Wastewater Impact Study", plus any perceived inequities found in implementing the Plans or imposing the impact fees. It is intended to satisfy the requirements of Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code. LAND USE: ASSUMPTIONS The Land Use Assumptions, adopted by City Ordinance No. 1020 on April 10, 1990, should continue to be the basis for the "Capital Improvement Plan / Water & Wastewater Impact Study". The Land Use Assumptions provide a description of the service area and projections of changes in land densities, intensities, and population in the service area over a ten year period from 1990 to 2000. Though 1990 census figures differ frum the 1990 estimate used in the Land Use Assump- tion report, the differences are not significant enough to warrant changing the Land Use Assumption Plan at this time. No significant changes have been made nor recommended at this time. CAPIML IMPROVEMENT PLAN WATER & WKWENATER IMPACT STUDY Exhibit 1, attached hereto, delineates the schedule of proposed water facilities identified in the "Capital Improvement Plan / Water & Wastewater Impact Study (adopted on May 22, 1990). Growth has been slower than originally expected, however, capital improvements for such facilities are proceeding according to the Plan. The primary costs associated with the wastewater system are due to Trinity River Authority's (TRA) proposed sewer treatment plant expansion. To date, TRA has not made any of these forecasted changes. No changes have been made to the Plan nor are any recommended at this time. Page 1 of 3 IMAM FEE CHARGES The statement entitled "City of Euless, Methodology and Calculation of Impact Fees," which is based on the Water & Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan, states that the actual cost of providing capital improvements needed to maintain the current level of service tallies to be as follows: TYPE MAX IMPACT FEE Water $2,263/service unit Wastewater $3,504/service unit These figures represent the maximum impact fee per service unit that may be charged. Impact fees the City Council set were only 17% of the maximum amount allowable to be collected. City Council Ordinance No. 1024, adopted June 12, 1990, established impact fees per service unit as follows: TYPE IMPACT FEE CHARGE Water $392/Service Unit Wastewater $608/Service Unit Fees are based on water meter size, with a 3/4 inch water meter equalling one service unit and large meters equal more service units. Where water meters are installed to provide water that will not enter the wastewater system, such as l., for landscape irrigation purposes, no wastewater impact fee is charged. Other- wise, wastewater impact fees are based upon the water meter size. Ordinance #1024 establishes fees based on service unit resulting in a fee per water meter size as follows: Meter Living Unit Water Sanitary Sewer Size Equivalent Impact Fee Impact Fee 3/4" 1.00 $ 392 $ 608 1" 1.67 655 1,015 1-1/2" 3.33 1,305 2,025 2" 5.33 2,089 3,241 3" 10.00 3,920 6,080 4" 16.67 6,535 10,135 6" 33.33 13,065 20,265 8" 60.00 23,520 36,480 10" 96.67 37,895 58,775 Ordinance #1026 amends a portion of Ordinance #1024 by changing the time of assessment and collection of impact fees. This section gives properties platted prior to the approval of Ordinance #1024 (i.e. , the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Ordinance; 6/12/90) a one year grace period on having to pay the new fees. These properties were allowed to pay only the amount that was in force prior to Ordinance #1024 which was $196 for water and $304 for wastewater, regardless of meter size. Page 2 of 3 June 12, 1991, marked the termination of this one (1) year grace period. From this date on, all developments shall be subject to the $392/Service Unit fee for water and $608/Service Unit for wastewater. IMPACT FEE ASSESEMENT & COLLECTION During this last six (6) month period a total of 59 Service Units for water and 29 Service Units for wastewater were added. Based on an audit of the permits issued for this time period (See Exhibit 2) , $29,385 were collected for water and $17,632 for wastewater. Since January, 1990, a total of $85,380 for water impact fees and $95,065 for wastewater impact fees have been collected. CONCLUSION The Capital Improvements Advisory Committee finds no inequities in imposing the impact fees, nor a need to update or revise the fees adopted. The assessment and collection of water and wastewater impact fees have been in accordance with the guidelines of Ordinance No. 1024 & 1026 and Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code. All monies have been deposited into a separate interest bearing account for impact fees. No monies except for "start-up cost" have been expended to date. No problems have occurred in the implementation of the provision of Ordinance No. 1024 & 1026. RT/ljl:impact.rpt Page 3 of 3 .�,.... 4 0 0 0 0o oV o 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o• O O co Q o• O O o• O d• qq S O O S oS O • o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O g 0 0 0 8 0 8 8 g 0 0 0 0 0 0 g 0 g dad 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 8 Z ' 6,2- -42 2 �)• 2 '' -t 2 2 2 a o a .R .c) .k .a ..p�.p .,R 1 .,z. .o a s .o -a' a a I a 0' o o` o 0 0 0 0• 0= 0 0 0` o` o• 0 0 0` o• o` o• o` Lii S o 0 88888888888 or o 0 0 o 8 8 8 6 o 0 0 0 0 • •g o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g 0 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 WO O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 .a .2 e .QT2" .,R 2" .o a .o .o .o a .�i ,c e e'.a `E e 'fl e' ,2 •.. '2 02 ' _ o 0 0• o o fl 0 0 0` 0 0 0 0` o` o` o` 0 0 0• 0 0 0` o• 0 44 0 O § O O O O O O O O O p O -O -O Q O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD v O O O O O s O O O O O O O_.O O O O O s O 000 (00000o ° O O 0 O O O O O O O O O G O O O O O O 0 0 l 0 O O O O O ,O O O _ I r.'.'. -N 0 0 0 co- a N •Kf O O O O O O to O •r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co q co Q0 C O O M co O Qf ^ LU • 0 •- M CD N Z N N O. ... N 4- 0 -y 0 N CA ^.O r 0 0 0 0 N in 'O V O O (o O In O Co O N N' co O O O O . Q co co O © V 7 cD q O co © CD 0 O C) C') N. O l '7.1 W Q CP C) (D N (D N N (D to N O to N N CO V' D) V CO N ;�- M O N C) (O �t CV 4 C) N U) M M M N (D O (D C') C) \ .-4,4tt!? l_ p a m to N N N O N N N M N •C CO CO U CO CO N M M -. CD Z LL _ :'r 0 0 0 0000000000000000000000000000 O Z W .--I C N VI■ N t17 -co, N. CD N •a CO N. to O '.T O CO (D �f t_A O CO O N N (D O V' (D+O 2 4-4 LLI J 2 co co CO O © Co 0 M '' �t '-Y CO q in O v L) C) CD 0 0 a) CO N m O ,' < < O Q) CT CO 7 NI C) C') to CD N N (D Cl) C- - O N. tr) N � co v co -T co. N N CO O CO yJ a. O 6 O - co O O M v N V O N v N ttl co M CD N D 7 D co n f M O CD 1+ O Q 0 u) P. •• CO CO N N 0 N N N CO �7 N N v (D CO Cl) CO C) N 0 M N. •r C) (0 0 CC �' F- O CO d a x /-- - , , Z N D) N (D N ' O N 1 0 0 o CD V. Cl) O © O N N Co O V ca Qo W co I- O CT CT D V ' a) co t� Q N N D o O 1� co CV N C? ? O 7 co N N O Q © cii... < Cn O O N O) V w O O c- V N V Q N V N U) M C) m N D O D C) C7) Cl) O 9. (D Z . LU Q U O h N N 1•■ M CO N N N N N CO V N V V D W N CO M N CO CO ^ 0 CV N .- O CC . ; -1-i I I-. 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 0 0 N N N N O O O O O N N O N O O N N O O O O N (n N .- N .- N r N N. N. r r r .- N N N. N. cD r r N ••' a) N. .- 9-- N. (D (D 0 Cn Q CV CV N N N CV N N N CV CV CV CV CV CV N CV 6 CV CV CV CV (D of N N CV 6 (D QQ U co V' co V• co V' CO CO CO V V• V V M C) C) CO CO Q V CO V N CO Q V M (D (D d a) I t 1 1 t d +' V LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL L.L. LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL U. LL J .H J J J J .U J J J J J J .J J J J J J J J J,J J J J J J J J J C.7 Z W ' _ ■ O 0 t� CD CO .- to Cl) O LC) Cl) 0 to 0 CD O Cl) O CO N. 0 CO to (A 0 O to O CD O 0 F- tp C p v CD N CO N 7 CO N O l CO O CO N O M N ? C1� CD V 0 U( D O N Mi1:70) V ,r g CO N © '(t O to O O N CO O © N N. Cr) © © N .- N S Z c) (1 .- r- CV o N — .- M .. 7 C M r t[ K O • J O N ' w c •e • • • • • • • c • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 `> N © Qo ^ © Co Co © (N (N N N © CD © © (D N N © N N CO N I N CO (D (D •p W tiJ D O CO N O O) 7 U) 7 .- N N UY N CL O CO O p O O O O O O Q) G CT C) G7 O O O O O Q) c) O O C)I O I O O O O C) O O O S O O O O O cn O G7 ( O O rn O CT C) C) O I O O O O 4) .-- N N . - . - - N - �I . - - I N N N > >" n A A A A A A n n A 0 )4 w w w w wlwIZ w W W wIw w w LU w W UJ W Ui wIwlwlw ww w w w a. W J J J J J z..1.71z I J J J J J I J J J J J J J —a J —4 J J J J J J /--1 a 2 IG CL G C GIG G G CLICI= C GIG G I G G G GI GIGG (L G C c IG F¢- F-.. W W W W W W W W W w LU W W LU W W W W LJ w W I W I W W w W L:-, W W ro F- r !- r- 1.- t- 1-I I- I- I- F-- I- )- r-I I- I-- I- I- f--■ I-i r- r r- r- 1.- I- r- r-- 1. u C I ¢ Q .- Q I Q a ¢ d I S I Q t .- „ 11s • i i l i .,... CITY OF EULESS IMPACT FEES COLLECTED BETWEEN JAN. 1, 1992 and JUNE 30, 1992 EXHIBIT 2 #OF WATER #OF SEWER TAPS TOTAL TOTAL WATER SEWER PERMIT •ERMIT STREET ADDRESS PERMIT PAYER LOT BLK. ADDITION NAME METERS BY SIZE BY SIZE WATER SEWER IMPACT IMPACT DATE # # 3/4' I' 112 2' 3/4' l' 11/2 2' LUE'e LITE'. FEE FEE 01/07/92 306 1000 E.ASH LANE WOODCIIASE APT. 1 11 VILLAGES OF BEAR CREE 8 26.64 0.00 $16,712 $0 01/08/92 6897 251 S INDUSTRIAL ABRAMS CONSTRUCTION 1 A BELCHASE (Home Depot) 1 1 1 8.66 5.33 $3,394 $3,241 03/11/92 594 409 N.ECTOR H.E.B.I.S.D.MIDWAY PK ELE 3B A-7t1 J.P.HALFORD SURVEY 1 0.00 5.33 $0 $3,241 03/24/92 6904 2606 POTOMAC GENERAL HOMES 1 J WESTPOINT TWO 1 1 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 03/27/92 6905 2311 CHRISTOPHER LEE CUSTOM HOMES 2 4 PARK HILL ADDITION 1 I 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 04/01/92 6907 804 BENT TREE ROY LEACH 19 1 TRAIL LAKE ESTATES 1 1 1.67 1.67 $655 $1,015 04/03/92 6908 2815 BAZE HORIZON HOMES 8R A SUNSHINE MEADOWS I 1 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 04/09/92 6910 804 TRAIL LAKE SHARON A YOUNG CUSTOM 19 5 TRAIL LAKE ESTATES II 1 1 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 04/09/92 6909 2914 NORMANDY HORIZON HOMES 9R A SUNSHINE MEADOWS 1 I 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 04/13/92 6911 1811 TRAIL LAKE DAN OFFIELD 22 1 TRAIL LAKE EST II 1 1 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 04/17/92 6913 2601 POTOMAC GENERAL HOMES 4 I WESTPOINT II I I 1 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 04/17/92 6915 1215 JAMESTOWN GENERAL HOMES 1111 WESTPOINT II 11111111E 1 00 1.00 $392 $608 04/17/92 6912 2600 POTOMAC GENERAL HOMES WESTPOINT II 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 '17192 6914 2605 POTOMAC GENERAL HOMES III WESTPOINT II I�������„I 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 14/92 6916 301 CROWE BROOKS BUILDERS BELL RANCH TERRACE 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 05/18/92 6918 517 ANTHONY SUMEER INC. IIIII BEAR CREEK EST. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1.00 1.00 I $392 $608 05/22/92 6919 2603 POTOMAC GENERAL HOMES WESTPOINT II 1.00 1.00 $392 $608 06/01/92 6920 1809 EDEN'I'RAIL D.R.HORTON INC. ®©FRAIL LAKE ESC II I�■■■IM■■■I®® $392 $608 06/08/92 6921 1806 EDEN TRAIL GRANDE CUSTOM HOMES 9 fl TRAIL LAKE II I1/.■■I11■■■I 1 A0 1.00 $392 $608 06/23/92 ro 2311 W EULESS THE FRYMIRE COMPANY Ellin INTERNAFION/REGIONAL 1111111111111111111111111117.00112 $2,744 $1,015 IIIIIIIIIIIIIFIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII column totals 9 0 .: $29,385 $17,632 MIME $47,017 v�i��. 10 110'13:92 914/92 RT/IMPACT_F ... CITY OF EULESS SUMMARY OF WATER & SEWER IMPACT FEES COLLECTED FROM JULY 1990 THROUGH JULY 1992 EXHIBIT 3 WATER SEWER 6 MONTH #OF WATER #OF SEWER TAPS TOTAL TOTAL IMPACT IMPACT WATER+ PERIOD ENDING METERS BY SIZE BY SIZE WATER SEWER FEES FEES SEWER FEES 3/4" 1" 1 1/2' 2" 3/4" 1" 1 1/2" 2" LUE's LUE's COLLECTED COLLECTED COLLECTED E SUM TOTAL 164 11 16 6 161 10 3 6 267.6 219.7 $85,380 $95,065 $180,445 12/31/90 62 3 0 3 60 2 0 3 83.0 79.3 $16,279 $24,537 $40,816 06/30/91 46 2 0 0 46 2 0 0 49.3 49.3 $9,800 $15,200 $25,000 12/31/91 41 4 7 1 40 4 3 1 76.3 62.0 $29,916 $37,696 $67,612 06/30/92 15 2 9 2 15 2 0 2 59.0 29.0 $29,385 $17,632 $47,017 wr 9/4/92 RT/IMPACT_F