07.10.2012 Town Council PacketPage 1 of 3
]
1. Call to Order / Roll Call.
2. Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, and Pledge to the Texas Flag.
3. Announcements of dates and times of upcoming community events.
CONSENT AGENDA
(Items placed on the Consent Agenda are considered routine in nature and are considered non-
controversial. The Consent Agenda can be acted upon in one motion. A majority vote of the Council
is required to remove any item for discussion and separate action. Council members may vote nay on
any single item without comment and may submit written comments as part of the official record.)
4 MINUTES, RESOLUTIONS AND OTHER ITEMS
4. Consider and act upon minutes from the following Council meeting(s) (AP)
June 26, 2012 – Regular Town Council Meeting
4b. Consider and act upon Resolution No. 12-48, authorizing a contract between Town of Prosper
and Denton County Elections to conduct the September 15, 2012 Town Special Called
Election to fill a vacancy. (AP)
4c. Consider and act upon 1) an Agreement with Quality Excavation, LTD and the Town of
Prosper regarding the Prosper Road Improvement Project 2012, Prosper Trail (Coit Road to
Custer Road) and 2) a resolution authorizing the Town Manager to execute the same. (FJ)
4d. Consider and act upon a Resolution No. 12-50, amending authorized representatives to
transact business with TexPool Participant Services. (MG)
4e. Consider and act upon a Resolution No. 12-51, authorizing individuals named to endorse
checks and orders for the payment of money or otherwise withdraw or transfer funds on
deposit with Independent Bank or any other Town depositories and exercise all of the powers
listed in the resolution. (MG)
4f. Consider and act upon whether to direct staff to submit a written notice of appeal on behalf of
the Town Council to the Development Services Department, pursuant to Chapter 4, Section
1.5(C)(7) and 1.6(B)(7) of the Town’s Zoning Ordinance, regarding action taken by the
Planning & Zoning Commission on any site plan or preliminary site plan. (CC)
4g. Consider and act upon Resolution No. 12-47, adopting a revised Board Configuration for the
Prosper Community Library Board Members. (ML)
AGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Prosper Town Council
Prosper Municipal Chambers
108 W. Broadway, Prosper, Texas
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
6:00 p.m.
Page 2 of 3
5. CITIZEN’S COMMENT
(The public is invited to address the Council on any topic. However, the Council is unable to discuss
or take action on any topic not listed on this agenda. Please complete a “Public Comments Form” and
present it to the Town Secretary prior to the meeting.)
Other Comments by the Public -
REGULAR AGENDA
(If you wish to address the Council during the regular agenda portion of the meeting, please fill out a
“Speaker Request Form” and present it to the Town Secretary prior to the meeting. Citizens wishing
to address the Council for items listed as public hearings will be recognized by the Mayor.
Those wishing to speak on a non-public hearing related item will be recognized on a case-by-case
basis, at the discretion of the Mayor and Town Council.)
DEPARTMENT ITEMS
6. Consider and act upon a Resolution No. 12-52, regarding Customer Choice in the implementation of
smart meters within the Town of Prosper. (ML)
7. Discuss and provide direction regarding the 2012 Town of Prosper Comprehensive Plan Update.
(CA12-0001) (CC)
8 EXECUTIVE SESSION
Recess into Closed Session in compliance with Section 551.001 et. seq. Texas Government Code, as
authorized by the Texas Open Meetings Act deliberate regarding;
8a. Section 551.072. To deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property located
south of Prosper Trail, east of the BNSF railroad, west of Custer, and north of Highway 380.
8b. Section 551.071. Meeting with Town Attorney regarding a matter in which the duty of the
Town Attorney under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar
of Texas conflicts with the Open Meetings Act regarding legal issues relating to the proposed,
updated Comprehensive Plan.
8c. Section 551.074. To deliberate the appointment employment and/or duties of the interim
Town Manager and/or permanent Town Manager.
8d. Section 551.087. To deliberate regarding Economic Development Negotiations regarding
property located west of DNT, north of Hwy 380, east of 1385 and south of First Street.
To reconvene in Regular Session and take any action necessary as a result of the Closed
Session.
9. Possibly direct Town Staff to schedule topic(s) for discussion at a future meeting.
10. Adjourn
Page 3 of 3
CERTIFICATION
I, the undersigned authority, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted on the inside window at the Town Hall of the Town of Prosper, Texas, a place
convenient and readily accessible to the general public at all times, and said notice was posted at least 72 hours before said meeting was convened.
_________________________________ ________________ ____________________
Amy Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary Date Notice Posted Date Noticed Removed
In addition to any specifically identified Executive Sessions, Council may convene into Executive Session under Section 551 of the Texas Government Code at any
point during the open meeting to discuss any item posted on this agenda. The Open Meetings Act provides specific exceptions that require that a meeting be open.
Should Council elect to convene into Executive Session, those exceptions will be specifically identified and announced. Any subsequent action, as a result of this
Executive Session, will be taken and recorded in open session.
NOTICE OF ASSISTANCE AT PUBLIC MEETINGS: The Prosper Town Council Meetings are wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to
attend this meeting and who may need auxiliary aids or services such as Interpreters for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, readers, or large print, are
requested to contact the Town Secretary’s Office at (972) 569-1011. BRAILLE IS NOT AVAILABLE.
Page 1 of 10
]
Council present included: Mayor Ray Smith; Mayor Pro Tem Meigs Miller, Deputy Mayor Pro Tem
Kenneth Dugger; Danny Wilson; Jason Dixon; and Curry Vogelsang Jr.
Council Member(s) absent: Dave Benefield
Staff present included: Mike Land, Town Manager; Amy Piukana, Town Secretary; Hulon Webb,
Director of Development Services; Wade Harden, Parks and Recreation Manager; Chris Copple,
Planning Director; and Matthew Garrett, Finance Director; and Gary McHone, Assistant Police
Chief.
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to recess into Executive Session at 5:01 p.m. Motion
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Miller. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
1. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Recess into Closed Session in compliance with Section 551.001 et. seq. Texas Government Code, as
authorized by the Texas Open Meetings Act to deliberate regarding;
1a. Section 551.071. Meeting with Town Attorney regarding a matter in which the duty of the
Town Attorney under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar
of Texas conflicts with the Open Meetings Act regarding legal issues relating to the proposed,
updated Comprehensive Plan.
1b. Section 551.072. To deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property located
south of Prosper Trail, west of Coit Road, east of Preston Road, and north of First Street.
1c. Section 551.072. To deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property located
south of FM 1461/Frontier Parkway, east of Legacy, west of Custer, and north of Highway
380.
1d. Section 551.074. To deliberate the appointment, employment and/or duties of the interim
Town Manager and/or permanent Town Manager.
1e. Section 551.087. To deliberate regarding Economic Development Negotiations regarding
property located west of DNT, north of Hwy 380, east of 1385 and south of First Street.
1f. To reconvene in Regular Session and take any action necessary as a result of the Closed
Session.
Council Member Dixon made a motion to reconvene into Regular Session at 6:04 p.m. Motion
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dugger. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
2. Call to Order / Roll Call.
Minutes
Regular Meeting of the Prosper Town Council
Prosper Municipal Chambers
108 W. Broadway, Prosper, Texas
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Council Meeting
6:00 p.m.
Page 2 of 10
3. Mayor Pro Tem Miller gave the Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, and Pledge to the Texas Flag.
4. Announcements of dates and times of upcoming community events. No announcements were made.
CONSENT AGENDA
(Items placed on the Consent Agenda are considered routine in nature and are considered non-
controversial. The Consent Agenda can be acted upon in one motion. A majority vote of the Council
is required to remove any item for discussion and separate action. Council members may vote nay on
any single item without comment and may submit written comments as part of the official record.)
Mayor Pro Tem Miller made a motion to pull items 5b, 5d, and 5h off the Consent Agenda to allow
further discussion. Motion seconded by Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger. Motion approved by vote
of 6-0.
5. MINUTES, RESOLUTIONS AND OTHER ITEMS
5a. Consider and act upon minutes from the following Council meeting(s) (AP)
June 12, 2012 – Regular Town Council Meeting
5c. Consider and act upon 1) a Professional Services Agreement with Specialty Land Services,
LLC, and the Town of Prosper regarding the right-of-way acquisition for various Town
projects and 2) Resolution No. 12-41, authorizing the Town Manager to execute the same.
(MB)
5e. Consider and act upon 1) a Pipeline License Agreement with the BNSF Railway Company
and the Town of Prosper regarding the construction of a 20”water line crossing within the
BNSF corridor approximately 100 feet north of US 380 and 2) Resolution No. 12-43
authorizing the Town Manager to execute the same. (HW)
5f. Consider and act upon Resolution No. 12-44, 1) determining a public necessity to acquire, by
purchase or condemnation, real property located south of Prosper Trail, west of Coit Road,
east of Preston Road, and north of First Street, 2) giving notice of an official determination to
acquire said property for the purposes set forth within and 3) authorizing the Town Manager
to establish procedures for acquiring the property by purchase or condemnation. (MB)
5g. Consider and act upon Ordinance No. 12-17 amending Sign Ordinance No. 10-010, Sections
1.09(D)(2)(b)(3), 1.09(G)(5)(b), and 1.09(O)(2)(b)(1), regarding the minimum front yard
setback for monument signs, unified development signs, and wood frame signs located in the
City of Irving waterline easement along U.S. 380. (CC)
5i. Consider and act upon 1) an application to Collin County Parks & Open Space Project
Funding Assistance Program and 2) Resolution No. 12-45, authorizing the Town Manager to
execute the same. (WH)
5j. Consider and act upon accepting the resignation of Council Member Dave Benefield, for
Town Council Place 1. (AP)
Page 3 of 10
5k. Consider and act upon Resolution No. 12-46, ordering a Special Election to fill the vacancy
created in Town Council Place 1 for the remainder of the current term; designating Early
Voting locations; ordering Notices of Election to be given as prescribed by law in connection
with such election; and providing for the appointment of Election Judges. (AP)
(CONSIDERAR Y ACTUAR EN LA RESOLUCIÓN Nº 12-46 CONSIDERANDO QUE LA CIUDAD DE
PROSPER, COLLIN Y CONDADOS DE DENTON, TEXAS, ORDENANDO UNA ELECCIÓN ESPECIAL
PARA LLENAR LA VACANTE CREADA EN AYUNTAMIENTO LUGAR 1 POR EL RESTO DEL
MANDATO ACTUAL; DESIGNACIÓN DE SITIOS DE VOTACIÓN ANTICIPADA; AVISOS DE PEDIDOS
DE ELECCIONES DARSE SEGÚN LO PRESCRITO POR LA LEY EN RELACIÓN CON DICHA
ELECCIÓN; Y PREVÉN EL NOMBRAMIENTO DE LOS JUECES DE LA ELECCIÓN.)
5l. Consider and act upon the May 2012 monthly financial statements. (MG)
Council Member Vogelsang made a motion to approve Consent Items 5a,5c,5e,5f,5g,5i,5j,5k
and 5l, as presented. Motion seconded by Council Member Dixon. Motion approved by vote
of 6-0.
5b. Consider an act upon Ordinance No. 12-13, establishing a reduced speed limit for Preston
Road. Assistant Chief Gary McHone briefed Council regarding this item.
Council asked what the maximum reduced speed limit could be for Preston Road during
construction. Assistant Chief explained that the maximum allowed reduced speed limit is 10
miles below the normal speed limit per Texas Department of Transportation regulations and
speed studies.
After discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Miller made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 12-13
reducing the speed limit along Preston Road from 60 mph to 50 mph. Motion seconded by
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger. Motion approved by 6-0.
5d. Consider and act upon 1) a Professional Landscape Architecture Services Agreement with
Studio 13 Design Group, PLLC., and the Town of Prosper regarding median landscape design
of Coit Road (US 380 to First Street) and First Street (Craig Street to Coit Road) and 2)
Resolution No. 12-42 authorizing the Town Manager to execute the same. Development
Director Hulon Webb briefed Council regarding this item.
After discussion, Council Member Dixon made a motion to approve Resolution 12-42, a
Professional Services Agreement with Specialty Land Services, LLC and the Town of Prosper
for median landscape design of Coit Road (US 380 to First Street) and First Street (Craig
Street to Coit Road). Motion seconded by Council Member Wilson. Motion approved by
vote of 6-0.
5h. Consider and act upon an amendment to Ordinance 02-33 establishing a pavilion rental fee.
Parks and Recreation Manager Wade Harden briefed Council regarding establishing a fee
structure for the rental of the pavilion at Frontier Park and to set fees for any new park
pavilions the Town may construct. Mr. Harden explained that the Parks Board approved the
proposed fee schedules.
After discussion, Council asked staff to place a reserved sign at the pavilion indicating the
times it is being reserved.
Page 4 of 10
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to approve Ordinance 02-33 establishing a
Pavilion Rental Fee for the use of Town Pavilions in the amount of $35 per half day (4 hours)
for residents and $75 for half day (4 hours) for non residents, and requiring a $100 deposit.
Motion seconded by Council Member Wilson. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
6. CITIZEN’S COMMENT
(The public is invited to address the Council on any topic. However, the Council is unable to discuss
or take action on any topic not listed on this agenda. Please complete a “Public Comments Form” and
present it to the Town Secretary prior to the meeting.)
Other Comments by the Public –
Irwin Parry-spoke asking Council to take no action on the Comp Plan tonight reminding them there is
no deadline or action, feels citizens have not been able to give proper input on the Comp Plan, he
asked that the Town hold more meetings with small public groups to allow for more input. He
expressed dissatisfaction with the consultant’s results.
Ken Weaver, spoke regarding his concerns of high density growth and fears that the Town will start
looking like Richardson and Plano which in his opinion, no longer have the “Small community
feeling”. He had questions regarding the square footage guidelines and explained that his current lot
doesn’t fit in the proposed recommendations of lot sizes. Mr. Weaver thanked Council for updating
the 2004 Comprehensive Plan and asked Council to abide by the vision allowing all citizens to
provide input. He asked that the following High Density issues be addressed: 1)Maximizing Low
and Medium Density Development; 2)clearly define Low and Medium Density Square footage
minimums that are not ambiguous and don’t overlap; 3) Eliminate or minimize High Density
Development.
Jack Dixon, spoke asking Council to table the Comprehensive Plan until a new Town Manager is
hired to allow the next Leader to have input with the plan and direction of the Town. He asked that
the density be lowered.
Donna Elliott, spoke to Council stating she represents the Prosper Historical Society. She submitted
a petition that represents citizens of Prosper that shows support for the Historic Preservation and
Restoration. She asked that the Parvin home be preserved and wants the Town to work with the
Historical Society to add a Historical Preservation Zoning classification in the future. She stated the
Historical Society will construct a Visionary Committee that will design the Historical Societies plan.
Shawn Turner, spoke regarding the Town’s Comprehensive Plan Update stating he is opposed to a
light rail stop in Prosper stating he has not seen any pros or cons of having light rail. Mr. Turner
asked them not to dismiss the citizens concerns. Mr. Turner asked that if the outcome is pre-
ordained, to please drop the pretense of soliciting resident input. Mr. Turner asked that Council strike
light rail from the Comprehensive Plan until pros and cons have been adequately examined and town
residents have been able to provide adequate input.
REGULAR AGENDA
Page 5 of 10
(If you wish to address the Council during the regular agenda portion of the meeting, please fill out a
“Speaker Request Form” and present it to the Town Secretary prior to the meeting. Citizens wishing
to address the Council for items listed as public hearings will be recognized by the Mayor.
Those wishing to speak on a non-public hearing related item will be recognized on a case-by-case
basis, at the discretion of the Mayor and Town Council.)
Council skipped to item 8.
DEPARTMENT ITEMS
8. Consider and act upon Ordinance No. 12-14 and all matters incident and related to the issuance and
sale of the Town of Prosper, Texas General Obligation Bonds, Series 2012, including the adoption of
an ordinance authorizing the issuance of such Bonds, approving an Official Statement, a Bond
Purchase Agreement, a Paying Agent/Registrar Agreement and an engagement letter of Bond
Counsel. Finance Director Matthew Garrett introduced Jason Hughes with First Southwest was
present to answer any questions. Mr. Hughes explained that the purpose of these bonds is to fund
several projects. He indicated the issuance will not cover the entire projected need, but will allow
Town Staff to begin work on several critical projects.
Mayor Pro Tem Miller made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 12-14, as presented. Motion
seconded by Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
9. Consider and act upon Ordinance No. 12-15 and all matters incident and related to the issuance and
sale of the Town of Prosper, Texas Combination Tax and Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series
2012, including the adoption of an ordinance authorizing the issuance of such Certificates, approving
an Official Statement, a Bond Purchase Agreement, a Paying Agent/Registrar Agreement and an
engagement letter of Bond Counsel. Finance Director Matthew Garrett and Jason Hughes with First
Southwest were present to answer any questions. Mr. Hughes indicated that from the Certificate of
Obligation proceeds, the Town plans to use approximately $1 million for Storm Drainage Projects.
After discussion, Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 12-15,
authorizing the issuance and sale of the Town of Prosper, Texas Combination Tax and Revenue
Certificates of Obligation, Series 2012 and approving all matters incident thereto. Motion seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Miller. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to recess for a five minute break. Motion seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Miller. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
After recess, Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to reconvene into Regular Session.
Motion seconded by Council Member Wilson. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
PUBLIC HEARING
7. A public hearing to consider and act upon the 2012 Town of Prosper Comprehensive Plan Update.
Planning Director Chris Copple explained that the Town entered into a professional services
agreement with Freese & Nichols, Inc., to update the Town’s Comprehensive Plan, which includes
updating the Town’s vision, goals and objectives, Future Land Use Plan, Transportation Plan,
Infrastructure Assessment, Housing Strategies Plan, Economic Analysis, and Implementation Plan.
Mr. Copple explained The Planning & Zoning Commission requested Town staff summarize several
Page 6 of 10
significant recommendations or estimates included in the draft 2012 Comprehensive Plan Update that
are different from the 2004 Comprehensive Plan. These changes are noted below:
• Vision Statement – The 2004 Comprehensive Plan does not include a vision statement. The draft
Comprehensive Plan Update includes a vision statement that reads, “Prosper is a community for a
lifetime; rooted in family values, exemplary schools, distinctive and distinguished neighborhoods,
and a “small town feel,” it is a true place to call home. We aspire to create a residential oasis in an
ever increasing urban area. We envision a community with spacious, family-friendly neighborhoods,
exceptional shopping areas, excellent services, a business friendly environment and a responsive
government where citizens have a say.”
• Single Family Densities and Lot Size – The 2004 Comprehensive Plan recommends densities of less
than 2.0 dwelling units per acre in low density residential areas and between 2.1 and 3.5 dwelling
units per acre in medium density residential areas. The 2004 Plan does not include a
recommendation on lot sizes. The draft Comprehensive Plan Update recommends densities of less
than 1.6 dwelling units per acre in low density residential areas and between 1.6 to 2.5 dwelling units
per acre in medium density residential areas. The draft Comprehensive Plan Update also
recommends lot sizes greater than 15,000 square feet in low density residential areas and between
12,500 – 20,000 square feet in medium density residential areas.
• Multifamily – The 2004 Comprehensive Plan supports 215 acres of multifamily use and an additional
100 acres of mixed use with multifamily use, including an estimate of 3,425 multifamily units. The
draft Comprehensive Plan Update recommends no additional garden style multifamily units be
constructed (648 units exist today) and when opportunities arise, the Town should work with
developers to construct other forms of high density residential units, such as mixed use apartments,
patio homes, snout homes, townhomes, and brownstones, to replace the 2,746 garden style
apartments currently allowed to develop by existing zoning in Prosper.
• Artesia Municipal Utility District (MUD) in Denton County (Prosper’s ETJ), north of Fishtrap Road,
east of Teel Parkway – The 2004 Comprehensive Plan did not recognize the Artesia MUD in Denton
County and recommended medium density residential for the area. The draft Comprehensive Plan
Update recognizes the existing Artesia development and the area is shown as High Density
Residential on the proposed Future Land Use Plan. Artesia has been platted and has the right to
develop 2,170 single family units and 600 multifamily units.
• Ultimate Capacity (build-out population) – The 2004 Comprehensive Plan estimates a build-out
population of 89,919 people. The draft Comprehensive Plan Update estimates a build-out population
of 69,303 people. This reduction is due primarily to the lower single family residential densities
recommended in the draft Comprehensive Plan Update.
• Addition of the Business Park District, east of Dallas North Tollway, north of First Street, west of
BNSF Railroad, south of Prosper Trail (removal of Neighborhood Office District) – Due to the nature
of the existing zoning and development in this area, the draft Comprehensive Plan Update
recommends a variety of potential land uses in this area, such as light industrial, commercial
warehousing, office storage, and commercial uses with outside storage. The 2004 Comprehensive
Plan recommended neighborhood office uses for this area. The draft Comprehensive Plan Update
allows for neighborhood office uses in the Retail and Neighborhood Services District.
• Removal of the Commercial Boulevard and Industrial Districts, west of Dallas North Tollway, along
US 380 – The 2004 Comprehensive Plan recommends industrial uses along US 380, west of the
Dallas North Tollway, and includes a Commercial Boulevard District, north of the Industrial District,
to extend non-residential uses to Fishtrap Road (approximately one mile north of US 380). The draft
Comprehensive Plan Update shows medium density residential in place of the Commercial
Page 7 of 10
Boulevard District and the Industrial District has been replaced with the Highway 380 District, which
allows for a variety of uses, including big box retail, commercial service uses, hotels, banks,
convenience store with gas stations, home service centers with outside storage, and other similar uses
the community may not necessarily desire along Preston Road or the Dallas North Tollway. The
Highway 380 District also allows for certain high density residential uses to serve as a buffer between
more intense activity along US 380 and lower density residential areas to the north.
• Retail space – The 2004 Comprehensive Plan estimates the Town’s build-out population of 89,919
people would support 1,900,000 square feet of retail space, but due to the regional draw and location
of the retail space, the 2004 Future Land Use Plan accommodates 5,782,216 square feet of retail
space, or approximately 737 acres of retail development (based on a floor to area ratio of 0.18:1).
The draft Comprehensive Plan Update includes a more thorough retail analysis and estimates the
Town’s build-out population of 69,903 people would support 2,853,379 square feet of retail space,
but due to the regional draw and location of the retail space, the draft Comprehensive Plan Update
expects 5,942,542 square feet of retail space, or approximately 758 acres of retail development (based
on a floor to area ratio of 0.18:1) to be supported. Due to the amount of existing neighborhood
service retail zoning (does not include retail along the 380 corridor, the Dallas North Tollway
corridor, or in the Town Center District at Preston/380), the draft Comprehensive Plan Update
recommends any additional neighborhood service retail zoning be avoided.
• Downtown Prosper – The 2004 Comprehensive Plan designated downtown Prosper as a special
district called the Old Town Core District, but it did not include specific recommendations on land
use or transportation. In 2007, the Town Council adopted a land use plan for the Old Town Core
District. The draft Comprehensive Plan Update includes a revised land use plan and a detailed
transportation plan, including roadway profiles, for the Old Town District.
• Transit Oriented Development with passenger rail – The 2004 Comprehensive Plan does not mention
the possibility of future passenger rail service on the BNSF Railroad. The draft Comprehensive Plan
Update addresses the possibility of passenger rail in the future, along with the possibility of locating
transit oriented development near the intersection of the BNSF Railroad and First Street.
Mr. Copple noted that the P&Z Commission recommended the Town Council approve the 2012
Comprehensive Plan Update, subject to: 1) The Commission’s list of requested changes being
reconciled in the Comprehensive Plan, and 2) The addition of an executive summary, which is to
include the Future Land Use Plan, being placed at the beginning of the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Copple introduced Eddie Haas with Freese & Nichols who presented a lengthy Power Point
presentation of the proposed 2012 Comprehensive Plan Update. (See Exhibit A to the minutes)
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to open the Public Hearing. Motion seconded by
Council Member Vogelsang. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
The following citizens were present and wished to speak:
Ann Lieber, requested Council to remove light rail from the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Lieber
indicated she has not received any information showing benefits or negative aspects of having light
rail. She asked that cost, safety and implementation need to be addressed with the citizens allowing
input. Ms. Lieber encouraged Council and Staff to research Mobility 2035 website as she feels
explains that this is not a transportation plan but a social engineering plan promoting “social equity”,
“environment” and “economics”. In closing remarks, Ms. Lieber respectfully requested Council to
strike the “veloweb” verbiage from page 24 of Part 1 Planning Context as it does not define the
accurate definition in her opinion.
Page 8 of 10
Kelly Cooper, stated she agrees with Planning and Zoning recommendations but has concerns with
Item No. 9 Mr. Carlin’s item, removing the word “taxes”. She asks that the wording “Light Rail” be
taken off the comp plan, she explained that citizens have not been given provided adequate
information, and asked that the light rail issue be put before the voters and tax payers in order to
provide input. She passed out a NCTCOG handout defining the Regional Veloweb. Ms. Cooper also
noted that the Mobility 2035 does not require a light rail stop in the Town. In her closing remarks,
she noted recognized and thanked the Historical Society and appreciates for all their efforts.
Matt Robison, spoke noting that he is President of the Developer’s Association and voiced concerns
with the lot sizes in the single family residential low density and high density. Mr. Robison indicated
the current lot sizes of many current developments do not fit into the scale proposed. He noted lot
diversification is essential. Mr. Robison explained that the Comprehensive Plan is more than a
guideline, it affects citizens and Developers.
Joe Hickman, representing Blue Star Land, had concerns with the inconsistency between the future
land use designations on Blue Star’s land and the actual zoning that was in place. Mr. Hickman
asked if the Town is downsizing the specific areas throughout its limits. Mr. Hickman asked Council
to be flexible with the Developers to allow them to meet the demand of the market. Mr. Hickman
agrees that quality is important however; felt some citizens do not want big lots. He noted the
economy and asked Council to work with the Developers and requested Council to deny the
comprehensive plan amendment in its current form.
Bill Dahlstrom with Land Plan noted that the plan is inaccurate in the color code designations noting
it reflects 40 acres of mixed use zoning at a school location. He asked that Council amend the single
family residential to 3 units per acre instead of the 2.5 shown on the proposed Comp Plan. He noted
that the thoroughfare plan is not shown on the Comp Plan and asked that Council work with the
Planned Development Zoned lots.
Shawn Turner thanked everyone for their efforts with the Comprehensive Plan; however, he added
that all topics had not been thoroughly discussed. He noted that the Comprehensive Plan is more
than a guideline, it affects citizens and Developers. Mr. Turner spoke against light rail, disagrees
with the retail acreage and asked Council to adhere to the vision.
Jack Dickson voiced his support for a uniform vision statement and noted that the population
numbers in his opinion are inaccurate.
Council Member Vogelsang discussed the Economic Analysis with Freese & Nichols asking if they
looked at the comp plan analysis or concentrated only on the economic purposes. Council Member
Vogelsang asks that we look at the Planned Developments and those agreements in regards to lot
sizes and asked for clarification. Mr. Haas explained that lot sizes were measured by existing
developments and surrounding area cities since the Town is not fully developed. Curry asked for
rationalization in regards to the build out of Prosper. Mr. Haas explained that the build out numbers
proposed are based off the plan and do not necessarily include the Planned Developments. He
explained that the lower density and larger lots were the goal and they took medium density and
changed it to a lower density to meet the goal. Mayor, Curry and Dugger asked what the total build
out would be with the existing Planned Developments. Council Member Vogelsang concurred with
the P&Z Commission recommending the Town Attorney review the plan to ensure language and plan
meets Federal and State guidelines. Council Member Wilson noted that the Council will be flexible
with Developers and understands that the existing Planned Developments are already in place and
will take that into consideration for future developments. Council Member Vogelsang asked about
the old town districts maximum height. Planning Director Chris Copple explained that the maximum
height allowed is a two story building. Council Member Vogelsang asked if the Town has any
restrictions when homes are removed and if we have any requirements. Council Member Vogelsang
Page 9 of 10
encouraged maintaining the home town feel. Council Member Vogelsang had concerns regarding
light rail and does not feel it has been addressed. Council Member Vogelsang advised staff to rewrite
light rail wording and provide more information indicating pros and cons of light rail. Mr. Haas
replied that he recommends monitoring other local Towns and leaving the option open for future
leaders to make the decision if the Town will need light rail. Mayor Smith asked what the height
restrictions are for US 380 and recommended leaving it flexible and gave an example of the new
Baylor Hospital in McKinney noting it was eight (8) stories in height. Mayor Smith asked what land
use was along Preston Road. Mr. Haas explained that he recommends small scale retail box uses
which would include a grocery store. Planning Director Chris Copple explained that the DNT
Tollway has eight (8) stories and Planned Development height restrictions which are made on a case
by case basis. Mayor asked that the map be updated to reflect Retail in the Master Plan at the
southeast corner of Coit and 1461.
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Miller made a motion to table the item. Motion seconded by Council
Member Wilson. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
10. Consider and act upon Change Order #1 to Freese and Nichols, Inc., for the Custer Road Pump
Station Improvements Project. Development Director Hulon Webb introduced Jeff Payne with
Freese & Nichols who explained that Coserve’s motor restrictions had become more restrictive since
the original design and now the inrush current limitations can only be met with the use of VFDs.
This requirement has triggered several changes in the design; (1) electrical design of the VFDs
electronics, instrumentation, and programming and (2) design of an electrical room expansion to the
pump station building including structural, electrical, architectural, and HVAC design. The impact to
the construction estimate due to the addition of VFDs is an approximate increase of $450,000.
After discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to approve Change Order #1 to Freese and
Nichols, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $43,000 for the Custer Road Pump Station Improvements
Project.
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to recess into Executive Session at 9:09 p.m. to
discuss Agenda Items 1a. through 1f. Motion seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Miller. Motion approved
by vote of 6-0.
Council Member Wilson made a motion to reconvene into regular session. Motion seconded by
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
11. Possibly direct Town Staff to schedule topic(s) for discussion at a future meeting. No discussion or
action was taken on the item.
12. Adjourn- Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dugger made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded
by Council Member Wilson. Motion approved by vote of 6-0.
The meeting adjourned at 10:38 p.m.
APPROVED:
___________________________________
Ray Smith, Mayor
Page 10 of 10
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Amy M. Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary
Page 1 of 1
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Amy Piukana, Town Secretary
CC: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – July 10, 2012
Date: July 5, 2012
Agenda Item:
Consider and act upon Resolution No. 12-48, authorizing a contract pursuant to Texas Election
Code Sections 31.092 and 42.002(5) for a September 15, 2012 special election to be
administered by Frank Phillips, Denton County Elections Administrator.
Description of Agenda Item:
Town of Prosper will hold an Election with Denton County in accordance with the Texas Election
Code and this agreement. The Denton County Elections Administrator shall coordinate,
supervise, and handle all aspects of administering the Election as provided in this agreement.
Town of Prosper agrees to pay the Denton County Elections Administrator for equipment,
supplies, services, and administrative costs as provided in this agreement. The Denton County
Elections Administrator shall serve as the administrator for the Election. The Elections
Administrator shall provide advisory services in connection with decisions to be made and
actions to be taken by the officers of the participating authority as necessary.
Attached Documents:
Resolution No. 12-48
Denton County Elections Cost Worksheet
Town Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends that the Town Council approve Resolution No. 12-48, authorizing a
contract for a September 15, 2012 Special Election to be administered by Denton County
Elections Administrator.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
ADMINISTRATION
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. 12-48
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS,
AUTHORIZING THE PROSPER TOWN COUNCIL TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT
WITH DENTON COUNTY ELECTIONS ADMINISTRATOR FOR ELECTION
SERVICES.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: The Town of Prosper, Texas, hereby authorizes the Prosper Town
Council to enter into a contract with Denton County Elections Administrator for election
services for the September 15, 2012 Special Election to fill a vacancy.
SECTION 3: This Resolution shall take effect upon passage.
RESOLVED THIS THE 10th day of July, 2012.
APPROVED:
_________________________
Ray Smith, Mayor
ATTEST TO:
_______________________
Amy Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary
Page 1 of 7
THE STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF DENTON
ELECTION AGREEMENT AND CONTRACT FOR ELECTION SERVICES
THIS CONTRACT for election services is made by and between the Denton County Elections Administrator and
the Town of Prosper, hereinafter referred to as the “participating authority.”
This contract is made pursuant to Texas Election Code Sections 31.092 and 42.002(5) for a September 15, 2012
special election to be administered by Frank Phillips, Denton County Elections Administrator, hereinafter referred to as
“Elections Administrator.”
RECITALS
The Town of Prosper plans to hold a Special Election on September 15, 2012.
The County owns an electronic voting system, the Hart InterCivic eSlate/eScan Voting System (Version 6.2.1),
which has been duly approved by the Secretary of State pursuant to Texas Election Code Chapter 122 as amended, and
is compliant with the accessibility requirements for persons with disabilities set forth by Texas Election Code Section
61.012. The contracting political subdivision desires to use the County’s electronic voting system, to compensate the
County for such use, and to share in certain other expenses connected with this election, in accordance with the
applicable provisions of the Texas Election Code, as amended.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, agreements, and benefits to the parties, IT IS
AGREED as follows:
I. ADMINISTRATION
The participating authority agrees to hold an Election with Denton County in accordance with the Texas Election
Code and this agreement. The Denton County Elections Administrator shall coordinate, supervise, and handle all aspects
of administering the Election as provided in this agreement. The participating authority agrees to pay the Denton County
Elections Administrator for equipment, supplies, services, and administrative costs as provided in this agreement. The
Denton County Elections Administrator shall serve as the administrator for the Election; however, the participating
authority shall remain responsible for the decisions and actions of its officers necessary for the lawful conduct of its
election. The Elections Administrator shall provide advisory services in connection with decisions to be made and actions
to be taken by the officers of the participating authority as necessary.
It is understood that other political subdivisions may wish to participate in the use of the County’s electronic
voting system and polling places, and it is agreed that the Elections Administrator may enter into other joint election
agreements and contracts for election services for those purposes, on terms and conditions generally similar to those set
forth in this contract.
In no instance shall a voter be permitted to receive a ballot containing an office or proposition stating a measure
on which the voter is ineligible to vote.
II. LEGAL DOCUMENTS
The participating authority shall be responsible for the preparation, adoption, and publication of all required
election orders, resolutions, notices, and any other pertinent documents required by the Texas Election Code and/or the
participating authority’s governing body, charter, or ordinances.
Preparation of the necessary materials for notices and the official ballot shall be the responsibility of the
participating authority, including translation to languages other than English. The participating authority shall provide a
copy of its election orders and notices to the Denton County Elections Administrator.
Page 2 of 7
The participating authority shall prepare a submission to the United States Department of Justice for preclearance
of the election procedures and polling places, pursuant to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended. The participating
authority will provide to the Elections Administrator a photocopy of the submission and any correspondence from the
Department of Justice.
By signing this agreement, the participating authority certifies that it has no unresolved preclearance or
voting rights issues known to it that would preclude or delay Department of Justice preclearance of the election.
The participating authority will file an amended submission to the United States Department of Justice in the event
that any polling places are changed after the original submission is filed, including changes resulting from the withdrawal
of one or more participating authorities pursuant to Section XII of this contract.
III. VOTING LOCATIONS
The Elections Administrator shall select and arrange for the use of and payment for all Election Day voting
locations. Voting locations will be, whenever possible, the usual voting location for each election precinct in elections
conducted by the county, and shall be compliant with the accessibility requirements established by Election Code Section
43.034 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The proposed voting location(s) is the Reynold’s Middle School
Community Library, 700 N. Coleman Road, Prosper, TX 75078. In the event a voting location is not available or
appropriate, the Elections Administrator will arrange for use of an alternate location with the approval of the affected
participating authorities. The Elections Administrator shall notify the participating authority of any changes from the
location listed above.
If polling place(s) for the September 15, 2012 election are different from the polling place(s) used by the
participating authority in its most recent election, the authority agrees to post a notice no later than September 15, 2012 at
the entrance to any previous polling places in the jurisdiction stating that the polling location has changed and stating the
political subdivision’s polling place names and addresses in effect for the September 15, 2012 election. This notice shall
be written in both the English and Spanish languages.
IV. ELECTION JUDGES, CLERKS, AND OTHER ELECTION PERSONNEL
Denton County shall be responsible for the appointment of the presiding judge and alternate judge for each
polling location. The Elections Administrator shall make emergency appointments of election officials if necessary.
Upon request by the Elections Administrator, the participating authority agrees to assist in recruiting polling place
officials who are bilingual (fluent in both English and Spanish). In compliance with the Federal Voting Rights Act of 1965,
as amended, each polling place containing more than 5% Hispanic population as determined by the 2010 Census shall
have one or more election officials who are fluent in both the English and Spanish languages. If a presiding judge is not
bilingual, and is unable to appoint a bilingual clerk, the Elections Administrator may recommend a bilingual worker for the
polling place. If the Elections Administrator is unable to recommend or recruit a bilingual worker, the participating
authority served by that polling place shall be responsible for recruiting a bilingual worker for translation services at that
polling place.
The Elections Administrator shall notify all election judges of the eligibility requirements of Subchapter C of
Chapter 32 of the Texas Election Code, and will take the necessary steps to insure that all election judges appointed for
the Election are eligible to serve.
The Elections Administrator shall arrange for the training and compensation of all election judges and clerks. The
Elections Administrator shall arrange for the date, time, and place for presiding election judges to pick up their election
supplies. Each presiding election judge will be sent a letter from the Elections Administrator notifying him of his
appointment, the time and location of training and distribution of election supplies, and the number of election clerks that
the presiding judge may appoint.
Each election judge and clerk will receive compensation at the hourly rate established by Denton County pursuant
to Texas Election Code Section 32.091. The election judge will receive an additional sum of $25.00 for picking up the
Page 3 of 7
election supplies prior to Election Day and for returning the supplies and equipment to the central counting station after
the polls close.
Election judges and clerks who attend voting equipment training and/or procedures training shall be compensated
at a rate of $7.00 per hour.
The Elections Administrator may employ other personnel necessary for the proper administration of the election,
including such part-time help as is necessary to prepare for the election, to ensure the timely delivery of supplies during
early voting and on Election Day, and for the efficient tabulation of ballots at the central counting station. Part-time
personnel working in support of the Early Voting Ballot Board and/or central counting station on election night will be
compensated at the hourly rate set by Denton County in accordance with Election Code Sections 87.005, 127.004, and
127.006.
V. PREPARATION OF SUPPLIES AND VOTING EQUIPMENT
The Elections Administrator shall arrange for all election supplies and voting equipment including, but not limited
to, official ballots, sample ballots, voter registration lists, and all forms, signs, maps and other materials used by the
election judges at the voting locations. The Elections Administrator shall ensure availability of tables and chairs at each
polling place and shall procure rented tables and chairs for those polling places that do not have tables and/or chairs.
In no instance shall a voter be permitted to receive a ballot containing an office or proposition stating a measure
on which the voter is ineligible to vote. Multiple ballot styles shall be available in those shared polling places where
jurisdictions do not overlap. The Elections Administrator shall provide the necessary voter registration information, maps,
instructions, and other information needed to enable the election judges in the voting locations that have more than one
ballot style to conduct a proper election.
The participating authority shall furnish the Elections Administrator a list of candidates and/or propositions
showing the order and the exact manner in which the candidate names and/or proposition(s) are to appear on the official
ballot (including titles and text in each language in which the authority’s ballot is to be printed). The participating authority
shall be responsible for proofreading and approving the ballot insofar as it pertains to that authority’s candidates and/or
propositions. The participating authority shall be responsible for proofing and approving the audio recording of the ballot
insofar as it pertains to that authority’s candidates and/or propositions.
Early Voting by Personal Appearance and voting on Election Day shall be conducted exclusively on Denton
County’s eSlate electronic voting system.
The Elections Administrator shall be responsible for the preparation, testing, and delivery of the voting equipment
for the election as required by the Election Code.
The Elections Administrator shall conduct criminal background checks on the relevant employees upon hiring as
required by Election Code 129.051(g).
VI. EARLY VOTING
The participating authority agrees to appoint the Election Administrator as the Early Voting Clerk in accordance
with Sections 31.097 and 271.006 of the Texas Election Code. The participating authority agrees to appoint the Elections
Administrator’s permanent county employees as deputy early voting clerks. The participating authority further agrees that
the Elections Administrator may appoint other deputy early voting clerks to assist in the conduct of early voting as
necessary, and that these additional deputy early voting clerks shall be compensated at an hourly rate set by Denton
County pursuant to Section 83.052 of the Texas Election Code. Deputy early voting clerks who are permanent employees
of the Denton County Elections Administrator or any participating authority shall serve in that capacity without additional
compensation.
Early Voting by personal appearance will be held at the Municipal Chambers, 108 W. Broadway Street, Prosper,
TX 75078, during the following dates and times: Wednesday through Friday (August 29, 2012 through August 31, 2012)
Page 4 of 7
between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Tuesday through Friday (September 4, 2012 through September 7, 2012) between 8:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m., and Monday and Tuesday (September 10, 2012 and September 11, 2012) between 7:00 a.m. and
7:00 p.m.
As Early Voting Clerk, the Elections Administrator shall receive applications for early voting ballots to be voted by
mail in accordance with Chapters 31 and 86 of the Texas Election Code. Any requests for early voting ballots to be voted
by mail received by the participating authority shall be forwarded immediately by fax or courier to the Elections
Administrator for processing.
The Elections Administrator shall provide the participating authority a copy of the early voting report on a daily
basis and a cumulative final early voting report following the election. In accordance with Section 87.121(g) of the
Election Code, the daily reports showing the previous day’s early voting activity will be distributed to the participating
authority no later than 8:00 AM each business day. This will be accomplished by Denton County posting the daily reports
on its website.
VII. EARLY VOTING BALLOT BOARD
Denton County shall appoint an Early Voting Ballot Board (EVBB) to process early voting results from the Joint
Election. The Presiding Judge, with the assistance of the Elections Administrator, shall appoint two or more additional
members to constitute the EVBB. The Elections Administrator shall determine the number of EVBB members required to
efficiently process the early voting ballots.
VIII. CENTRAL COUNTING STATION AND ELECTION RETURNS
The Elections Administrator shall be responsible for establishing and operating the central and remote counting
stations to receive and tabulate the voted ballots in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Election Code and of this
agreement.
The participating authority hereby, in accordance with Section 127.002, 127.003, and 127.005 of the Texas
Election Code, appoints the following central counting station officials:
Counting Station Manager: Frank Phillips, Denton County Elections Administrator
Tabulation Supervisor: Eric Leija, Denton County Technical Operations Manager
Presiding Judge: Jason Barnett, Denton County Deputy Elections Administrator
Alternate Judge: Paula Paschal, Denton County Contract Manager
The counting station manager or his representative shall deliver timely cumulative reports of the election results
as precincts report to the central and remote counting stations and are tabulated. The manager shall be responsible for
releasing unofficial cumulative totals and precinct returns from the election to the participants, candidates, press, and
general public by posting to the Denton County web site. To ensure the accuracy of reported election returns, results
printed on the tapes produced by Denton County’s voting equipment will not be released to the participating authority at
the remote collection sites or by phone from individual polling locations.
The Elections Administrator will prepare the unofficial canvass reports after all precincts have been counted, and
will deliver a copy of the unofficial canvass to the participating authority as soon as possible after all returns have been
tabulated. The participating authority shall be responsible for the official canvass of its election.
The participating authority will be responsible for submitting the precinct-by-precinct results reports to the
Secretary of State as required by Section 67.017 of the Election Code.
The Elections Administrator shall be responsible for conducting the post-election manual recount required by
Section 127.201 of the Texas Election Code unless a waiver is granted by the Secretary of State. Notification and copies
of the recount, if waiver is denied, will be provided to the participating authority and the Secretary of State’s Office.
Page 5 of 7
IX. ELECTION EXPENSES AND ALLOCATION OF COSTS
The participating authority agrees to the election expenses as set forth on Attachment A.
Costs for Early Voting by Mail shall be allocated according to the actual number of ballots mailed to the
participating authority’s voters.
The participating authority agrees to pay the Denton County Elections Administrator an administrative fee equal
to ten percent (10%) of its total billable costs in accordance with Section 31.100(d) of the Texas Election Code.
The Denton County Elections Administrator shall deposit all funds payable under this contract into the appropriate
fund(s) within the county treasury in accordance with Election Code Section 31.100.
X. WITHDRAWAL FROM CONTRACT DUE TO CANCELLATION OF ELECTION
The participating authority may withdraw from this agreement should it cancel its election in accordance with
Sections 2.051 - 2.053 of the Texas Election Code. Any monies deposited with the Elections Administrator by the
withdrawing authority shall be refunded, minus a $75 cancellation fee.
XI. RECORDS OF THE ELECTION
The Elections Administrator is hereby appointed general custodian of the voted ballots and all records of the
election as authorized by Section 271.010 of the Texas Election Code.
Access to the election records shall be available to the participating authority as well as to the public in
accordance with applicable provisions of the Texas Election Code and the Texas Public Information Act. The election
records shall be stored at the offices of the Elections Administrator or at an alternate facility used for storage of county
records. The Elections Administrator shall ensure that the records are maintained in an orderly manner so that the
records are clearly identifiable and retrievable.
Records of the election shall be retained and disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Section 66.058 of
the Texas Election Code. If records of the election are involved in any pending election contest, investigation, litigation, or
open records request, the Elections Administrator shall maintain the records until final resolution or until final judgment,
whichever is applicable. It is the responsibility of the participating authority to bring to the attention of the Elections
Administrator any notice of pending election contest, investigation, litigation or open records request which may be filed
with the participating authority.
XII. RECOUNTS
A recount may be obtained as provided by Title 13 of the Texas Election Code. By signing this document, the
presiding officer of the contracting participating authority agrees that any recount shall take place at the offices of the
Elections Administrator, and that the Elections Administrator shall serve as Recount Supervisor and the participating
authority’s official or employee who performs the duties of a secretary under the Texas Election Code shall serve as
Recount Coordinator.
The Elections Administrator agrees to provide advisory services to the participating authority as necessary to
conduct a proper recount.
XIII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
1. It is understood that to the extent space is available, other districts and political subdivisions may wish to
participate in the use of the County’s election equipment and voting places, and it is agreed that the
Elections Administrator may contract with such other districts or political subdivisions for such purposes
and that in such event there may be an adjustment of the pro-rata share to be paid to the County by the
participating authorities.
Page 6 of 7
2. The Elections Administrator shall file copies of this document with the Denton County Judge and the
Denton County Auditor in accordance with Section 31.099 of the Texas Election Code.
3. Nothing in this contract prevents any party from taking appropriate legal action against any other party
and/or other election personnel for a breach of this contract or a violation of the Texas Election Code.
4. This agreement shall be construed under and in accord with the laws of the State of Texas, and all
obligations of the parties created hereunder are performable in Denton County, Texas.
5. In the event that one of more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held to
be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability shall not
affect any other provision hereof and this agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal, or
unenforceable provision had never been contained herein.
6. All parties shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of the State of Texas, all local
governments, and any other entities with local jurisdiction.
7. The waiver by any party of a breach of any provision of this agreement shall not operate as or be
construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach.
8. Any amendments of this agreement shall be of no effect unless in writing and signed by all parties hereto.
XIV. COST ESTIMATES AND DEPOSIT OF FUNDS
The total estimated obligation for the participating authority under the terms of this agreement is listed below. The
participating authority agrees to pay the Denton County Elections Administrator a deposit of approximately 90% of this
estimated obligation no later than 15 days after the agreement is executed. The exact amount of the participating
authority’s obligation under the terms of this agreement shall be calculated after the September 15, 2012 election, and if
the amount of an authority’s total obligation exceeds the amount deposited, the authority shall pay to the Elections
Administrator the balance due within 30 days after the receipt of the final invoice from the Elections Administrator.
However, if the amount of the authority’s total obligation is less than the amount deposited, the Elections Administrator
shall refund to the authority the excess amount paid within 30 days after the final costs are calculated.
The total estimated obligation and required deposit for each participating authority under the terms of this agreement shall
be as follows:
Estimated Deposit
Political Subdivision Cost Due
Town of Prosper $5,135.90 $4,622.31
Rev. 6/21/2012 (2:25 p.m.)
THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK.
7/5/2012 1
Election Costs Units Cost Per Unit Estimated Actual
Early Voting by Personal Appearance (EVPA) Expenses:
EVPA Polling Place(s)0.00 3,178.00 0.00
Early Voting Ballot Board Personnel 5 10.00 50.00 0.00
Early Voting by Mail (EVM) Expenses:
EVM Ballots (cost per thousand)0 335.00 0.00
EVM Ballot Postage 0 1.05 0.00 0.00
Election Day (ED) Expenses:
ED Polling Place(s)0 0.00 921.00 0.00
ED Ballots (cost per thousand)0 335.00 0.00 0.00
ED Pollling place rental/custodial 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
Delivery of Equipment 1 90.00 90.00 0.00
General Expenses of the Election:
Programing eScan/eSlate per Election 1 400.00 400.00 0.00
Postage for DOJ 0 5.00 0.00 0.00
Legal Notices 0 30.00 30.00 0.00
Worksheet Total Expense $4,669.00 $0.00
Estimated Actual Amount Paid Ck #/Date Received
Election Total $4,669.00 $0.00
Election Service Fee $466.90 $0.00
Election Total Cost $5,135.90 $0.00
Deposit (90%)$4,622.31 $0.00
Balance Due $5,135.90 $0.00
Denton County Elections Contract Worksheet
Town of Prosper - September 15, 2012
Page 1 of 2
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Frank E. Jaromin, P.E., Director of Public Works
CC: Mike Land, Town Manager
Hulon T. Webb, Jr., P.E., Director of Development Services/Town Engineer
Michael Bulla, CIP Project Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – July 10, 2012
Date: July 6, 2012
Agenda Item:
Consider and act upon 1) an Agreement with Quality Excavation, LTD and the Town of Prosper
regarding the Prosper Road Improvement Project 2012, Prosper Trail (Coit Road to Custer
Road) and 2) a resolution authorizing the Town Manager to execute the same.
Description of Agenda Item:
On May 14, 2011, the residents of Prosper voted in favor of a bond proposition allocating
$13,290,000 for street and road improvements. One of the road improvement projects
recommended by the Bond Committee was to improve Prosper Trail from Preston Road to
Custer Road in asphalt. The attached agreement is to mix the existing sub base, compact and
construct five inches (5”) of new asphalt on Prosper Trail from Coit Road to Custer Road.
On June 8, 2012, Town staff opened proposals to improve Prosper Trail from Coit Road to
Custer Road and received only one proposal from Quality Excavation, LTD in the amount of
$900,295. At the June 12, 2012, Town Council Meeting, the Town Council rejected the
proposal from Quality Excavation, LTD.
The project was rebid and Town staff opened proposals again on July 6, 2012. Quality
Excavation, LTD, was once again the sole bidder but this time the proposal is $818,330.
Budget Impact:
Funding for this project will be from the anticipated 2012 Bond. Since bonds have not been sold
staff will use the previously approved reimbursement resolution for funding to be later
transferred back to the General Fund.
Legal Obligations and Review:
The contract is a standard construction contract previously approved by the Town Attorney.
Attached Documents:
1. Resolution
2. Proposal
3. Standard Form of Agreement
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
PUBLIC WORKS
Page 2 of 2
Board, Committee and/or Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends that the Town Council approve 1) an Agreement with Quality
Excavation, LTD and the Town of Prosper regarding the Prosper Road Improvement Project
2012, Prosper Trail (Coit Road to Custer Road) and 2) a resolution authorizing the Town
Manager to execute the same.
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. 12-49
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
PROSPER TEXAS, HEREBY AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER
OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS, TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT FOR THE PROSPER ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 2012
PROSPER TRAIL, COIT ROAD TO CUSTER ROAD BETWEEN
QUALITY EXCAVATION, LTD AND THE TOWN OF PROSPER.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: The Town Manager of the Town of Prosper, Texas, is hereby
authorized to execute, on behalf of the Town Council of the Town of Prosper, Texas, to
execute an Agreement for the Prosper Road Improvements 2012 Prosper Trail, Coit
Road to Custer Road between Quality Excavation, LTD and the Town of Prosper, as
hereto attached.
SECTION 2: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
RESOLVED THIS THE 10th day of July, 2012
_________________________
Ray Smith, Mayor
ATTEST TO:
___________________________
Amy Piukana, Town Secretary
STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT
STATE OF TEXAS §
§
COUNTY OF COLLIN §
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 10th of July, 2012, by and between the TOWN OF
PROSPER, TEXAS, a Texas Municipal Corporation, of the County of Collin and State of Texas, acting through Mike
Land, Town Manager, thereunto duly authorized so to do, Party of the First Part, hereinafter termed OWNER, and
QUALITY EXCAVATION, LTD, Party of the Second Part, hereinafter termed CONTRACTOR.
WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinafter mentioned, to be
made and performed by the OWNER, and under the conditions expressed in the bond bearing even date herewith,
the said CONTRACTOR hereby agrees with the said OWNER to commence and complete the construction of certain
improvements generally described as follows:
PROSPER ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2012
PROSPER TRAIL (COIT ROAD – CUSTER ROAD)
and all extra work in connection therewith, under the terms as stated in the General Conditions of the Agreement
and at his (or their) own proper cost and expenses to furnish all the materials, supplies, machinery, equipment,
tools, superintendence, labor, insurance, and other accessories and services necessary to complete the said
construction, in accordance with the conditions and prices stated in the Proposal attached hereto, and in accordance
with the Advertisement for Proposals, General and Special Conditions of Agreement, Plans and other drawings and
printed or written explanatory matter thereof, and the Specifications and addenda therefore, as prepared by Frank
E. Jaromin, P.E., herein entitled the ENGINEER, each of which has been identified by the CONTRACTOR and the
ENGINEER, together with the CONTRACTOR'S written Proposal, and the Performance and Payment Bonds hereto
attached; all of which are made a part hereof and collectively evidence and constitute the entire contract
(hereinafter collectively called the "Contract Documents" or the "Contract").
The CONTRACTOR hereby agrees to commence work within ten (10) days after the date written notice to do
so shall have been given to him, and to substantially complete the same by August 13, 2012, subject to such
extensions of time as are provided by the General and Special Conditions.
The OWNER agrees to pay the CONTRACTOR in current funds the price or prices shown in the Proposal,
which forms a part of this contract, such payments to be subject to the General and Special Conditions of the
contract.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to these presents have executed this Agreement in the year and day
first above written.
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS QUALITY EXCAVATION, LTD.
Party of the First Part Party of the Second Part
(OWNER) (CONTRACTOR)
By: By: ______________
ATTEST: ATTEST:
________________________
Page 1 of 1
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Matthew B. Garrett, Finance Director
CC: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – July 10, 2012
Date: July 5, 2012
Agenda Item:
Consider and act upon a resolution amending authorized representatives to transact business
with TexPool Participant Services.
Description of Agenda Item:
This resolution is necessary to remove Mike Land from the list of authorized users on the
Town’s TexPool accounts.
Budget Impact:
N/A
Legal Obligations and Review:
No legal review is required.
Attached Documents:
Resolution
Board, Committee and/or Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends that the Town Council approve the resolution amending authorized
representatives to transact business with TexPool Participant Services.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
Administration
Page 1 of 1
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Matthew B. Garrett, Finance Director
CC: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – July 10, 2012
Date: July 5, 2012
Agenda Item:
Consider and act upon resolution 12-51 authorizing individuals named to endorse checks and
orders for the payment of money or otherwise withdraw or transfer funds on deposit with
Independent Bank or any other Town depositories and exercise all of the powers listed in the
resolution.
Description of Agenda Item:
An update to our list of individuals authorized to endorse checks is required given changes to
town staff. The resolution will authorize Finance Director Matthew Garrett, Mayor Ray Smith and
Town Secretary Amy Piukana as signers to Independent Bank and other depository accounts.
Budget Impact:
N/A
Legal Obligations and Review:
N/A
Attached Documents:
Resolution
Board/Committee Recommendation:
N/A
Town Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Town Council approve the item as part of the consent agenda.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
Administration
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. 12-51
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS, HEREBY
AUTHORIZING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR, THE MAYOR AND THE TOWN SECRETARY
TO ENDORSE CHECKS AND ORDERS FOR THE PAYMENT OF MONEY OR OTHERWISE
WITHDRAW OR TRANSFER FUNDS ON DEPOSIT WITH INDEPENDENT BANK OR ANY
OTHER TOWN DEPOSITORY AND EXERCISE ALL OF THE POWERS LISTED IN THE
RESOLUTION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
PROSPER, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: The Town approved signatories for current and possible future Independent Bank
accounts and those of any other depository of the Town of Prosper, Texas, are hereby authorized to include the
Finance Director, the Mayor and the Town Secretary. Presently the incumbents for each position herein
authorized are Matthew Garrett, Ray Smith and Amy Piukana respectively.
SECTION 2: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
DULY RESOLVED AND APPROVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
PROSPER, TEXAS, on this the 10th day of July, 2012.
____________________________________
Ray Smith
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Amy Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Chris Copple, AICP, Planning Director
Cc: Mike Land, Town Manager
Hulon T. Webb, Jr., P.E., Director of Development Services/Town Engineer
Re: Town Council Meeting – July 10, 2012
Date: July 5, 2012
Agenda Item:
Consider and act upon whether to direct staff to submit a written notice of appeal on behalf of the
Town Council to the Development Services Department, pursuant to Chapter 4, Section 1.5(C)(7)
and 1.6(B)(7) of the Town’s Zoning Ordinance, regarding action taken by the Planning & Zoning
Commission on any site plan or preliminary site plan.
Description of Agenda Item:
Attached are the site plans and/or preliminary site plans acted on by the Planning & Zoning
Commission at their July 2, 2012 meeting. Per the Town’s Zoning Ordinance, the Town Council
has the ability to direct staff to submit a written notice of appeal on behalf of the Town Council to
the Development Services Department for any site plan or preliminary site plan acted on by the
Planning & Zoning Commission.
Attached Documents:
1. Preliminary site plan for Frontier Office Park on 23.3± acres, located on the southeast
corner of Frontier Parkway and future Victory Way. Approved by a vote of 7-0.
Town Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends the Town Council take no action on this item.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
PLANNING
FRONTIEROFFICE PARKTOWN OF PROSPERCOLLIN COUNTY, TEXASPLOTTED BY MCGUIRE, KELSEY 6/28/2012 9:04 AMDWG NAME K:\FRI_CIVIL\68179001\DWG\WESTOFFICE\PLANSHEETS\01-PRELIMINARYSITEPLAN-WEST.DWG [Layout1]LAST SAVED 6/28/2012 9:02 AM
00 60'120'
GRAPHIC SCALE 60'
TOWN OF PROSPER
SITE PLAN NOTES
LEGEND
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
OWNER:ENGINEER:PRELIMINARYSITE PLANSITE DATA SUMMARY TABLE LOTS 1-5
TOWN CASE NO: D12-0015 PSP FRONTIER OFFICE PARK
Page 1 of 1
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Mitzi Wadsworth, Assistant to the Town Manager
CC: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – July 10, 2012
Date: July 5, 2012
Agenda Item:
Consider and act upon a revised Board configuration for the Prosper Community Library Board.
Description of Agenda Item:
The current board member configuration for the Prosper Community Library Board Membership
states that the Board is made up of five members, including the Superintendent of Schools, a
member of the Town Staff, two members appointed by the Town Council, and one member
appointed by the PISD Board of Trustees. The Board would like to change the make-up of
Board members, as follows: Five members, including a member of the Town staff, three
members appointed by the Town Council, and one member appointed by the PISD
Superintendent.
Budget Impact:
None.
Legal Obligations and Review:
No legal review is required.
Attached Documents:
Revised Prosper Community Library Board Membership Configuration
Resolution No. 12-47
Board, Committee and/or Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends that:
“The Prosper Town Council approves the revised board member configuration regarding the
make-up of the Prosper Community Library Board.”
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. 12-47
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS,
HEREBY REVISING THE BOARD CONFIGURATION OF THE PROSPER
COMMUNITY LIBRARY BOARD.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: The Town of Prosper, Texas, hereby revises the board
configuration of the Prosper Community Library Board, as hereto attached.
SECTION 3: This Resolution shall take effect upon passage.
RESOLVED THIS THE 10th day of July, 2012.
APPROVED:
_________________________
Ray Smith, Mayor
ATTEST TO:
_______________________
Amy Piukana, TRMC
Town Secretary
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Mike Land, Town Manager
Re: Town Council Meeting – Tuesday July 10, 2012
Date: July 6, 2012
Agenda Item:
Consider and approve a Resolution of the Town Council encouraging the Public Utility
Commission of Texas to adopt a Smart Meter opt-out program.
Description of Agenda Item:
As a result of citizen input during the past two Council meetings staff has been in contact with
the Town’s Attorney’s, Representative Paxton’s office, Senator Estes office and the Public Utility
Commission regarding the current mandatory installation of smart meters occurring throughout
Prosper and the State.
The issue has been well presented by the citizens during their public comments and there are
multiple opinions, papers and research activities documenting the pro’s and con’s of the use of
radio frequency transmitters which in their use create what is referred to as the smart meter.
It is also abundantly clear that local municipalities have no regulatory authority over the
installation of these types of meters. Per the Town Council’s instruction I have requested an
opinion from the Town’s lead attorney in addressing electric service related issues Geoffrey Gay
on the Town’s authority as it relates to this issue. Mr. Gay provides a thorough explanation of
the legislation approved in 2005 and amended in 2007 in which the St ate Legislature introduced
language into the Texas Utilities Code to provide that:
“It is the intent of the legislature that net metering and advanced meter information
networks be deployed as rapidly as possible to allow customers to better manage
energy use and control costs, and to facilitate demand response initiatives.”
The PUC followed this mandate from the legislature and agreed to a roll-out of advanced meters
for Oncor several years ago.
Please note that Electric Cooperatives such as CoServe are not under the control of the PUC.
While Mr. Gay’s letter addressing several issues it is his last paragraph that summarizes the
Town’s only position, that the Town has no authority to gain relief from the implementation of
advanced meters and that the Town Council should encourage citizens to express their
complaints to Legislators.
In reviewing the Town’s franchise agreements with Oncor and CoServe Courtney Kuykendall,
the Town’s Attorney, also concluded that these agreements do not provide for the Town to stop,
delay or prohibit the installation of these or any other type of meter.
In addition to encouraging this action, the PUC is currently evaluating if and how an opt-out
program could work for consumers. To this end, the attached resolution is offered for the Town
Council’s consideration.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
ADMINISTRATION
This Resolution basically encourages the PUC to positively consider creating an opt-out process
for citizens.
In addition to the materials that CoServe has provided to staff and that will be available in the
Community Library starting on Monday July 9th, they did provide a response to the question of
what reporting is required from them by the Department of Energy for accepting the grant. That
response is also attached.
Finally, Oncor will be parking their Mobile Experience Center outside of Municipal Chambers on
Tuesday, remaining in place through Wednesday. The purpose of the vehicle is to demonstrate
the smart meter program and allow Oncor staff an opportunity to answer questions. The MEC
will be open to the public beginning on Tuesday July 10th at 9:00 a.m. and remain open until
8:00 p.m. It will also be open on Wednesday July 11th from 11:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.
Budget Impact:
Approving this Resolution has no budget impact.
Legal Obligations and Review:
The Town’s attorney has reviewed the attached Resolution
Attached Documents:
1. A Resolution of the Town Council encouraging the Public Utility Commission of Texas to
adopt a smart meter opt-out program.
2. Letter from the Geoffrey Gay offering an opinion on Municipal Authority over
implementation of smart meters.
3. Email from Courtney Kuykendall regarding her discussions with the PUC’s Legal
Services Director Margaret Pemberton.
4. Email from Craig Chambers, Area Manager for CoServe regarding Department of
Energy grant recipient reporting requirements.
5. Flyer from Oncor regarding their Mobile Experience Center that will be in Prosper on
Tuesday and Wednesday July 10th and 11th.
Town Staff Recommendation:
Town Staff recommends that the Prosper Town Council approves the Resolution encouraging
the Public Utility Commission of Texas to adopt a smart meter opt-out program and forward said
resolution to State Representatives and the PUC.
RESOLUTION (SMART METER OPT-OUT PROGRAM) PAGE 1
#612151
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. __________(R)
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
PROSPER, TEXAS, HEREBY ENCOURAGING THE PUBLIC UTILITY
COMMISSION OF TEXAS TO ADOPT A SMART METER OPT-OUT
PROGRAM FOR SMART METER INSTALLATION BY INVESTOR
OWNED UTILITIES AND ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Prosper, Texas (“Town Council”)
has investigated and determined that investor owned utilities and electric cooperatives
have begun installing smart meters within the Town of Prosper, Texas (“Town”); and
WHEREAS, it has come to the attention of the Town Council that the installation
of smart meters is of great concern to the citizens of the Town because citizens
currently do not have a choice with regard to whether a smart meter is installed on their
property; and
WHEREAS, the Public Utility Commission of Texas (“PUC”) has begun the rule
making process in Project #40190 “PUC Proceeding to Evaluate the Feasibility of
Instituting a Smart Meter Opt-Out Program” and is currently accepting comments on
this Project; and
WHEREAS, in a letter to Donna L. Nelson, Chairman of the PUC, dated,
February 10, 2012, Dennis Bonnen, Texas State Representative, District 25, stated that
it was not the intent of the Texas Legislature to force smart meters on customers; and
WHEREAS, as a result of the findings above, the Town Council has investigated
and determined and finds that it will be advantageous, beneficial and in the best
interests of the citizens of the Town to encourage the PUC to adopt rules and
regulations providing, to the greatest extent possible, a smart meter opt-out program for
smart meter installation by investor owned utilities and electric cooperatives.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: Findings Incorporated. The findings set forth above are
incorporated into the body of this Resolution as if fully set forth herein.
SECTION 2: Adoption of Smart Meter Opt-Out Program. The Town Council
hereby encourages the PUC to adopt rules and regulations providing, to the greatest
extent possible, a smart meter opt-out program for smart meter installation by investor
owned utilities and electric cooperatives.
RESOLUTION (SMART METER OPT-OUT PROGRAM) PAGE 2
#612151
SECTION 3: Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon
its passage.
RESOLVED THIS, THE 10th day of July, 2012.
______________________________
RAY SMITH, Mayor
ATTEST TO:
_________________________
AMY PIUKANA, Town Secretary
ONCOR SMART TEXAS MOBILE EXPERIENCE CENTER
Overview
Oncor will install more than 3 million smart meters in homes and small businesses in its Texas service area by 2012. The Oncor SMART
TEXAS rethinking energy® Mobile Experience Center (MEC) is part of a consumer education campaign which builds awareness
about the new smart meters. The digital meters are capable of providing consumers and small business owners with greater control
over energy consumption, opportunities for significant savings on electricity costs and the chance to reduce their carbon footprint.
This traveling exhibit showcases the benefits through an interactive learning experience.
What Consumers Can Expect
• Wheelchair accessible trailer featuring an inside exhibit of 1,000 sq. ft. of interior space that includes: interactive kiosks, energy
trivia games, real-world demonstrations and the SMART TEXAS Home featuring smart appliances.
• Oncor educators guide visitors through the MEC, provide information on the smart meter benefits and demonstrate how
consumers now have better control over their energy consumption. Visitors have a chance to receive CFLs, koozies and water
bottles while visiting the exhibit.
Educational zones throughout the center create a complete learning experience:
Zone A – Learn about Oncor and the differences
between the old and new smart meters
Zone B – Learn simple steps to save money on your
electricity costs
Zone C – Visualize the future with a smart home
featuring smart appliances that demonstrate
home area networks
Zone D – Understand how the smart meter can build
a sustainable energy future, plus find out
when you will receive your smart meter
Zone E – Search the “Power To Choose” website for
information on electricity plans and providers.
Also see how to use www.smartmetertexas.com
to view your energy usage patterns
JumboTron – 20' tall, 9' x 12'
LED screen, supports two
cameras up to 400 feet
away. Plays DVDs, back-
ground music, PowerPoint
and YouTube videos, in-
cludes sound system with
wireless microphones.
Setup Options
A site visit may be required, but the following footprints represent the maximum and minimum space required. Electricity is run from
a generator if the event is less than three days. If longer, additional arrangements will need to be made. The trailer is 53-feet long and
14-feet tall.
• Footprint 1 – 101' x 60' includes exhibit tractor, trailer, JumboTron trailer attached to Ford dually truck, and two 10' x 10' canopy
tents set up outside at the exhibit entrance and exit.
• Footprint 2 – 83' x 40' includes exhibit trailer, JumboTron trailer and two 10' x 10' canopy tents set up outside at the exhibit
entrance and exit.
To learn more, visit www.smarttexas.com.
FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK!
enabled by
Double Expansion Trailer
JumboTronTrailer
10' x 10'Canopy Tent
10' x 10'Canopy Tent
18’
24’ 9”
18’
65’
10’
10’
40’
14’
Footprint 2
enabled by
RECLAIMING OUR SKIES
REFINING OUR CONSUMPTION
REDEFINING OUR FUTURE
WW W.SMA RTTEXAS.COM
18’
14’
20’ 6”
8’ 6”
38’ 6”
65’18’
10’
59’
10’
101’
24’ 9”
Ford Super Duty Crew Cab
JumboTronTrailer
10' x 10'Canopy Tent
10' x 10'Canopy TentTractorDouble Expansion Trailer
Footprint 1
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Chris Copple, AICP, Planning Director
Cc: Mike Land, Town Manager
Hulon T. Webb, Jr., P.E., Director of Development Services/Town Engineer
Re: Town Council Meeting – July 10, 2012
Date: July 6, 2012
Agenda Item:
Discuss and provide direction regarding the 2012 Town of Prosper Comprehensive Plan Update.
(CA12-0001).
Description of Agenda Item:
Chapter 213 of the Texas Local Government Code allows for municipalities to adopt a
Comprehensive Plan for the long range development of the municipality. The Texas Local
Government Code also allows for the municipality to define the content and design of the
Comprehensive Plan. The Town’s Charter requires the Town’s Comprehensive Plan include the
Future Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan. The Charter notes the Comprehensive Plan shall
serve as a guide to all future Town Council action concerning land use and development
regulations and expenditures for capital improvements. The Town’s existing Comprehensive Plan
was adopted by the Town Council on October 26, 2004.
On March 8, 2011, the Town Council approved a professional services agreement between the
Town of Prosper and Freese & Nichols, Inc., regarding the update of the Town’s Comprehensive
Plan, which includes updating the Town’s vision, goals and objectives, Future Land Use Plan,
transportation plan, infrastructure assessment, housing strategies plan, economic analysis, and
implementation plan.
On April 26, 2011, the Town Council appointed the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee
(CPAC) to serve in an advisory capacity to the Planning & Zoning Commission and Town Council.
The CPAC held seven meetings, from May 2011 – March 2012, to assist Freese & Nichols, Inc.
and Town staff in securing a better understanding of the community’s vision and to review sections
of the Comprehensive Plan Update as they were drafted. In addition to regular CPAC meetings, in
June 2011 and February 2012, Town Hall meetings were held to inform citizens of the
Comprehensive Plan Update process and to receive input on the draft Comprehensive Plan. On
March 19, 2012, the CPAC made final comments on the draft Comprehensive Plan and approved
a motion to start the public hearing process to adopt the Comprehensive Plan.
Budget Impact:
There are no significant budget implications associated with approval of the Comprehensive Plan
Update, but the Comprehensive Plan shall serve as a guide to all future Town Council action
concerning land use and development regulations and expenditures for capital improvements.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
PLANNING
Legal Obligations and Review:
The Towns Charter requires the Town Council to hold at least one public hearing prior to taking
action on any additions or amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The Town Council held the
required public hearing on June 26, 2012.
Attached Documents:
1. The 2012 Comprehensive Plan Update.
2. Freese & Nichols PowerPoint presentation from the June 26th public hearing.
3. Minutes from the May 15, 2012 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting.
4. Economic Analysis Explanation from Freese & Nichols.
5. Summary of Planning & Zoning Commission’s Requested Changes.
6. Draft Executive Summary.
Planning & Zoning Commission Recommendation:
At their May 15, 2012 meeting, the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended the Town
Council approve the 2012 Town of Prosper Comprehensive Plan Update by a vote of 4-3, subject
to:
1. The Commission’s list of requested changes being reconciled in the Comprehensive Plan,
and
2. The addition of an executive summary, which is to include the Future Land Use Plan, being
placed at the beginning of the Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioners Senkel, McClung, and Cox voted in opposition to the motion. Commissioners
Senkel, McClung, and Cox had previously voted in support of a motion to approve the
Comprehensive Plan Update subject to the Commission’s list of requested changes being
reconciled in the Comprehensive Plan and removing the references to lot sizes on pages 39, 47,
and 61 of the Comprehensive Plan. That motion failed by a vote of 3-4. The minutes from the May
15, 2012 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting are attached.
Town Staff Recommendation:
Town staff recommends the Town Council discuss and provide direction regarding the 2012 Town
of Prosper Comprehensive Plan Update.
The Town Charter does require the Town Council to adopt or reject the proposed revision to the
Comprehensive Plan within sixty (60) days. The last regularly scheduled Town Council meeting
within the sixty (60) day time frame is scheduled for August 14, 2012.
ProsperComprehensivePlan
TownofProsper,Texas
AdoptedXXXX,2012
Prosperisaplacewhereeveryonematters.
i Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
Acknowledgements
TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS
Ray Smith, Mayor
Dave Benefield, Place 1
Kenneth Dugger, Place 2, Mayor Pro-Tem
Curry Vogelsang Jr., Place 3
Meigs Miller, Place 4
Danny Wilson, Place 5
Jason Dixon, Place 6
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS
Mark DeMattia, Chair
Mike McClung, Vice Chair
Chris Keith, Secretary
Bruce Carlin
Jim Cox
Bill Senkel
Rick Turner
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Jason Dixon, Chair
Craig Moody, Vice Chair
Ane Casady, Secretary
Kelly Cooper
Mark DeMattia
Michael Goddard
Kyle Huckelberry
Ann Lieber
Meigs Miller
Eric Nishimoto
Jordan Simms
Daniel Ting
Doug Trumbull
TOWN STAFF
Mike Land, Town Manager
Hulon T. Webb, Jr., P.E., Director of Development
Services/Town Engineer
Chris Copple, AICP, Planning Director
CONSULTANT: FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC
Dan Sefko, FAICP, Group Manager
Edmund Haas, AICP, Project Manager
Brandon Gonzalez, Project Planner
ii
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
iii Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
Table of Contents
WHAT IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? ............................................................................ 1
PLANNING TO PLAN ..................................................................................................... 2
Regional Relationship ............................................................................................................................... 3
Population Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 4
Regional Growth ....................................................................................................................................... 5
Housing Characteristics ............................................................................................................................. 6
Existing Land Use ...................................................................................................................................... 7
Development Patterns .............................................................................................................................. 8
Physical Development Patterns ................................................................................................................ 9
Town Limits ............................................................................................................................................. 11
Planning Context ..................................................................................................................................... 13
Regional Initiatives .................................................................................................................................. 17
COMMUNITY VISION ................................................................................................. 19
Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CPAC) ................................................................................. 20
SWOT Analysis......................................................................................................................................... 21
Vision Statement ..................................................................................................................................... 22
Visual Character Survey .......................................................................................................................... 23
Town Hall Meeting .................................................................................................................................. 32
Community Goals .................................................................................................................................... 36
COMMUNITY CHARACTER .......................................................................................... 37
Process .................................................................................................................................................... 38
Land Use Types ....................................................................................................................................... 39
Density .................................................................................................................................................... 44
Land Use Map ......................................................................................................................................... 44
Land Use Acreages .................................................................................................................................. 47
Ultimate Capacity .................................................................................................................................... 47
Population Projections ............................................................................................................................ 49
Community Livability .............................................................................................................................. 50
Land Use Concepts .................................................................................................................................. 51
Livable Neighborhoods ........................................................................................................................... 58
Corridors and Districts ............................................................................................................................ 65
Image Enhancement ............................................................................................................................... 71
Maintaining compatibility between the Zoning Map and the Future Land Use Plan ............................. 74
iv
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION PLAN ............................................................................................ 75
Planning Context ..................................................................................................................................... 76
Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................................. 79
Projected Conditions ............................................................................................................................... 79
Planning Principles .................................................................................................................................. 81
Transportation Plan ................................................................................................................................ 85
Transportation Plan Map ........................................................................................................................ 87
Cross Sections ......................................................................................................................................... 89
Plan Modifications .................................................................................................................................. 93
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 97
Analysis from Catalyst ............................................................................................................................. 97
Future Land Use Plan Acreage ................................................................................................................ 98
Analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 99
Economic Analysis Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 102
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT ............................................................................... 103
Previous Planning Efforts ...................................................................................................................... 103
Infrastructure Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 103
Water System ........................................................................................................................................ 104
Wastewater System .............................................................................................................................. 109
Storm Drain System .............................................................................................................................. 113
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .......................................................................................... 115
Proactive and Reactive Implementation............................................................................................... 115
Roles of the Comprehensive Plan ......................................................................................................... 116
Regulatory Mechanisms ........................................................................................................................ 117
Implementation Objectives and Strategies .......................................................................................... 118
1 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
PLANNING CONTEXT
What is a Comprehensive Plan?
The comprehensive plan for the Town of
Prosper is intended to guide and direct future
development decisions made by Town staff,
elected officials and all other decision makers.
The comprehensive plan tells the story of who
the community is and what it wishes to
become. This document is intended to serve as
a flexible long-range planning tool that guides
the growth and physical development of
Prosper for ten years, twenty years or an even
longer period of time.
The Comprehensive Plan is a long-range
statement of public policy. According to
Chapter 213 of the Texas Local Government
Code, a comprehensive plan may:
x Include but is not limited to provisions
on land use, transportation and public
facilities;
x Consist of a single plan or a coordinated
set of plans organized by subject and
geographic area;
x Be used to coordinate and guide the
establishment of development
regulations.
Legal Authority
The right for a community to plan is rooted in
the Texas Local Government Code. The
following are the specific chapters which
directly relate to the Town’s ability to plan.
x Chapter 211: Allows the governing body
of a community to regulate zoning.
x Chapter 212: Allows the governing
body of a community to regulate
subdivision development within the City
and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ).
x Chapter 213: Allows the governing body
of a community to create a
comprehensive plan for the long-range
development of the community and to
address a wide range of issues including
land use and transportation.
When putting together a puzzle, it is
often helpful to know what the
ultimate outcome of the puzzle will
be.
While you would still be able to
assemble the puzzle without the
vision, knowing your ultimate vision
makes assembling the puzzle much
easier. The Comprehensive Plan
works in this same fashion…it serves
as the vision and makes assembling
the various pieces of the
development puzzle much easier.
Whil ld till b bl t
2
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
PLANNING CONTEXT
Planning to Plan
The Town of Prosper sits at an exciting and
determining point in its history. Decisions made
now will have a lasting physical impact on the
Town for generations to come. The Town has a
significant amount of vacant land, and while
many pre-arranged development agreements
currently exist, the ultimate objective of this
Plan is to set policies and a vision to ultimately
guide such developments, ensuring that all
development that occurs within Prosper is
compatible and fits into the community’s long
term vision.
This 2012 Comprehensive Plan (Plan) will serve
as the compass, or guide for the long-term
growth of the Town. The following Plan will
include an examination of the following issues:
x Future Land Use;
x Livability
x Transportation;
x Economic Analysis; and
x Infrastructure.
A comprehensive plan, however visionary, must
also be rooted in the present. Therefore, prior
to examining the above elements, it will be
important and helpful to understand where
Prosper is today and what planning efforts have
been conducted prior to this Plan. This starting
point, or baseline analysis, will allow
coordination with previous planning efforts.
This examination will be helpful to establish an
understanding of Prosper’s population growth,
housing characteristics, existing land use,
physical constraints and past planning efforts.
Over the past several decades, rapid
development has defined the northern side of
the Dallas/Fort Worth Metropolitan Area. The
DFW Metro Area is now ranked as the 4th
largest metropolitan area in the nation and is
expected to nearly double in size by the year
2050. Growth is not a question, but is
inevitable. Community planning, a vision
accompanied by guiding policies, will help
ensure that Prosper develops in an orderly
fashion, considering and respecting the
physical values of the community and
protecting the quality of life which makes
Prosper one of DFW’s most livable
communities.
3 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
PLANNING CONTEXT
Regional Relationship
The Town of Prosper is located at the
northern edge of the Dallas/Fort Worth
Metropolitan area, in western Collin
County and eastern Denton County. The
Town’s immediate neighbors include
Frisco, McKinney, Celina and Little Elm.
The Town of Prosper is currently situated
at the northern terminus of the Dallas
North Tollway and future expansions will
take the Tollway through the Town. The
Tollway provides direct access to
Downtown Dallas as well as to other
major regional highways, such as Highway
121/Sam Rayburn Tollway, President
George Bush Turnpike and IH 635/LBJ.
Highway 380, traversing the southern
border of the Town, provides access to the
cities of McKinney and Denton and to
Interstate 35 and Highway 75/Central
Expressway.
Location Mileage
Downtown Dallas 34
Love Field 31
DFW Airport 33
Stonebriar Centre (Frisco) 11
Dallas Galleria 23
Addison 22
McKinney (downtown) 13
Denton 20
75 Central Expressway 11
Interstate 35 23
SH 121 12
President George Bush Turnpike 18
gp
4
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
PLANNING CONTEXT
Population Analysis Examining historical population growth trends
helps to tell the story of how Prosper has grown
in the past and may give some insight into how
Prosper may grow in the future. There are a
number of different variables that must be
considered when examining population growth
trends, but one of the primary factors is
location. Communities in rural areas, not
adjacent to a major metropolitan area, typically
experience very gradual yet steady growth over
time. Many rural communities experience very
little growth at all, and in some cases
experience negative growth, or decline.
Communities near metropolitan areas,
however, are characterized differently.
Typically speaking, communities on the fringe of
metropolitan areas began as rural, somewhat
isolated communities characterized by slow but
steady growth. Eventually, the urbanized/
developed area encroaches on these rural
communities causing a period of very rapid and
robust growth until the community reaches its
carrying capacity, or build-out. At this point,
the growth rapidly slows once again. This
pattern has characterized growth within the
North Dallas region. Garland, Richardson,
Plano, Frisco and McKinney are all examples of
this type of growth.
When examining historical growth patterns for
the Town of Prosper, we see that Prosper, too,
fits into this type of growth pattern. In 1970,
the community contained only 500 residents.
Between 1970 and 2000, the community added
approximately 1600 residents. Since 2000,
however, the Town has added over 7,000 new
residents, indicating that Prosper has likely
reached the beginning of a period of rapid and
robust growth. Although impossible to predict
the future housing market, reasonable
assumptions seem to indicate that this period of
rapid growth over the past 10 years was not an
accident, but is indicative of the rapid northern
expansion of the DFW Metropolitan Area.
Based on this assumption, it is likely that rapid
and robust growth will continue to characterize
Prosper for the decades to come.
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
11,000
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year Population Change Growth CAGR*
1970 501 - -
7.6%
1980 675 174 34.7%
1990 1,018 343 50.8%
2000 2,097 1,079 106.0%
2010 9,350 7,253 345.9%
*Compound Annual Growth Rate
Source: United States Census
Population Synopsis
From 1970 to 2000, the Town of Prosper
experienced relatively fast, but steady,
population growth. Since 2000, however, the
Town has experienced very rapid and robust
growth and reached a population of 9,350
residents according to the 2010 U.S. Census.
2011 NCTCOG Population estimates put the
population of Prosper at 10,550 residents.
The Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) is a
method of analyzing annual average rates of
growth. Between 1970 and 2010, Prosper
experienced a CAGR of 7.6 percent. Generally
speaking, this is a high rate of growth for a
community. Since 2000, the CAGR for the
community has risen dramatically to 16.1
percent.
he
in2011: 10,550
2010: 9,350
5 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
PLANNING CONTEXT
Regional Growth
2010 U.S. Census numbers provided insight into
just how rapidly the State of Texas, and its
metropolitan areas, are growing. The
Dallas/Fort Worth Metropolitan area added
nearly 1,500,000 people during the 2000-2010
period. Collin County, in particular, has
experienced some of the most robust growth
over the past several decades. Collin County
alone added nearly 200,000 new residents
between 2000 and 2010 and is rapidly
approaching the 1,000,000 resident mark, a
significant milestone considering that only
67,000 residents called Collin County home in
1970.
Between 1970 and 2000, Little Elm and Frisco
experienced the fastest rates of growth. Since
2000, however, Little Elm and Prosper have
experienced the highest rates of growth at
21.7% and 16.2% respectively. Although Frisco
experienced the third highest rate of growth
between 2000 and 2010, the City experienced
the highest numerical increase, adding over
83,000 new residents during the past decade. It
is also important to note that Prosper and every
one of its neighbors experienced higher rates of
growth over the past decade than in the prior
years. This indicates that growth within Prosper
and its neighbors is increasing.
Place Year CAGR
1970-
2000
CAGR
2000-2010
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Collin County 66,920 144,576 264,036 491,675 782,341 6.3% 4.8%
Celina 1,272 1,520 1,737 1,861 6,028 4.0% 12.5%
Frisco 1,845 3,499 6,138 33,714 116,989 10.9% 13.3%
Little Elm 363 926 1,255 3,646 25,898 11.3% 21.7%
McKinney 15,193 16,256 21,283 54,369 131,117 5.5% 9.2%
Prosper 501 675 1,018 2,097 9,423 7.6% 16.2%
Forecasted Regional Growth
The Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area is
currently the fourth largest metropolitan area
in the United States, behind New York City,
Los Angeles and Chicago. According to the
North Central Texas Council of Governments
(NCTCOG), the population of the Dallas/Fort
Worth metropolitan region is expected to
reach 9.8 million by 2035 and 10.5 million by
2040. This would result in the addition of
over 3 million new residents over the next 20-
30 years.
Source: 2010 Census
6
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
PLANNING CONTEXT
Housing Characteristics
Household type refers to how the people who
live within a household are related, if they do
not live alone. Generally speaking, Prosper
contains a large number of married-couple
households and households with children under
the age of 18.
Within Prosper, the average household size is
3.4 persons per household (PPH) for single
family dwelling units and 2.4 persons per
household for multifamily units. This number is
significantly higher than the State average of
2.81 PPH, Frisco at 2.94 PPH, and Celina at 3.10
PPH. Only Little Elm has a larger average
household size than Prosper at 3.43 PPH. This
data indicates a large number of families call
Prosper home.
Occupancy rate is an important indicator of the
local housing market and housing saturation. A
high occupancy rate may indicate an immediate
need for additional housing stock to
accommodate new population growth. A low
occupancy rate may indicate an oversaturation
of homes in the housing market. Typically,
healthy cities have at least a 90% occupancy
rate, something fairly common in the rapidly
growing DFW area.
Currently, Prosper has a 91.3% occupancy rate
for single family dwelling units. This is
indicative of a healthy housing saturation. The
Town has a 94.5% occupancy rate for
multifamily units. This too is a very healthy
multifamily saturation rate.
92.8%
94.3%
95.1%
92.6%
91.3%
89% 90% 91% 92% 93% 94% 95% 96%
Celina
Frisco
Little Elm
McKinney
Prosper
Single Family Occupancy Rates
3.1
2.9
3.4
3.0
3.4
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
Celina Frisco Little Elm McKinney Prosper
Persons per Household (PPH)
Household Type
Family Households 85.1%
Non-Family Households 14.9%
Of the total Family Households, 53.1% have
children under the age of 18, 75.2% are
married couple households, 3% are single
parent male households, and 6.9% are single
female parent households.
12.1% of the total households in Prosper are
householder living alone.
Source: 2010 Census
Source: 2010 Census
7 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
PLANNING CONTEXT
Existing Land Use
The existing land use of the Town of Prosper is
predominantly characterized by vacant land.
Within the Town boundaries, the majority of
land, 80%, is currently vacant. This is a
significant portion of land that will drastically
impact the overall urban form of the
community as it develops. While a majority of
undeveloped property in Prosper has already
been zoned, there may be opportunities to
work with developers to incorporate the
identified community vision. Such
opportunities should be pursued, particularly as
circumstances arise which necessitate zoning
adjustments or changes.
When excluding vacant land and only examining
developed land, the predominant land use in
Prosper is single family residential. Parks &
Open Space constitutes the second highest land
use followed by public/semi-public and
commercial. Discussed previously, very little
residential variations currently exist.
Additionally, only 2% of the developed land use
is currently occupied by retail.
Duplex
0% Commercial
8%
Industrial
3%
Multi-Family
1%
Mobile Home
1%
Office
0% Parks & Open
Space
15%
Public Semi-
Public
10%
Retail
2%
Single-Family
59%
Commercial
2%
Industrial
1%
Multi-
Family
0% Mobile
Home
0%
Office
0%
Parks &
Open Space
3%
Public Semi-
Public
2%
Retail
0%
Single
Family
12%
Vacant
80%
All Land
Developed Land Only
8
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
PLANNING CONTEXT
Development Patterns
The majority of development within Prosper has
occurred over the past decade, in conjunction
with the rapid increase in population. The vast
majority of development has been single family
residential, although some retail has been
added along Preston Road.
Most new residential construction has occurred
to the east of Coleman Road and the original
town center. Some residential development has
begun on the western side of the planning area,
with more expected in the near future. A
significant number of large-lot homes were
constructed in Prosper prior to 2005, coinciding
with septic tank requirements that mandate a
minimum lot size of 1 acre. As sewer service
has been expanded and has become more
readily available, lot sizes within new residential
areas have become significantly smaller. In
2011, over 80 percent of approved housing
permits were on lots under 15,000 square feet
in size. In 2011, only 6 building permits were
issued to lots at or above one acre in size while
51 permits, approximately 14 percent, were
issued on lot sizes under 10,000 square feet.
The amount of vacant land within the
community is advantageous, because it allows
for new development opportunities on
undeveloped land, rather than more expensive
redevelopment. It will be important to ensure
that the thoroughfare plan is coordinated with
land use, to ensure that appropriate right-of-
way is acquired during the subdivision of land.
Additionally, it will be important to ensure
connectivity is provided within and between
new residential subdivisions, so that upon
buildout, a connected street system serves the
community.
Finally, a significant amount of infill land is
available within the community. This land is
located between subdivisions and along major
roadways. It will be important to insure that
development in these areas is compatible with
adjacent residential subdivisions.
Large-Lot Residential
Vacant Land/Infill
Small-Lot Residential
9 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
PLANNING CONTEXT
Physical Development Patterns
Local development patterns refer to the factors
that have influenced the shape and growth of
the Town. Understanding such features creates
knowledge of how the Town can grow in the
future. These patterns are divided into two
primary categories: “Natural Constraints”
which examine the geographical aspects of
Prosper and “Man-Made Constraints,” which
examine features which have been constructed
or added to the Town.
Natural Constraints
Natural features influence what type of
development can occur and where such
development can occur. Topography, soils,
vegetation, and wildlife are all factors which can
have a direct effect on development within the
Town and are all important factors which
should be considered during the planning
process.
The Town of Prosper is located along a major
ridge line which runs to the east of Preston
Road. Areas to the west of the ridge line drain
into Lake Lewisville. Areas to the east of the
ridge line drain towards Lake Lavon.
Most topographical variations within Prosper
are located along the major ridge line, near
Preston Road. While a certain degree of
topography exists within Prosper, the relative
flatness of Prosper and the surrounding area is
advantageous for accommodating future
development.
The two largest floodplain areas are located in
the extreme eastern and western portions of
the community; Doe Branch Creek in the west
and Wilson Creek and Rutherford Branch Creek
in the east. The floodplain areas along Doe
Branch Creek, Wilson Creek and Rutherford
Branch Creek contain the most natural tree
cover within the planning area.
Doe Branch Creek
Wilson Creek
Rutherford Branch Creek
10
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
PLANNING CONTEXT
Man-Made Features
The importance of man-made features, such as
transportation facilities, Town boundaries and
infrastructure, are significant factors that
greatly influence development patterns. The
following discussion relates to the significant
man-made features which currently exist within
Prosper.
Preston Road, Highway 380 and the future
Dallas North Tollway are the major arterial
roadways within the community. As
development occurs, Teel Parkway, Legacy
Drive, Coit Road, FM 1385/Gee Road and Custer
Road will grow in importance and will provide
additional north-to-south corridors within the
community. Prosper Trail and First Street will
serve as major east-to-west corridors within the
community. In addition to these roadways, the
Dallas North Tollway will serve as a major
transportation addition within the community
and will increase accessibility within the
community, will provide quick access to the
regional highway network and will serve as a
catalyst in attracting new development.
In the State of Texas, the extraterritorial
jurisdiction (ETJ) refers to the land that an
incorporated community may legally annex for
the purpose of planning and accommodating
future development. The Town has entered
into boundary agreements with Frisco,
McKinney, Celina and Little Elm and has no
plans to expand west of FM 1385 at this time.
For this reason, the general planning area for
the Town is established and well-defined,
allowing the Town to concentrate on the
annexation of internal properties. The
advantage of a defined Town boundary is
knowing exactly where Prosper is able to grow.
This enables Town staff to more effectively plan
for growth, particularly the necessary
infrastructure that will be needed to
accommodate future growth within the Town
boundaries.
Prosper Trail
Broadway Street
Dallas North Tollway, Frisco
Z00.511.50.25MilesPlate 1City LimitandETJJanuary 2012FishTrap Rd.Preston Rd.1st. StreetProsper TrailF.M. 1461Coit Rd.F.M. 2478£¤380!(289Legacy Dr.Parvin Rd.Virginia Pkwy..BNSF RRF.M. 2478Preston Rd.Frontier Pkwy.Dallas North TollwayLa Cima Blvd.Custer Rd.Teel Pkwy.GeeF.M. 1385S. ColemanN. ColemanDenton CountyCollin CountyUS 380LegendTOWNETJ
13 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
PLANNING CONTEXT
Planning Context
In order for this Comprehensive Plan to truly be
comprehensive, it will be important to consider
the context in which the Plan is being created.
The planning context includes a number of
different factors including current and past
planning efforts, regional initiatives, and
external issues that, although may be beyond
direct control of the community, have the
ability to directly impact growth decisions,
primarily the Dallas North Tollway extension.
Building upon past planning efforts and
considering external factors which impact
Prospers growth will allow for realistic growth
assumptions to be made and will help to insure
a cohesive, inclusive and truly comprehensive
plan.
Planning Efforts
2004 Comprehensive Plan
In 2004, The Town adopted a Comprehensive
Plan to guide land use decisions within the
community for the next 5 to 10 years. This Plan
included the development of a future land use
and community framework scenario and also
examined the thoroughfare system and
infrastructure of the community.
It is typically recommended that a
Comprehensive Plan be updated every 5 to 10
years, depending upon how rapidly the
community is growing. Since 2004, Prosper has
continued to grow quite rapidly, necessitating
the review and update of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Land Use decisions made during the 2004
Comprehensive Plan will be examined and
evaluated to determine if changes are
necessary. Various development plans and
agreements have been submitted to or
approved by the Town. Updating the Future
Land Use Plan will re-examine the community’s
vision and values. While the majority of land
within Prosper is zoned, an updated Future
Land Use Plan will provide the framework for
discussions and negotiations with developers as
changes to zoning occur.
2004 Future Land Use Plan
Past
Efforts
Current
Initiatives
External
Issues
Regional
Initiatives
Plan
14
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
PLANNING CONTEXT
2007 Parks Recreation and Open Space
Master Plan
In 2007, the Town completed a Parks,
Recreation and Open Space Master Plan (Parks
Plan) to direct the growth of the Town’s parks
and trails as the community grows over the next
several decades. The importance of the Parks
Plan cannot be understated. Parks provide
recreational opportunities for community
residents and help to increase the overall
quality of life of the community. In the same
manner, trails provide recreational
opportunities for residents to walk, run or bike
throughout the community. Trails provide
access to open space, parks, schools,
community facilities and help to link various
areas of the community to one another.
As development occurs, incremental
implementation of the Parks Plan will occur.
Ensuring that it is updated as changes occur,
will help the Town leverage and negotiate with
developers as vacant land is developed,
ultimately enabling the Town to impose a
proportional cost of park development on
developers.
It will be important that the Parks Plan be
consulted by Town decision makers as
development proposals are received. While
slight deviations may be permitted to
accommodate site layouts, the location of parks
and trails have been chosen for intentional
reasons and therefore the general locations of
trails and parks should be adhered to as close as
possible.
Town Lake Park
Frontier Park
Parks and Trails Master Plan
15 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
PLANNING CONTEXT
2007 Old Town Core District Amendment
In 2007, the Town created the Old Town Core
District Amendment to guide the land use
development of Old Town. This area serves as
the historical core of the community and the
visible center of Prosper. While other areas of
the community are currently more
opportunistic for development due to vacant,
available land, the core of the community
cannot be forgotten. The history of Prosper is
rooted within this area. Commercial, retail,
office and single-family residential uses were
applied within the Old Town area in addition to
areas of green space and the school location.
The planning efforts conducted by the Town in
2007 will be built upon during the creation of
this Plan in order to insure consistency.
2007 Old Town Core District Map
Historic Grain Silos, Old Town Prosper
16
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
PLANNING CONTEXT
2010Thoroughfare Plan
The Town of Prosper recently completed an update to its Thoroughfare Plan, re-examining issues and
redefining the Town’s roadway network in 2010. This Plan will build upon previous work efforts and will
seek to coordinate land use decisions with previous transportation efforts. Any changes that result from
land use decisions will be included as recommendations within this Plan and should be considered as the
future Thoroughfare Plan update is made.
2008-2010 Annexation Plan
The Town of Prosper has taken a proactive
approach towards defining its planning area.
Annexation is a tool that communities use to
proactively manage growth and ensure that
future growth meets the established standards
set by the community. This is particularly
important due to the number of Municipal
Utility Districts (MUD’s) that have developed
along Highway 380, in Celina and other areas
around the Metroplex.
State law requires any community engaging in
annexation to have a three year annexation
plan. The annexation plan for Prosper was
done in three phases: 2008, 2009 and 2010.
The 2008 phase included 14 properties that
were primarily confined to the center and
southeastern areas of the community. The
2009 phase included 12 properties on the
northwestern and west central areas of the
community. Finally, the 2010 phase included 9
properties on the far western side of the
community.
Annexation phases coincided with a desire by
Town Council to annex everything inside the
Town’s boundaries defined by boundary
agreements with Frisco, McKinney, Celina and
Little Elm (FM 1385, Frontier/Parvin, Custer and
Highway 380).
With the exception of the Artesia Municipal
Utility District, only a few parcels of land remain
to be annexed within the Town’s boundaries.
Artesia may be considered for annexation at
some point in the future.
17 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
PLANNING CONTEXT
Prosper ISD
Throughout the planning g process, schools
have been identified as one of the single most
important features of the Town. As the Town
continues to grow, it is of prime importance
that the exemplary status and reputation of
Prosper’s schools be maintained.
While the Town and Prosper Independent
School District operate as two separate entities,
they are inevitably related to each other.
Growth in the Town increases the overall tax
base and provides revenue for the School
District. Additionally, excellent schools enable
the Town to continue to attract new residents
and new development.
The Town and Prosper ISD should therefore be
in direct communication, clearly identifying
areas of growth and assessing future
educational needs. Communication between
the Town and PISD will inevitably allow for
coordinated infrastructure decisions, such as
when new roads allowing access to new schools
should be constructed.
The Town and Prosper ISD should also
coordinate on population growth rates and
potential future school locations. Establishing a
working relationship between the two entities
will benefit the Town, PISD and the residents of
Prosper themselves.
PLANNING CONTEXT
18
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
Regional Initiatives
North Central Texas Council of
Governments (NCTCOG)
NCTCOG is the metropolitan planning
organization that encompasses the 16 county
North Texas region. NCTCOG works to promote
orderly and balanced growth within the North
Texas region. The metropolitan transportation
plan created by NCTCOG, known as Mobility
2035, contains a number of different
components ranging from arterial roadway
networks, freeways, rail transit and major trails,
known as the Veloweb.
Coordination with NCTCOG will help to
streamline projects within Prosper, particularly
if outside funding is desired or necessary.
Typically, funding is awarded to projects which
show planning and coordination at multiple
levels. Ensuring that future roadway and
transportation plans by the Town are
coordinated with NCTCOG will help Prosper
attract investment from both the public and
private sector and will ensure that roadways are
better coordinated between adjacent
communities.
In addition to transportation, there are various
grants that are awarded to communities in
North Texas by NCTCOG. These grants are used
to incentivize regional cooperation without
requiring compliance. NCTCOG has established
the Center of Development Excellence which
provides 12 guiding principles that it
recommends communities to consider.
Communities in North Texas are encouraged to
incorporate these principles, where best
applicable, and are awarded grants and
additional funding to help communities with
some of the initial costs, studies and plans
associated with quality planning.
.
..
12 Principles
x Development Diversity
x Efficient Growth
x Pedestrian Design
x Housing Choice
x Activity Centers
x Environmental Stewardship
x Quality Places
x Efficient Mobility Options
x Resource Efficiency
x Educational Opportunity
x Healthy Communities
x Implementation
www.developmentexcellence.com
19 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY VISION
Community Vision
A fundamental component of the
comprehensive planning process evolves
around the vision of the community. The
importance of the vision cannot be
overstated—the vision guides land use
decisions and allows Town staff and decision
makers to determine whether or not decisions
are ultimately in conformance with the long
term vision for Prosper, as defined by its
residents. In other words, the vision is the
roadmap that guides decisions within the
community and serves as the basis for the
Future Land Use Plan and policy
recommendations.
For this Plan, the visioning process was guided
by a Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee
(CPAC) and included several deliberate
exercises. The visioning process included:
x Seven CPAC Meetings
x CPAC SWOT Analysis
x CPAC Visual Character Survey (VCS)
x Two Town Hall Meetings
x Town Hall Brainstorming Groups
x A Public Visual Character Survey on the
Town’s website
x Public Hearings During Adoption.
The following pages contain the who and the
what of the visioning process, highlighting the
various groups involved, exercises used and
preliminary results derived from the visioning
process.
Community Vision
VCS
Town
Hall
SWOT
VCS
To wn
HHHaaaalllllllll HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
SWOT
Every community is distinctive and has its
own set of values, aspirations and
objectives. The purpose of the visioning
section is to determine the ultimate vision
of the community based upon resident
input.
Unique, Distinctive,
Exceptional
The community vision is used to guide the
formation of the comprehensive plan and
is ultimately used by decision makers as
they weigh the vision with development
proposals and future opportunities.
20
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY VISION
Comprehensive Plan Advisory
Committee (CPAC)
A committee of community residents and
stakeholders was compiled in order to assist in
the development of the Plan. Committee
members were selected based upon a variety of
criteria including the area of the community
where they reside, past or current council
experience, economic development knowledge
and business ownership. The CPAC’s role in the
process was to guide the formation of the Plan
document and ensure that the Plan created
ultimately reflected the vision desired by
Prosper residents.
Seven meetings were conducted with the CPAC:
x Orientation Meeting on May 2, 2011
x Visioning Meeting on June 6, 2011
x Future Land Use Meeting on September
12, 2011
x Livability Meeting on October 10, 2011
x Economic Analysis, Transportation and
Infrastructure Assessment on
November 14th, 2011
x Transportation Continued and Plan
Review on December 14, 2011
x Town Hall Review and Final Comments
on March 19, 2012
All CPAC meetings were conducted at 6:30 p.m.
and were open to the public. Community
residents and representatives from the
development community were present at
several meetings.
Energized and productive discussions were had
at CPAC meetings, representative of the diverse
opinions and backgrounds present on the
committee. The exchange of ideas with various
points of view ensured a thorough process
where the realities of external factors affecting
Prosper were weighted with the ultimate vision
of the Town.
Comprehensive Plan Advisory
Committee
Jason Dixon, Chair
Craig Moody, Vice Chair
Ane Casady, Secretary
Kelly Cooper
Mark DeMattia
Michael Goddard
Kyle Huckelberry
Ann Lieber
Meigs Miller
Eric Nishimoto
Jordan Simms
Daniel Ting
Doug Trumbull
21 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY VISION
SWOT Analysis
A strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats (SWOT) analysis was conducted with the
CPAC during the May 2, 2011 meeting. The
SWOT analysis is commonly used as a means of
evaluating internal and external factors
affecting the community. Strengths and
weaknesses are seen to be internal—existing
assets or downfalls. Opportunities and threats,
on the other hand, are seen to be external—
potential or future assets or downfalls. The
purpose of the SWOT exercise is to utilize
current strengths, address current weaknesses,
utilize future opportunities and mitigate future
threats. Although not scientific, the SWOT
process helps put into perspective many of the
preliminary issues.
For this exercise, CPAC members were asked to
identify perceived strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities and threats. After all issues were
identified, each CPAC member was given a total
of 5 dots—4 green dots representing 1 point
each and 1red dot representing 5points. CPAC
members then placed their votes next to issues
which they perceived to be the most important
to them individually. Issues receiving votes
included the following:
x Schools (S) 12
x No Outside Policies Dictating
Growth and Development (T) 11
x Small-Town Feel (S) 8
x Highway Frontage (S) 7
x Large-Lots (S) 7
x Development Standards (S) 6
x Community Cohesiveness (S) 5
x Over Development (T) 5
x Image Branding (W) 5
x Rapid Growth (W) 5
x Restaurants (W) 4
x Downtown/Old Town (O) 4
x Maintaining Natural Feel (O) 2
x Lack of Office Space (W) 2
x Commercial Development (O) 2
x Quiet Feel (O) 1
x Roads (W) 1
22
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY VISION
Vision Statement
A vision communicates the reason for existence, the purpose behind planning and the overall goals of a
community from a long-range planning and development perspective. The primary benefit of visioning
is that it clarifies how a community will approach its critical planning, development and growth issues.
With the clarified approach that visioning provides, the resulting Plan will better address the future of
the Town in a manner that is reflective of the community’s interests.
The vision statement for a community should describe the community as it will ideally exist in the
future. A vision statement spells out goals or values at a high level and promotes what the Town should
become. The vision statement for this Plan is as follows:
Prosper is a community for a lifetime; rooted in family values,
exemplary schools, distinctive and distinguished neighborhoods and a
“small town feel,” it is a true place to call home. We aspire to create a
residential oasis in an ever increasing urban area. We envision a
community with spacious, family-friendly neighborhoods, exceptional
shopping areas, excellent services, a business friendly environment and
a responsive government where citizens have a say.
23 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY VISION
Visual Character Survey
A Visual Character Survey (VCS) is a technique in
which respondents are asked to score a series
of photographs based on what they find to be
visually preferable for Prosper. The images used
are selected in order to illustrate different
aesthetic, architectural, and visual elements
within any particular built environment and are
used in order to quantify exactly what types of
developments are desired and appropriate for
Prosper. Although the VCS is not necessarily
scientific in nature, it is an effective method of
receiving attitudinal, aesthetic-based input.
Three VCS surveys were conducted for this Plan.
The first survey was conducted with the CPAC at
the June 6, 2011 meeting. The second VCS was
made available through the Town’s website
following the Town Hall meeting. Town Hall
attendees were given a passcode in order to
take this VCS. The third and final VCS was made
available to the general public through the
Town’s website and contained no passcode.
This survey remained available for
approximately 3 weeks. A total of 434 residents
participated in the online VCS for the
community.
The VCS for Prosper was divided into 8
categories:
x Dallas North Tollway
x Preston Road
x Highway 380
x Housing Mix
x Street Design
x Signage
x BNSF
x Public Space
It is important to note that the images depicted
within the VCS are intended to reflect general
characteristics which may or may not be desired
in Prosper. It is also important that market
conditions be evaluated in conjunction with the
long term vision and goals. The following
images depict the highest and lowest rated
images per category from the general public
VCS.
24
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY VISION
Dallas North Tollway
Input indicated that the Dallas North Tollway corridor would accommodate the most intense
uses in Prosper, where images of four to six story office buildings, mixed-use
shopping/residential units and corporate offices scored the most favorably.
Along the Dallas North Tollway, images depicting industrial uses, such as batching plants and
warehousing facilities, scored the least favorably. An image of a car dealership also was
among the lowest rated images in this particular category.
Highest Lowest
25 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY VISION
Preston Road
Based upon the highest scoring images, the Preston Road corridor was much more retail in
nature. Images depicting small-scale retail establishments and retail clusters were scored the
most favorably by VCS respondents.
More intense uses, such as mid-rise offices, were not deemed appropriate along Preston
Road.
As Preston Road traverses Prosper, it migrates through many residential areas. Small-scale,
less intensive retail establishments are not only more compatible with adjacent residential
areas, but they also provide essential daily services for Prosper residents.
Highest Lowest
26
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY VISION
Highway 380
A variety of images were scored favorably within the Highway 380 corridor. The three
highest images depicted an office park, dining establishments and more intensive retail
centers.
The lowest rated images within the Highway 380 corridor were industrial uses, such as a
batching plant and distribution warehouse, and garden style apartments.
Higher traffic volumes and visibility along Highway 380 create opportunities to capitalize on
pass-by spending trips. The 8 mile stretch of Highway 380 through Prosper may present
opportunities to accommodate a range of uses at appropriate and opportunistic locations.
Highest Lowest
27 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY VISION
Housing Mix
A variety of housing types were shown to determine housing preference. Overall, images of
single family detached housing scored the most favorably while garden style apartments
and certain images of townhomes and brownstones scored the least favorably.
Highest Lowest
28
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY VISION
Street Design
Images depicting a variety of different streetscapes and streetscape amenities were
shown to determine the level of aesthetics desired within Prosper.
Overall, images with enhanced landscaping, landscaped medians, masonry and wrought
iron fences, street trees and sidewalks were scored the most favorably indicating a
preference for enhanced and attractive roadways in Prosper.
Images with little to no landscaping enhancements were scored the least favorably, along
with an image of a more urbanized roadway with adjacent apartments.
Highest Lowest
29 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY VISION
Signage
Signage has the ability to greatly influence the look and appearance of commercial
corridors within the community. Images depicting monument signs, combined signage and
signage with architectural enhancements scored the most favorably. In contrast, pole
signs and signage features with minimal aesthetic enhancements scored the least
favorably.
More suburban communities are choosing to use monument signs containing architectural
features and landscaping to enhance and protect the aesthetic appearance of roadway
corridors while still allowing businesses to be seen.
Highest Lowest
30
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY VISION
BNSF
Within the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe Railroad corridor, a variety of images were shown
to determine resident’s ultimate vision for vacant land along the rail line. The highest
scoring images depicted a high-quality business park, a quaint old town area and a station
platform with enhanced architectural features.
Images that scored the least favorably included more intensive industrial uses and
warehouse uses with little to no aesthetic enhancements. Additionally, a residential image
depicting single family homes was scored among the least favored images.
Highest Lowest
31 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY VISION
Public Space
Public spaces are those shared by the community and create opportunities for neighborly
interaction and family activities. Public space may also be used to identify and brand
Prosper.
Overall, images of park spaces with water features and passive recreational options were
scored the most favorably. Relatively speaking, pictures of the grain silos, modern art and a
community garden were rated the least favorably. It is important to note that every image
within the Public Space category had greater than 50% favorability, indicating that a variety
of public spaces may be appropriate within the Town.
Highest Lowest
32
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY VISION
Town Hall Meeting
A Town Hall meeting was conducted on
Monday June 27, 2011. The purpose of the
Town Hall meeting was to gather feedback from
the public on what the vision for Prosper should
be. Over 140 residents from the community
attended the event that was held at Prosper
High School.
Town Hall attendees were first given an
introduction to the planning process. During
this presentation, an overview of past planning
efforts, existing conditions and growth patterns
within our region was explained. The
presentation concluded by informing residents
of the planning process as well as introducing
members of the Comprehensive Plan Advisory
Committee to attendees.
A visioning exercise was conducted with
attendees in order to engage the public and
gather initial feedback on Prosper’s future.
Topic tables were arranged so that each
participant in attendance would rotate to each
of the following tables:
x Land Use/Corridors
x Transportation
x Housing;
x Livability
x Community Identity
At each of the tables, a member of the CPAC,
Town staff or consultant guided discussion on
each group’s major issues, concerns or ideas.
Issues gathered were then compiled and
presented to the CPAC to guide discussion on
elements within the Plan.
33 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY VISION
The following is a summary of the recurring major issues identified by participants during the Town Hall
meeting.
Land Use/Housing
x No garden style apartments
x Any new apartments should be within mixed-use areas
x Townhomes acceptable in certain areas
x Zero-Lot Line acceptable in certain areas for empty-nester housing
x Large-lot homes
x Neighborhood services needed (grocery store, dry cleaners, etc.)
x Maximum density 4-6 stories along Tollway
x No more workforce housing…keep median home value high
x Open space/preserve natural features (creeks/trees)
x Mixed-uses in specific areas (380 at Preston and DNT), maybe Old Town
x Preston Road should be different from Preston Road in Frisco, unique and distinctive
neighborhood corridor rather than chain/”cookie-cutter” development in Frisco
x Quality Retail along Preston
x High-quality development/keep the development bar high
x Focus on retail and services rather than office
x Limiting strip malls, prefer higher end retail centers
Transportation
x Sidewalks
x Bicycle/jogging trails (connected trails/sidewalks )
x Enhance landscaping (landscaped medians)
x Larger setbacks along certain roadways (Preston Road)
x Lighting
x Positive identity and image along major corridors (landscaping, amenities, branding)
x Rail/Transit discouraged
x Consistent signage
x Sound barriers in areas with high traffic
Livability/Identity
x Open space and trees/quiet feel
x Upscale small-town feel (“chic country”)
x Connected bicycle and walking trails
x Community identity and branding; Distinct and different from neighboring communities; and
Defined by open spaces and large-lots.
x Gateways along major corridors
x Preserving schools
x Shuttles for seniors
x Congregation/community space for festivals and community events (a downtown or civic area)
x Parks connecting neighborhoods via trails
x Entertainment for families
34
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY VISION
Town Hall “My Top Issues” Exercise
Prior to commencement of the Town Hall, several boards were on display for attendees to view as they
enjoyed refreshments and discussion. Boards were used to depict the comprehensive plan process,
existing conditions and 2010 demographic data but also included a “My Top Issues” exercise. On this
board, attendees were each given 4 red dots and were asked to place their dots on issues that they
believed were the most important to them individually. Participants could place all 4 dots on 1single
issue or could spread their dots among up to 4 separate issues. Issues depicted were derived from the
SWOT analysis conducted with the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee. The following are the
voting results of the “My Top Issues” board.
Category Votes
1. Retail/Shopping 75
2. Large-Lot Homes 70
3. Preserving Small-Town Feel 55
4. Roadway Improvements 52
5. Restaurants 48
6. Controlling Rapid Growth 39
7. Downtown Prosper 35
8. Preserving Open Space 33
9. Office Space/Job Opportunities 27
10. Mixed-Use/Town Center 19
11. Maximizing Highway Frontage 15
12.Gateways/Branding 14
35 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY VISION
Town Hall #2
On February 13, 2012, a Town Hall meeting was
conducted at Prosper High School in order to
present the Draft Comprehensive Plan to the
public and to gather comments and feedback
from the public on plan recommendations.
Over 275 attendees were present at the
meeting. Attendees participated in round table
discussions where individualized feedback on
plan recommendations was obtained.
Participants were asked whether the Draft Plan
accurately described the vision for Prosper, if
there were any components of the plan that
excited them, if there were components of the
plan that concerned them and finally were
asked to prioritize a list of issues based upon
their personal order of importance.
The information collected from Town Hall
attendees was then tabulated in order to
identify consistent themes and priorities from
the public. This information was discussed with
the CPAC and necessary clarifications and/or
text modifications to the Draft Plan were made.
Yes
69%
Mostly
25%
No
6%
Question #1: Does the Plan Accurately
Describe the Community’s Vision for Prosper?
36
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY VISION
Community Goals
Community goals are created to direct the formation of the Plan. They are practical yet general points
under which more specific objectives may be located. The goals for the Plan are purposely designed to
cover a wide array of individual objectives, but were specifically crafted to address many of the
comments, issues, ideas and concerns defined during the visioning portion of the Plan’s creation.
The following goals are intended to provide a framework for the creation of applicable and economically
feasible land use decisions and special districts. The goals are also intended to establish guidelines for
preserving Prosper’s neighborhoods and creating quality new residential areas, maintaining and
enhancing Prospers quality of life and physical characteristics, providing a safe and attractive
transportation network and ultimately ensuring that the Town’s infrastructure systems will be adequate
to accommodate 20-year growth. Plan objectives are located within the Implementation Chapter of this
Plan.
Goal 1: Provide a variety of land uses, in accordance with the vision of Prosper
Residents, which diversify the tax base and enable residents to live, work,
shop, eat and relax in Prosper.
Goal 2: Maintain and enhance the high quality of life and small-town feel currently
available and expected by Prosper Residents.
Goal 3: Protect the quality and integrity of Prosper’s neighborhoods.
Goal 4: Require high-quality and visually attractive architectural characteristics in
both residential and non-residential developments.
Goal 5: Develop quality, open roadways that enhance the Town’s rural image, are
compatible with adjacent development and provide safe and convenient
traffic movements.
Goal 6: Ensure that water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure is able to meet
future growth demands.
37 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Future Land Use
The right of a municipality to coordinate growth
is rooted in its need to protect the health,
safety, and welfare of local citizens. An
important part of establishing the guidelines for
such responsibility is the Future Land Use Plan,
which establishes an overall framework for the
preferred pattern of development within
Prosper. In general, the Future Land Use Plan is
intended to be a comprehensive blueprint of
Prosper’s vision for its future land use pattern.
Specifically, the Future Land Use Plan
designates various areas within the Town for
particular land uses, based principally on the
specific land use policies outlined herein.
The Future Land Use Plan is graphically depicted
for use during the development plan review
process with the Future Land Use Plan map. The
Future Land Use Plan should ultimately be
reflected through the Town’s policy and
development decisions. The Future Land Use
Plan map is not a zoning map, which deals with
specific development requirements on
individual parcels. The zoning map and changes
in zoning should, however, be based on the
Future Land Use Plan and related Future Land
Use Plan map.
Legal Authority
Authority of a community to create a
comprehensive plan is rooted in Chapters 211,
212 and 213 of the Texas Local Government
Code.
Chapter 211
Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government
Code allows the government body of a
community to regulate zoning.
Chapter 212
Chapter 212 of the Texas Local Government
Code allows the governing body of a community
to regulate subdivision development within the
community limits and also within the
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) which varies
depending upon the population of the
community.
Chapter 213
Chapter 213 of the Texas Local Government
Code allows the governing body of a community
to create a comprehensive plan for the “long-
range development of the municipality.” Basic
recommendations for comprehensive planning
are to address land use, transportation and
public facilities, but may include a wide variety
of other issues determined by the community.
It is important to note that a comprehensive
plan is NOT a zoning ordinance, but rather is
intended to be used as a tool to guide
development, infrastructure and land use
decisions in the future. The comprehensive
plan does, however, serve as a basis on which
zoning decisions are made, as specified by
Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Development
Code.
38
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Process
The Future Land Use Plan was derived through
a defined and deliberate process. Existing land
uses, development agreements and planned
developments were combined with extensive
public input in order to create a Future Land
Use Plan that is both realistic, attainable and
reflects the public’s vision for Prosper’s future.
The first consideration was existing land use.
Existing land use includes analyzing past
development trends and working to ensure that
future growth occurring within the community
coincides with existing development patterns
and does not negatively impact the integrity of
existing neighborhoods.
An examination of potential planned
developments was the second step. This
involved an understanding of existing
development agreements that are in place
within Prosper. Understanding what types of
development may occur in the future helps to
determine what the adjacent land uses should
be.
Finally, an extensive public input process was
conducted with the general public and the
CPAC. The public and CPAC described the
characteristics which should define Prosper and
identified many of the needs within the
community.
Additionally, a VCS was conducted with
attendees of the CPAC, Town Hall meeting and
the general public. A significant number of
responses were received and the results of the
survey helped to determine the visual
aesthetics and development characteristics that
were felt to be appropriate within Prosper.
The results of this process ultimately concluded
in a land use scenario for the Town. This land
use scenario is not a mandate, but should be
used to guide Town staff and decision makers
as development intensifies in the coming years.
39 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Land Use Types
Residential Low Density
This land use is indicative of large-lot single-
family homes. Typically speaking, lot sizes
within any low density development will range
between 15,000 square feet and 1+ acre in size.
While a variety of lot sizes may be used, the
total gross density of low density residential
neighborhoods should not exceed 1.6 dwelling
units per acre. Large-lot homes will provide a
continuation of the rural atmosphere and feel
that was intensely expressed by Prosper’s
residents. Most low density residential areas
will be located in Northwest and Northeast
Prosper.
Residential Medium Density
Medium density residential is also
representative of single family detached
dwelling units. Lot sizes in medium density
residential neighborhoods could range between
12,500 and 20,000 square feet in size. A
variation in lot sizes may be permitted to
achieve a goal range in density. While a variety
of lot sizes may be used within medium density
residential neighborhoods, the gross density of
such developments will typically not be less
than 1.6 dwelling units per acre or greater than
2.5 dwelling units per acre.
40
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Residential High Density
High density residential represents the most
intense residential land uses permitted in
Prosper. High density single family uses will
consist of developments greater than 2.5
dwelling units per acre and lot sizes smaller
than 10,000 square feet. Within Prosper, the
high-density residential district is reflective of
the Artesia development, where single family
residential lot sizes and dwelling units per acre
will be substantially higher than the rest of the
community. High density residential may be
located within the Dallas North Tollway,
Highway 380, town Center and Old Town
Districts. In such areas, high density residential
may take the form of multifamily or single
family attached dwelling units and may include
mixed-use lofts/apartments, patio homes,
snout houses, brownstones and townhomes.
No additional garden style apartments should
be permitted.
Retail and Neighborhood Services
Neighborhood services typically include retail
establishments that provide merchandise for
retail sale, banks, neighborhood office and
small medical offices. Retail uses are
particularly important because they contribute
to Prosper’s tax base through both property
taxes and sales taxes, making their inclusion
attractive and often times competitive. Within
Prosper, neighborhood service uses will likely
occur at major intersections along the Dallas
North Tollway, HIghway 380 and Preston Road
corridors. Neighborhood service uses should
also be strategically placed along the Town’s
perimeter in order to attract patrons from
neighboring communities, enhancing sales tax
revenue opportunities. The majority of
neighborhood service activity within Prosper
will likely be included within the Dallas North
Tollway, Highway 380, Town Center and Old
Town districts.
41 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Dallas North Tollway District
The Dallas North Tollway district will consist of
the most intense land uses within Prosper. A
diverse mixture of office, retail and residential
will likely develop along the corridor. Mid-rise
office (up to 6 stories) may be permitted
throughout the corridor. Office buildings
should be designed for a “campus feel”—they
should be oriented towards common public
space with significant landscaping and should
be linked by a pedestrian network. A common
architectural theme should also be established
for a consistent visual appearance. Mixed-use
development should be encouraged and should
contain a mixture of office, retail and residential
uses. Mixed-use lofts/apartments would be the
most appropriate residential use within this
district. Structured parking should be
encouraged in more intense areas to limit the
presence and visibility of large parking lots.
Structured parking should be oriented in a way
that minimizes visibility from the Tollway.
Highway 380 District
Much like the Dallas North Tollway district, the
Highway 380 district will contain a variety of
different uses. The major contrast between
Highway 380 and other districts will be the
inclusion of a big box development and
commercial service uses. Types of appropriate
commercial include hotels, banks, vehicle
refilling stations with a convenience store,
home service centers with outside storage,
garden center with outside storage and other
similar uses which serve the community but are
not necessarily desired on Preston Road or
within the Dallas North Tollway corridor.
Residential land uses may be appropriate within
certain areas, particularly away from major
intersections where retail and commercial will
be the highest and best land use. Residential
land uses may include patio homes, snout
houses, townhomes and brownstones. These
residential areas may serve as a buffer between
more intense activity along Highway 380 and
low density residential areas to the north.
42
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Town Center District
The Town Center district is a continuation of the
area defined by previous planning efforts as a
future location for a large scale mixed-use
development. The Town Center would include
a mixture of land uses but development will be
less intense than that located along Highway
380 and the Dallas North Tollway. Retail, small
scale office, and residential uses would be
included within this district, but the primary
intent should be focused on dining and
shopping. Public space should be a major
component of this area, creating space for
families and residents of Prosper to meet and
socialize. Open space located within the Town
Center could be used for community events,
festivals and school events. Urban design
should accommodate the pedestrian while
providing automobile access and discreet
parking. Residential uses may include mixed-
use lofts/apartments, patio homes, townhomes
and brownstones. Areas of single family
residential may also be permitted, particularly
on the northern side where the development
abuts the Old Town district.
Old Town District
The Old Town district is the heart of Prosper.
This historic area of the community is intended
to include a variety of boutique type land uses,
ranging from unique and local retail
establishments, restaurants and offices. Many
of the historic homes within the Old Town
district, particularly areas along First Street and
Broadway, may gradually convert to boutique
office and retail establishments. The most
opportunistic possibility for a transit stop, if
desired by future residents, would be within the
Old Town district, which could facilitate
redevelopment of the downtown area. If this
occurs, high density residential options, such as
live-above lofts/apartments, may be
considered. The historic past of the community
should be preserved. The community’s
beginnings as a farm community in rural Collin
County are part of what defines Prosper, and
these attributes should be preserved as new
infill development occurs.
43 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Business Park
A Business Park district will include a variety of
potential land uses including light industrial,
commercial warehousing, office storage and
commercial uses with outside storage. While
outside storage will likely occur and be
necessary within this district, significant effort
should be placed on the visual integrity of the
district, particularly when located in higher
visibility areas. When such uses abut roadways,
larger landscape setbacks, such as 40 feet
setbacks, that include berms and evergreen
shrubs/trees should be used to protect the
visual integrity of roadways and the public view.
All outside storage should also be screened
from public view and from adjacent properties.
The location of the BNSF railroad and close
proximity to the Dallas North Tollway provide
the Business Park with significant accessibility.
Uses located along First Street, Prosper Trail
and other perimeter areas should incorporate a
higher degree of landscaping and architectural
design in order to protect the visual integrity of
Prosper’s roadways.
44
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Density
The density of development within Prosper should reflect the ultimate community vision.
Prosper residents have indicated that single family residential should be the predominate feature
in the Town. The rural nature and atmosphere of the community should be reflective in its
neighborhoods and should be a distinguishing factor between Prosper and its neighbors. The
following are general density guidelines. It should be noted that the following are for illustrative
purposes only and are not indicative of density regulations. Overall low density should remain
under 1.6 DUA and medium density should remain between 1.7 and 2.5 DUA.
2.5 to
3.5 DUA
4-6 DUA
4-6 DUA
6-10
DUA
35+
DUA
Low Density Estate/Single-Family
.5 to 1.5
DUA
1.5 to
2.5 DUA
Medium Density/Single-Family
High Density/Single-Family
High Density/Single-Family
High Density/Multi-Unit Home
4-6 DUA
High Density/Patio Home
High Density/Townhome
High Density/Mixed-Use
Z0 0.5 1 1.50.25MilesPlate 2FutureLand UsePlanMarch 2012kjkjkjkjkjkjkjkjkjkjkjkjkjkjkjParvin Rd.F.M. 1385GeeFish Trap Rd.U.S. 380Dallas North TollwayProsper TrailFirst St.La Cima Blvd.Frontier Pkwy.Preston Rd.Coit Rd.F.M. 1461F.M. 2478F.M. 2478Custer Rd.Teel Pkwy.Legacy Dr.Virginia Pkwy.BNSF RRS. ColemanN. ColemanLovers LnHays RdLegendLow Density ResidentialMedium Density ResidentialHigh Density ResidentialRetail & Neighborhood ServicesBusiness ParkOld Town DistrictTown CenterTollway DistrictUS 380 District100 Year FloodplainkjMajor GatewaykjMinor GatewayTown of ProsperETJNote: A comprehensive plan shall not constitutezoning regulations or establish zoning districtboundaries.
47 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Land Use Acreages
Based upon the Future Land Use Scenario,
medium density residential will constitute
the largest future land use within Prosper
at 35 percent, followed by low density
residential at 34%. In terms of non-
residential development, the Dallas North
Tollway district will be the largest
commercial district constituting 9% of the
total land use in Prosper, followed by the
Highway 380 district at 8%. In total, 73%
of the total land in Prosper will be reserved
for residential uses with the remaining
27% being a combination of retail, office,
commercial and high density residential.
Ultimate Capacity
The ultimate capacity for Prosper is based on the Future Land Use Scenario. Certain assumptions
were made in order to calculate the Ultimate Capacity. For low density residential, lot sizes greater
than 15,000 square feet, 1.2 dwelling units per acre was used for our assumptions.
For the purpose of estimating ultimate capacity, medium density residential includes lot sizes
between 10 and 20,000 square feet in size. For purposes of our assumptions, an average of 2.3
dwelling units per acre was assumed for medium density residential.
High density single family residential is indicative of Artesia. Artesia is an existing Municipal Utility
District, located in Prosper’s ETJ in Denton County, which has the right to develop 2,170 single family
lots and 600 multifamily units. While Artesia is not currently located within the Town of Prosper, it
is located in the Town’s planning area and therefore, is included in this Plan. Based upon actual
dwelling units and acreage, a high density single family density of 4.8 DUA and multifamily density of
20 DUA was used.
The 648 garden style apartments are reflective of existing, previously approved apartments located
within Prosper. The community has very strongly expressed that no new garden style apartments be
permitted within Prosper. While the plan recommends no more than the 648 existing garden style
apartments be constructed, it should be acknowledged that previously approved zoning currently
allows for an additional 2,746 garden style apartments to be constructed in Prosper, along with
2,400 mixed-use apartments and 1,150 townhomes.
While a significant number of garden style apartments are permitted by current zoning,
opportunistic changes may arise, such as a planned development amendment. If such opportunities
occur, the Town should work with developers to build mixed-use apartments, patio homes, snout
homes, townhomes and brownstones as replacements for garden style apartments, in addition to
reducing the overall number of high density units.
Business Park
2%
High Density
4%
Low Density
34% Medium
Density
35%
Old Town
2%
Neighbor-
hood Services
2%
Town Center
4%
Tollway
District
9%
US 380
District
8%
48
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Conservative estimates based upon developer agreements, planned developments and Town
zoning indicate that over 5,000 more high density dwelling units may be built in Prosper. Given
the low density nature of development within the community, this number would constitute
nearly 30% of the total dwelling units. While this number may seem significantly higher than
other communities, there are several factors influencing how this number is perceived.
One of the primary reasons for the high percentage of high-density units is due to the low
density nature of Prosper’s neighborhoods. Other communities typically have residential
neighborhoods averaging between 3-6 dwelling units per acre. In Prosper, however, most
neighborhoods will average between 1 and 3 dwelling units per acre, lowering the overall
dwelling units within the community and making high density dwelling units a greater
percentage of the overall population. While high density dwelling units may constitute 30% of
the overall dwelling units, 86% of the total Town population will reside in single family
neighborhoods, in accordance with the ultimate Town vision. Additionally, 69% of the total
land of Prosper is reserved for single family residential neighborhoods.
A second factor influencing the number of high density dwelling units is mixed-use
development. Town residents indicated their preference for mixed-use residential lofts and
apartments in appropriate areas, mainly the Dallas North Tollway, Highway 380 and the Town
Center districts. Images reflecting mixed-use centers received very favorable responses in the
Town Visual Character Survey. Mixed-use apartments, such as those in Legacy Town Center
and Watters Creek, are much higher in density than garden style apartments—mixed-use
apartments and lofts typically average between 30-50 dwelling units per acre. Therefore, a
significant portion of the 5,000 additional high density dwelling units will likely be located
within mixed use areas in the Dallas North Tollway, Highway 380, and Town Center districts.
Based upon the future land use scenario and the previous assumptions, the ultimate capacity
for Prosper is approximately 69,300 residents. Changes in overall development patterns that
deviate from the Plan’s recommendations could significantly impact the ultimate capacity of
the community.
484848
Town of Prosper
Land Use Acreage DUA* Dwelling
Units PPH** Total
Pop
Low Density 2,573 1.2 3,087 3.4 10,498
Medium Density 3,763 2.3 8,654 3.4 29,427
High Density Single-Family (Artesia) 450 4.8 2,170 3.4 7,378
High Density Multi-Family (Artesia) 30 20 600 2.4 1,440
Garden Style Apartments*** - - 648 2.4 1,555
High Density Residential**** - - 5,000 2 10,000
Additional Population 58,743
Existing Population 10,560
Total Build-Out Capacity 69,303
*DUA (Dwelling Units per Acre)
**Persons per Household
***Existing garden style apartments. No new garden style apartments should be permitted.
**** Mixed-use lofts/apartments, patio homes, snout homes, townhomes and brownstones
49 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Population Projections
The Town of Prosper has experienced extremely
rapid growth over the past several decades,
discussed in more detail in the Planning
Context. External factors seem to indicate that
growth within Collin County will likely continue
in the foreseeable future. Likewise, with the
extension of the Dallas North Tollway through
Prosper, it is very likely that rapid growth within
the Town will also continue.
It is often difficult to calculate population
projection growth rates for fringe communities,
such as Prosper, particularly when such
communities are in the beginning stages of
their growth and maturity. It is therefore
beneficial to examine a wide range of potential
growth numbers including the historical growth
rates of Prosper, its neighbors and Collin
County, as a whole.
Six different growth rates were examined. A
7.6% growth rate is indicative of Prosper’s 40
year CAGR, a 10.9% growth rate is indicative of
the average 20 year growth of Prosper, its
neighbors and Collin County. An 11.8% growth
rate is indicative of Prosper’s growth over the
past 20 years, a 16.2% growth rate is indicative
of Prosper’s growth between 2000 and 2010,
and finally an 8.0% growth rate was used
representative of the projected compound
annual growth rate of Prosper through buildout.
1990-2010
CAGR Average
Collin County 5.6%
10.9%
Celina 6.4%
Frisco 15.8%
Little Elm 16.3%
McKinney 9.5%
Prosper 11.8%
Source Percent
Growth
Texas Water Board 50 Year
Projection 4.2
40 Year Prosper Growth Rate 7.6
Projected Growth Rate 8.0
20 Year Regional Average 10.9
20 Year Prosper Growth Rate 11.8
10 Year Prosper Growth Rate 16.2
Population Projections
10 Year Prosper Average
20 Year Prosper Average
20 Year Region Average
Projected 8% Growth
40 Year Prosper Average
Texas Water Board
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Regional Population Growth
50
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Community Livability
What does the term livability mean with regard
to urban planning? Generally, livability reflects
the characteristics, aesthetics, design and social
aspects of Prosper that make the Town unique
and which help to establish a sense of
community. There are many intangibles that
make a place livable, such as a sense of
community, a strong sense of place in particular
areas, civic pride and the friendliness of
neighbors. There are also tangible aspects that
can promote livability as well.
Prosper is a unique community with its own
values and vision. The following section
describes in more detail some of those tangible
aspects that, when tailored to fit the needs and
vision of Prosper, can help the Town to grow in
a manner that enhances the quality of its
neighborhoods and helps to create vibrant
retail establishments. This section is intended
to describe, in more detail, the characteristics
of the Future Land Use Plan and is intended to
be used to guide decision makers what the
public believes the character of Prosper should
be as it grows. This section includes a
discussion of various land use concepts and
how they apply to Prosper, general
neighborhood characteristics, housing mix,
corridors and image enhancement.
It should be noted a significant number of
pictures in this section were taken directly from
the Visual Character Survey that was made
available to the public during August 2011.
Livability Guidelines
x Preserve small-town, rural feel
x Maintain open spaces that create a
quiet, open feel
x Provide large-lot homes
x “Raise the bar” on development/
attract quality development
x Attract neighborhood services,
such as a grocery store
x Build a system of connected parks
and trails for outdoor recreation
x Clearly brand and identify Prosper
through gateways and other
identifying features
x Provide entertainment venues for
families
x Create high quality mixed-use
centers where residents may shop,
dine, socialize and live
x Enhance Old Town Prosper
x Encourage a mixture of high-quality
residential types, for “in-town” and
“rural” living
51 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Land Use Concepts
Mixed-Use
Mixed-use refers to a development style that
combines a mix of land uses within one defined
zoning district. For example, residential, retail,
restaurants, office and public uses may be
allowed in the same building, same lot, same
tract, block or zoning district. Benefits of
mixed-use development include:
x Flexibility of building spaces over time
x Long term viability of commercial
districts
x Providing higher quality high density
residences;
x Inclusion of public facilities
x Reduction in the frequency of vehicular
trips
x Minimizing land consumption
Mixed-use developments are defined by their
design—building orientation, roadway
configuration and amenities such as shade
trees, benches and lighting create a safe
environment that is conducive for walking.
Intentional integration of diverse land uses
within one localized area creates a lifestyle
option where a person can perform many of
their daily needs and recreational desires within
a short distance of home. Such environments
are particularly attractive to young
professionals, young couples and empty
nesters.
Mixed-uses are typically either horizontal or
vertical in nature. Horizontal mixed-uses
involve retail, office and residential all located
within one defined area, but within separate
buildings. Vertical mixed-use developments
would include any combination of retail, office
and residential within the same building. A
common example of vertical mixed-use is
residential lofts and apartments above street-
level retail and office space.
General Guidelines
x Maximum Setbacks: bring building
facades closer to the street.
x Central Gathering Space or Focal
Point: Create an identity through
public space.
x Pedestrian Orientation: Facilitate
the pedestrian experience through
quality urban design. Ensure
access and connectivity to adjacent
neighborhoods.
x Architecture: moldings, spires,
canopies, balconies and building
locations all create a sense of
identity and contribute to the
experience.
x Strategic Parking: utilize shared
parking, on-street parking, parking
behind buildings and structured
parking.
x Connectivity: mixed use areas
should be tied in to adjacent
residential development.
52
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
What does mixed-use development look like in Prosper? We asked the community in a public
Visual Character Survey. The highest rated mixed-use pictures are shown below.
Past planning efforts, including the Town’s previous comprehensive plan, have indicated that the most
opportunistic location for a Town Center, a large mixed-use district, would be the area roughly
bounded by First Street to the north, Highway 380 to the south, BNSF Railroad to the west and Preston
Road to the east. This area is currently identified as a planned development by the Town’s zoning
ordinance.
Within Prosper, mixed-use areas may be appropriate along the Dallas North Tollway, Highway 380,
Town Center and Old Town districts, as shown below.
53 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Horizontal and Vertical Mixed-Use
Development
Mixed-use developments that include a range
of land uses incorporated within the same
building, but typically at different levels, are
referred to as vertical mixed-use developments.
Common examples of vertical integration
include apartments and lofts over ground level
retail and office uses. Examples of vertical
mixed-use developments are Shops at Legacy in
Plano, Watters Creek in Allen and the West
Village/State-Thomas areas of Dallas. Vertical
mixed-use development was preferred by
Prosper residents.
Horizontal mixed-use development is
representative of a mixture of uses within close
proximity to each other, but not necessarily
within the same building. Horizontal mixed-use
developments typically include residential uses
along the periphery of the larger development
area, separate from a more intense retail and
office core. An example of horizontal mixed-
use development is Southlake Town Center.
The central area of the Town Center includes
retail and office uses with residential
townhomes located on the periphery of the
development, primarily on the east side.
Two factors considered when determining
whether vertical or horizontal integration
should be utilized are land availability and land
value. In more intense areas of development,
land values are typically higher and land
availability may be significantly less. In such
locations, vertical integration, and higher
densities (up to 5 stories), would be most
appropriate. In Prosper, vertical integration of
mixed uses will likely occur within the Dallas
North Tollway and Town Center districts.
Horizontal mixed-use integration typically
occurs where land availability and value can
accommodate an overall lower density. Here,
1-3 story retail and office may be surrounded by
townhomes, patio homes, multi-unit homes and
other less intense uses. In Prosper, horizontal
mixed uses will likely occur within the Highway
380 and Town Center districts.
Vertical Mixed-Use
x Characteristics
o Multiple uses within the same building
o Live-above lofts and apartments
o More urban in nature
o Premium rents
o 4-5 story height for buildings with
residential uses located above the first
floor
o Structured Parking
x Considerations
o Consume less land
o Land value (density to maximize value)
o Higher density (typically more urban )
o Location: less appropriate when single
family residential areas are present
Horizontal Mixed-Use
x Characteristics
o Multiple uses within a planned areas,
but not necessarily within the same
building
o 1-3 story heights/lower density nature
o Areas of apartments, townhomes,
brown stones, patio homes and multi-
unit homes around the periphery,
buffering low-density neighborhoods.
o Structured parking or rear parking/rear
entry garages
o Typically more purchased units than
rental units.
x Considerations
o Consume more land
o With buffering, may be located near
residential areas along HWY 380
54
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Transit Oriented Development
If transit oriented development becomes a desire in Prosper, it
should reflect the Town’s values and should be customized to fit
the Town’s built environment.
As the Town and DFW region continue to grow, and as the
regional transit network becomes more established, transit may
become a more viable and desired option for Prosper residents,
particularly for commuters. Feedback received from the Town Hall
indicates that transit is not desired at the current time. While rail
transit may not be an immediate need and may not be realistically
achieved for some time, discussion with the CPAC indicated that it
may be in the best interest of the Town to identify a potential
location for a rail stop and allow future residents to determine
whether or not rail will be appropriate if the 19.5 mile line to
Celina becomes a reality. If the North Carrolton to Celina Line is
constructed, the train will traverse the center of Prosper multiple
times daily. If this scenario occurs, it was expressed that rail
should be used to benefit the community, particularly as an
economic development asset.
If the desire for rail connectivity arises in the future, the most
appropriate location for a future transit stop, and for transit
oriented development, may be in the Old Town district of the
community, likely at the intersection of the BNSF railroad and First
Street. In addition to an existing rail line, the Old Town district
contains the historical past of the Town and therefore presents
many opportunities for a mixture of preservation and
redevelopment—a theme consistent with what community
residents indicated during visioning exercises. A station in Old
Town should be architecturally and aesthetically compatible with
the development in the Town Center and Old Town districts.
As Prosper continues to grow, development and redevelopment of
the Old Town area may become more realistic. If transit is
deemed appropriate in the future, its location in Old Town may
help to bring a unique mix of business, restaurants and offices to
the Old Town core.
The ultimate decision on whether or not transit is appropriate for
Prosper should be left to future residents and future Town Councils
to decide.
55 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Context Sensitive Solutions
Context sensitive solutions is the practice of
developing transportation projects that serve all
users and meet the needs of the neighborhoods
through which they pass. It is a collaborative
process that involves all stakeholders in
development street designs that fit into the
character of surrounding neighborhoods while
maintaining safety and mobility. The key is that
elements of the street should complement the
context of surrounding or adjacent
development in order to generate a “roadway
experience” and therefore the roadway may
take on certain characteristics to support and
be compatible with adjacent development. The
process of designing CSS roadways is similar to
the process of designing traditional
thoroughfares in that automobile traffic is
considered with traffic counts, traffic demand
and level of service information-gathering
efforts. The difference is that in addition to
automobile traffic, other elements, such as
pedestrian traffic, built environment and land
use, are also carefully considered.
The CSS approach recommends designing
thoroughfares based upon:
x Community objectives
x Functional classes
x Thoroughfare types
x Adjacent land use
x Environmental considerations
In order to design accordingly, decision makers
must understand the key relationship between
transportation and land use, particularly the
flexibility that may be needed in roadway
design in order to accommodate a thoroughfare
to changing urban form within the community.
Understanding key community objectives for
land use within the community is also
important in order to ensure that public
infrastructure investments are in line with
ultimate land use objectives.
A roadway may traverse a wide range of land uses. It is important to design the roadway
considering its role and impact in each particular area.
56
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Coleman Road is a prime example of an
application of context sensitive solutions in
Prosper. Coleman Road will transition as it
traverses the community. The southern portion
of Coleman Road will traverse the Town Center.
In this area, it must consider the more intense
development that will likely be located within
the Town Center and its focus will be primarily
placed on moving traffic and safely
accommodating the pedestrian. As the
roadway moves into the Old Town district, it
must respect the character of Old Town. The
roadway will likely narrow and head-in and
parallel parking will likely be utilized. Other
pedestrian amenities, such as bulb outs, street
trees and enhanced sidewalks may be
considered. As Coleman Road continues to the
north of Old Town, it will transition into a
residential thoroughfare with more lanes added
and on-street parking removed.
Context Sensitive Principles
x Satisfies purpose and needs as
agreed to by a full range of
stakeholders
x Safe facility for user and
community
x Project in harmony with
community, preserves natural,
aesthetic, historic and natural
resource values of the area
x Project exceeds the expectations
of designers and stakeholders—
achieves a level of excellence.
x Project involves efficient and
effective use of resources
x Designed and built with minimal
disruption to community
x Project seen to have lasting value
to the community
An ITE Recommended Practice: Context Sensitive
Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for
Walkable Communities (2006)
Safe and attractive roadways
for pedestrians and traffic in
retail areas
On-street parking in
historic areas or high
pedestrian areas
Transition into resdiential
areas
57 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Building Orientation
Building orientation has the ability to
significantly affect the built environment of the
community. Over the past several decades,
strip shopping centers have been defined by
large setbacks and with parking areas located
between the building and the roadway. With
this type of design, much of the visual identity
of the corridor is placed on the parking lots and
vehicles, rather than on the architecture and
identity of the community and the buildings
themselves.
During visioning exercises, many Prosper
residents indicated that high quality non-
residential development should be a priority in
Prosper and that the “cookie-cutter” strip
centers that define many suburban
neighborhoods should be discouraged within
Prosper. Building orientation is a way to ensure
that high-quality retail and commercial centers
are developed within Prosper.
Retail centers should be clustered together,
when possible, creating nodes of activity rather
than strips of activity. Neighborhood retail
centers will most likely be located at major
intersections within Prosper. Clustering of
buildings into nodes of activity can often help to
define outdoor spaces such as plazas and
courtyards and the strategic orientation of
buildings can also minimize circulation conflicts.
An additional design which may be considered
is the placement of parking areas behind
buildings rather than along the roadway
frontage. The visual experience is then focused
upon the landscaping and architectural design
of the building, rather than on a large parking
lot located in the front.
Parking Lot Frontage and Building Frontage
Strip Center Retail and Nodal Retail
58
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Livable Neighborhoods
Life-Cycle Housing Connectivity Identity Recreational
Access
Quality
Development
Neighborhood
Conveniences
Open Space Neighborhood
Signage
Encourage a variety of
housing types and sizes
to accommodate
different stages of life
within Prosper. Ensure
that all housing types are
built to the highest
possible quality.
Encourage connected
neighborhoods
emphasizing both
internal and external
connectivity.
Neighborhoods should be
linked to each other as
well as to the community
as a whole.
Encourage neighborhood
events, such as National
Night Out, block parties
and other neighborhood
events to promote social
interaction among
neighbors and to foster a
sense of community.
Incorporate the Parks
Master Plan in order to
create outdoor
recreational
opportunities for both
neighborhoods and the
community, enhancing
the quality of life of
Prosper.
Continue to encourage
the creation of custom
homes, a definitive
feature of Prosper,
through anti-monotony
standards and by
requiring quality building
materials that reduce
maintenance and
preserve long-term
appearance.
Incorporate
neighborhood retail
centers in strategic
locations which optimize
convenience for adjacent
neighborhoods. Offer
walkable connections to
adjacent neighborhood
as well as automobile
connections and discreet
parking.
In addition to parks and
trails, neighborhoods
should include open
space in order to
preserve the rural nature
of Prosper.
Delineate different
neighborhoods through
entrance features and
signage toppers.
Neighborhoods are the most important component within Prosper. They are the backbone of the
Town and the quality of its neighborhoods is the single greatest priority of its residents. Livable
neighborhoods, regardless of what type of environment, have some common characteristics. The
following is a discussion of some of these common characteristics as well as strategies to ensure that
neighborhoods are protected, preserved and enhanced as development continues to occur within the
Town.
59 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Long Term Neighborhood Viability
Neighborhoods are often defined in more
abstract terms by the sense of “community”
and the quality of life enjoyed by the people
who live and play there. Well-designed
neighborhoods provide a setting for residents
to develop a strong sense of belonging, which is
promoted by their interactions. The quality and
livability of the Town’s neighborhoods are
integral components of the overall character.
The key to a successful neighborhood is creating
a livable environment where the ongoing
investment in property is supported by public
investment in parks and greenbelt areas;
opportunities for social interaction; accessibility
for pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles; and
distinctive characteristics which give an area a
unique identity. Prosper neighborhoods may be
quantified in terms of the following
characteristics:
• Opportunities for neighborhood
interaction;
• Careful and strategic placement of
retail uses and other appropriate
non-residential uses within access
of the neighborhood area;
• Continued investment in public and
private property to stabilize
property values;
• Condition of public facilities and
infrastructure serving the area;
• A sense of “community” and
belonging among residents through
distinctive neighborhood identities;
and
• Access to amenities such as parks,
open spaces, public facilities and
trails; and
• Incorporating open spaces within
neighborhoods as a definitive
feature of Prosper.
The majority of Prosper’s housing stock is
relatively new and in good physical condition.
Ensuring that the preceding principles are used
to guide new development will protect the long
term viability and continued investment in
Prosper’s neighborhoods in the future.
The following is feedback received
from Prosper Residents during the
Public Meeting regarding its
neighborhoods:
x Large-Lot Homes
x Keep home values high
x Mixed-use lofts/apartments
along certain corridors
x Open space/tree preservation
x Neighborhood services
x Sidewalks
x Bicycle/Jogging Trails
x Minimal Street lighting
x Sound barriers/buffers on high-
traffic corridors
x “Chic Country” community
x Space for community/
neighborhood festivals and
events
x Entertainment for families
60
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Housing Mix
It is important for communities to provide a
variety of housing for its citizens and to meet
the needs of different segments of the
population. The “full-life cycle” is intended to
describe all stages of life—young singles,
professionals, families with children, families
without children, singles, empty-nesters,
retirees and seniors. While large-lot traditional
single family homes will be the majority land
use in Prosper, the following is a list of housing
options which may be utilized to create full-life
cycle options in Prosper. Regardless of the type
of housing, it is essential that the highest level
of design be utilized, including quality
architecture, amenities and long-lasting, low
maintenance building materials.
Mixed-Use Apartment/Loft: High density dwelling units for rent which
are typically located above ground level retail uses. May be renter or
owner occupied. Generally speaking, these housing types appeal to
young professionals, young couples and singles.
Snout House: A single family detached residential unit where the
garage typically projects from the unit towards the street. The smaller
housing size provides a high quality and slightly more affordable
housing option for young families and starter families.
Single Family Home: A larger single family detached dwelling unit.
Generally accommodates larger established families with children.
Patio Home: Typically a zero-lot line home or single family attached
home with a reduced setback from the street and a lot width under 50
feet. Such uses are becoming increasingly pouplar with empty nesters
who seek a quality residential structure with less yard maintenance
and living space.
Mother-in-law Suite: This is an accessory residential unit located on a
single family lot which does not have a presence on the front street. It
will also include a separate entry from the main house. These
accessory units are typically used to provide living space for extended
family members.
Multiple
Family y
Starter
Home
Move-up
Home
MEmpty
Nester
E
Adult
Living
Complex
Adult
Assisted
Living
Md
61 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Housing Mix-Alternative Housing Options
Generally speaking, most of Prosper’s housing
options are, and will continue to be, larger lot
single family homes—the majority of residential
housing options should take place on lots
greater than 12,500 square feet in size. Prosper
residents have indicated that other housing
types are appropriate within the community but
that such units should primarily be confined
within the Dallas North Tollway, Highway 380,
Town Center and Old Town districts The
following are the preferred housing options, in
descending order, as preferred by the CPAC:
x Mixed-Use Lofts
x Mixed-Use Apartments
x Patio Homes
x Zero-Lot Line Homes
x Snout Houses
x Brownstones
x Townhomes
With the exception of mixed-use lofts and
mixed-use apartments, many of these
alternative housing options will require a
different accessibility approach, particularly
when looking at garage location and entry. The
large lot pattern of Prosper’s neighborhoods
has, up to this point, negated the need for rear
entry garages. When lot sizes are reduced, such
as in the cases of townhomes, brownstones,
patio homes and zero-lot line homes, design
approaches tend to favor rear entry garages for
two primary reasons; aesthetics and drainage.
Rear-entry garages on developments with lot
sizes less than 50 feet in width help to protect
the visual integrity of the streetscape by
reducing the visibility of closely situated garages
and driveways. This is particularly important
when looking at townhomes, brownstones,
zero-lot line homes and patio homes which are
either attached or closely situated to one
another. Rear entry garages allow more
landscaping opportunities and create a more
walkable environment in such areas by reducing
the frequency of individual driveways.
In addition to aesthetics, rear-entry garages
may also aid with drainage. Determining where
water that collects in ones backyard should
drain is often a contested issue. Having rear-
entry garages or a small rear yard/rear patio
feature can be a design advantage to this effect.
While rear-entry garages should be considered
for the densest forms of residential housing
options, it is likely that front-entry garages will
continue in the majority of Prosper’s lower
density neighborhoods.
Rear-Entry Townhome
Front-Entry Townhome
62
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Transitional Uses, Screening and Buffering
The Future Land Use Plan seeks to minimize
conflict between residential and nonresidential
areas, but screening and buffering efforts can
help to mitigate any remaining incompatibility
between land uses.
The Town should consider reviewing the
existing screening and buffering requirements
between residential and nonresidential
developments. There are several options to
alleviate the conflict: require transitional uses,
screening, and/or buffering.
Larger setbacks, such as a 40 foot setback, may
be utilized to protect the public view and create
a more rural feel. Within such setbacks,
extensive landscaping, such as berms, double
rows of large trees and solid living evergreen
screens may be used. Examples of “living
screens” were rated favorably in the Visual
Character Survey and include the types of
screening mentioned above, typically on
setbacks greater than 25 feet. When landscape
berms are used, consideration for maintenance
should be a priority. Typically speaking a 1:3
slope should be used for landscape berms to
ensure proper maintenance. So, for example, a
25’ setback would allow a 4’ berm; a 30‘ setback
would allow a 5’ berm; and a 40’ setback would
allow a 6’ berm.
If a screening wall is used, the wall should be
constructed entirely of brick, masonry, or other
like material consistent with the exterior finish
of the primary structure. It should also be at
least 6 feet in height. Wood is a high
maintenance material and therefore is not
recommended for screening walls.
Construction of such a wall would typically be a
responsibility of the nonresidential land use
developer. If a retaining wall is located on the
property line, the screening wall should be
located on top of the retaining wall to maximize
visual screening.
In addition to screening
residential areas from non-
residential areas, screening and
buffering techniques should also
be used to protect the visual
realm from unwanted eyesores
such as:
o Trash receptacles
o Utility Boxes
o Commercial loading docks
o Expansive parking lots
A variety of screening uses may be
utilized including masonry or brick
walls, shrubs, trees and landscape
berms, among others.
63 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Open Space Preservation
A common theme expressed by CPAC members
and Town Hall attendees was the need to
preserve open space within Prosper. Many
residents have chosen to live in Prosper due to
its quiet, rural feel and abundant open spaces.
Prosper is located along a prime development
corridor and therefore significant pressure will
be placed on land owners to sell property and
existing open spaces for development in the
future. Therefore, in order to preserve open
space within the community, Prosper may
consider the following options.
Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) is a
program that enables the community, or a land
trust, to purchase the development rights from
a landowner. Essentially, the municipality or
trust would purchase the difference between
the appraised and market value (what a
developer would pay for purchase of the
property) in exchange for the landowner not
developing the land. The landowner can
continue to use the land as farmland or open
space. Once an agreement is reached, the land
may not be subdivided or developed. In the
future, the property owner may sell the land at
the appraised value, but the restrictions on
development remain. One advantage to PDR is
the preservation of open space and the
continued ownership of land by the property
owner. The disadvantage is such land remains
under the control of the landowner, even after
development rights have been purchased, and
therefore is not public space. Only the
development rights have been purchased, not
the land itself.
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
While not commonly used in Texas, TDR is a
way of transferring development rights from a
transfer area, or open space, to a receiving area
(area approved for development). If, for
example, the tollway district was identified as a
receiving zone, a developer that was seeking
development greater than the approved density
for that district could purchase the
development rights from an area containing
open space and transfer that right to develop to
his/her property along the tollway. The
developer is therefore able to build at a higher
density and open space is able to be preserved
elsewhere. This increased density option would
only be allowed in areas identified as receiving
zones, not within individual neighborhoods.
Conservation Easements are another method
of preserving open space. Conservation
easements are initiated by the land owner in an
attempt to protect their property from future
development. In its publication Conservation
Easements: A Guide for Texas Landowners, The
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department outlines
many of the advantages of conservation
easements, including tax benefits. Typically, a
property owner voluntarily creates an
agreement with a municipality or county that
limits development on the landowner’s
property. In a conservation easement, the
landowner will limit their right to one or more
of the following: right to manage resources,
change use, subdivide or develop. Conservation
easements ensure that a farm, ranch, estate or
open space area is preserved from
development pressures in the future. The
advantage to conservation easements is that
land is preserved indefinitely and such
easements may be sold or donated to land
trusts for significant tax credits. The
disadvantage is that the landowner receives no
monetary reimbursement for not developing,
such as in the purchase of development rights
scenario, other than tax credits.
Parks Plan
The Town of Prosper currently has a park
dedication ordinance that requires 1 acre of
park dedication for every 35 units or 5% of total
land. The system of parks and trails established
by the 2007 Parks Master Plan is the most
significant way open space can be preserved
within Prosper. Park land dedication should be
guided by the adopted Parks Plan.
64
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Social Interaction
The term community naturally implies the
congregation and interaction of people.
Residents identified that one of the defining
features of Prosper were its residents and the
sense of community that exists within the
Town.
As the Town continues to grow, a sense of
community will continue to be an important
characteristic of the Town. With a larger
population, the built environment will need to
provide spaces and opportunities for residents
to meet, congregate, interact and enjoy life.
Creating such venues will help foster a sense of
community among residents and will create
family environments where interaction begets
new friendships.
An amphitheater was seen as a potential
opportunity to host Town events. This
Amphitheater, when combined with a larger
open space/park area, could serve as a central
location for Town festivals and events.
In addition to a community garden, many
communities in North Texas have begun to offer
farmers markets, encouraging local growers to
bring in fresh produce for residents to purchase.
The number of farmers markets has increased
17% from 2010 to 2011, with the second largest
growth occurring in Texas at 38% (US
Department of Agriculture – Agricultural
Marketing Service news release, Aug 5, 2011).
Farmers markets and community gardens can
also be beneficial in supporting the local
economy and encouraging social interaction.
The creation of the Town Center and other
mixed uses will also help to create additional
places for Prosper residents to interact and
socialize with other families by creating
opportunities for retail shopping and dining.
65 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Corridors and Districts
Preston Road
A major component of the visioning exercises pertained to the three major corridors in Prosper:
Preston Road, Dallas North Tollway and Highway 380. The following discussions on each corridor
are a result of the visioning exercises and feedback received from the comprehensive plan
advisory committee and the general public.
Land Use
Preston Road was described by numerous residents as “our road.”
Traversing the center of the community, Preston Road will have a
variety of land uses and will have a varying context. In the
southern portion of Prosper, Preston Road will accommodate
higher degrees of traffic, particularly as it traverses the Town
Center. Retail, office and some medium density residential will be
located along Preston Road on the southern end of the Town,
gradually becoming more residential in nature as it moves north.
Small scale office and retail may be located in certain areas along
Preston Road and these should be the types of uses which service
adjacent neighborhoods. Big box uses, mid-rise development, and
more intense land uses were generally not viewed as favorable as
small-scale retail and office uses. Residents identified an upscale
grocery store, such as a Central Market or a Whole Foods, as one
of their top priorities along Preston Road. Some medium density
development was positively rated along Preston Road, but such
development should not be in the form of garden style
apartments and would best be included as part of the Town
Center area in the southern portion of the corridor.
Character
The character of Preston Road should be more rural in nature,
respecting the small-town character of the community. Large,
heavily landscaped setbacks should be prevalent along the
roadway helping to differentiate Prosper from Frisco while
also providing a natural sense of calm for Prosper residents.
Wide setbacks are particularly important as the roadway
traverses residential areas generally north of First Street.
Areas of retail should be designed to the highest level of
quality and architectural characteristics within individual
developments should follow a theme consistent with recently
completed development. Residents felt that retail areas
should be organized in a nodal nature rather than in a strip
center fashion in order to prevent the entire roadway
frontage from being consumed by retail. Unanchored, stand-
alone retail establishments should be discouraged in favor of
a nodal shopping center development.
66
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Dallas North Tollway
Land Use
Unlike Preston Road, regional development pressures will be
likely be placed along the Dallas North Tollway. Feedback
received from the public indicated that more intense uses
would be appropriate along the corridor. Types of uses that
scored relatively well included mid-rise office buildings,
mixed-use development and corporate office parks, among
others. Generally speaking, the DNT corridor will contain
land uses that support a more regional context and will likely
include office space, retail uses and business parks. High
density residential is appropriate within the DNT corridor.
Mixed-use lofts/apartments are the preferred style of high
density residential within this district. Garden style
apartments, however, should be prohibited. Images
depicting big box retail, auto sales centers and commercial
services, such as self-storage facilities, scored the lowest
along the Dallas North Tollway.
Character
The character of the Dallas North Tollway will be significantly
more intense than the rest of the Town. The most intense
development will be located in the southern portion of the
corridor, primary around the interchange of the Dallas North
Tollway and Highway 380. Development in the Northeast
corner of this intersection will likely be a continuation of the
Town Center district, much in the same way office uses
surround Legacy Town Center in Plano. Areas on the
Northwest corner of the interchange are currently identified as
mixed-use. A mixture of office, retail and medium to high
density residential will likely develop within this area.
Floodplain on the north side of the Northwest corner will serve
as a buffer between the more intense development and the
low density residential neighborhoods to the north. Intensity
of development should gradually decrease on the north side of
the Dallas North Tollway corridor and backage roads will help
to facilitate the creation of pad sites that may buffer the
Tollway from residential uses.
67 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Highway 380
Land Use
Of the three major corridors, Highway 380 contains the
longest stretch of potential development. Generally
speaking, land uses along the Highway 380 Corridor were
seen to be more commercial in nature. Unlike Preston Road
and the Dallas North Tollway, big-box retail scored relatively
well along Highway 380, in addition to office, hotel uses,
retail centers and service uses, such as a gas station and fast
food restaurant. Similar to the other categories, industrial
uses, including warehouses, were not seen as a highly
appropriate use along the Highway 380 corridor. Due to the
length of the corridor, a variety of land uses will be located
along the corridor. Typically speaking, retail and service
establishments will locate adjacent to Highway 380 and
along major intersections, in a nodal pattern of activity.
Such uses capitalize on higher traffic counts and require a
higher degree of visibility. Big box uses may also be located
along the corridor, but pad sites should be located adjacent
to Highway 380 to capitalize on visibility and pass-by trips.
Residential uses, such as patio homes, snout homes and
townhomes and brownstones may be located within this
district. Such uses will likely be used as a buffer between
more intense uses along Highway 380 and lower intensity
residential neighborhoods to the north. Such uses may also
be located mid-block, reserving major intersections for retail
and commercial uses.
Character
The character of Highway 380 will be much more
commercial in nature. Wide setbacks with large
landscape buffering will protect the visual appearance of
the corridor, while still allowing more intense
commercial land uses to operate. Big Box retailers may
be permitted, but they should be designed to the highest
possible quality, incorporating significant landscaping,
high quality materials, such as stone and brick, and
should contain architectural enhancements and building
articulation.
Medium and high density residential options may be
included within the Highway 380 corridor but such uses
should be carefully designed to protect, enhance and
buffer low density neighborhoods to the north from
more intense development along Highway 380.
68
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Old Town
The Old Town area of Prosper is, in many ways, the heart and soul of the community. As the Town
continues to experience rapid growth, it is this core and center than can serve as an identifying
feature of the Town and can also serve to showcase Prosper’s humble beginnings. Many
communities in the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area have used their downtowns as an
identifying feature. Prosper residents have identified the significance of the downtown area and
have indicated its potential role in the future of the community.
Coleman Road serves as a divider between residential uses to the east and non-residential uses to
the west. The western side of Coleman will be the primary area of focus for redevelopment and
infill. The Old Town district indicates that commercial, office, retail and single family uses will be
permitted within the district. It is anticipated that many single family dwelling units along First
Street and Broadway will gradually convert to boutique retail and cottage office uses, requiring
flexibility in land use decisions as these areas transition over time.
Coleman, Broadway and First Street will serve as the primary corridors within the downtown area.
Special attention to context sensitivity should be given to these roadways as they move from newer
areas into the downtown. Parallel and head-in parking will likely be included along with pedestrian
walkways and streetscape enhancements.
If a transit station is built at First Street and the BNSF railroad, higher density residential options
should be permitted near the station. Currently, only studio apartments are permitted within the
Old Town district. High density residential options, such as vertical mixed-use development,
townhomes and brownstones should be considered within close proximity of the transit station.
Locating high-density residential within 1/4 mile of the transit station will help ensure long term
viability and effectiveness of transit and will ensure that Prosper’s transit station is more than simply
a “park-and-ride.”
All future development should be consistent in theme, possibly emphasizing an “old downtown” feel
consistent with Texas downtowns at the turn of the 20th century. Lewisville, McKinney and Plano are
examples of successful downtown rehabilitation projects which project such an image.
Old Town Transportation Plan Section A: Four lane divided roadway with a landscaped median and a landscaped parkway separating pedestrians from traffic. This section serves as a major entrance into Old Town from the east. No on-street parking. Section B: Two lane divided boulevard with a large center median containing landscaping. Wide travel lanes allow for bicycle accommodation and a landscaped parkway separates pedestrians from traffic. No on-street parking. Section C: Two lane divided boulevard with a large center median containing landscaping. On-street parallel parking is permitted and a landscaped parkway separates pedestrians from traffic. Section D: Two lane undivided urban roadway. Wide 20’ sidewalks accommodate patio seating, pedestrian traffic and street trees. On-street angled parking is permitted and bulb-outs are located at intersections to enhance pedestrian visibility at crosswalks. Section E: Two lane undivided roadway with on-street parallel parking and an immediately adjacent 8’ sidewalk. A large private setback of 25’ is included. Section F: Two lane undivided roadway with on-street parallel parking and a 15’ sidewalk. 10’ of the sidewalk will be located within the right-of-way and the additional 5 feet will be a 5’ setback to building face. Section G: Two lane divided roadway with a center median containing landscaping. On-street parallel parking and a 10’ sidewalk are included. Land Use The predominant land use within Old Town will be single-family residential. All infill development within such areas should conform to the architectural guidelines established for the Old Town district. Such guidelines are created to protect the continuity of look and feel within Old Town. Along Broadway and First Street, single-family uses will gradually transition to boutique, cottage-style office and/or specialty retail uses. Broadway west of Coleman, will be the retail core of the downtown. Shops, restaurants, and small office uses may be located within the main street retail area. This area is intended to be the heart and main activity center of the Old Town Area. As redevelopment occurs, building frontages should be brought to the property line to be consistent with ultimate streetscape improvements. Adjacent to the retail core, a mixed-use district incorporating mixed use lofts/apartments will serve as a buffer between the Business Park and the core of Old Town. This area will also provide rooftops that service adjacent retail establishments. The Green space area will serve as a community park and its location adjacent to the retail core of Old Town and the mixed-use district will make it an opportunistic and useable open space area. Niche retail is recommended along Preston Road and at the northern end of Coleman. Retail development within these areas should fit within the architectural framework of the Old Town area. Setbacks should be reduced, when possible, along Coleman and Broadway to frame the roadways.
71 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Image Enhancement
Prosper is a unique community. Many who
have moved to the Town express their diverse
reasons for relocating to Prosper. Reasons
include its excellent school system, its wide
open spaces, its large lot homes, its friendly
neighbors and rural setting with access to the
Town, among others. This section seeks to
define some of those attributes and using these
attributes to establish a recognizable image for
the community’s built environment.
Branding
g
Community branding is the concept of establishing an identity and
then working to ensure that the desired identity is reflected and
portrayed in the built environment. In Prosper, residents have
clearly identified that the rural, open spaces of the community are a
defining feature of Prosper, particularly defining when compared
with other North Dallas suburbs such as Frisco, Plano, McKinney and
Little Elm.
Residents identified that a common perception and image of
Prosper to outsiders is an upscale, rural community with open
spaces and large-lot homes. Despite the current availability of open
spaces and agricultural land, the Town will continue to grow and
develop. As the community grows, however, development
standards may reflect certain architectural characteristics that may
be unique to Prosper, helping to visually distinguish the Town from
adjacent communities, particularly its retail centers. Additionally,
setbacks and landscaping may be used along major corridors to
create a more rural atmosphere, even as the Town develops. Large
setbacks and medians may be heavily landscaped with trees, shrubs
and other natural elements. As trees grow and mature, the
presence of a dense tree canopy will help to create a more natural
feel within the community. Additionally, the Town may reduce the
amount of internal lighting to mitigate light pollution and enhance
dark skies, further enhancing the rural feel.
The Town’s extensive Parks Plan, as it is implemented, will also
significantly help to create and preserve open spaces and will
contribute significantly to the Town’s quality of life by providing
outdoor recreational opportunities.
As development occurs, all new development should not only meet
the development standards of the community, but should also be
analyzed based upon how they will contribute to the image and
branding of the community based upon Prosper’s vision, goals and
values.
72
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Gateways
The visual monotony that is often inherent to
communities within a particular geographic
area makes it appear that each one is just like
its neighbors. For example, the visual
appearance of a community to a traveler along
the Dallas North Tollway may be very similar to
the appearance of any other nearby
community. This lack of design variety,
especially along major corridors, tends to create
anonymity, and it becomes difficult for people
to know when they have left one community
and entered another. Gateways can provide a
strong sense of arrival to, as well as a sense of
departure from, the community. These features
are the first thing visitors see when they arrive
and the last impression visitors have when they
leave.
The design of gateways into the Town of
Prosper should be guided by several factors.
One of the most obvious factors is the number
of people using a particular entry point. The
most heavily traveled the roadway entering the
community will be the Dallas North Tollway.
Although it may be difficult to create an
aesthetically-pleasing gateway visible from the
highway, the bridges and the frontage roads are
alternate options. Improved overpasses with
decorative rails, landscaping, lighting, and
possibly signage are possibilities. In addition,
two entry features for the Town placed directly
along the Dallas North Tollway frontage roads,
both leading into and out of the community
(i.e., at the northern and southern corporate
limits) would be a positive step in creating a
visual identity once the Tollway is constructed.
Gateways could include the use of signage,
landscaping, and other design elements such as
lighting, fencing, paving patterns, art/sculptural
elements, a variety of earth forms, or other
identifier that signifies arrival into the Town.
Another important factor in the design of
gateways is to develop an entryway that
provides a sense of identity for the community
while projecting a desirable image for the Town.
For example, the windmill is a component of
the Prosper logo and may be used as a
component of Town gateways, if so desired by
the community. The windmill feature is a
strong representation of who Prosper is –it
identifies the Town’s humble beginnings as a
small agrarian town and also highlights and
reflects many of the Town’s values such as large
lots, open spaces and rural, small town feel.
Consideration should be given to establishing a
uniform design concept for all gateway areas,
and hierarchical distinction between major and
minor gateways can be achieved through design
modification for each type of entry feature.
Minor gateways could be specific to the
individual neighborhood, reflecting the distinct
character of each area.
Design of entry features should take into
consideration the setting in which each feature
will be placed. Although an entry feature might
ideally be placed at the corner of a roadway
intersection which is at, or near, the true Town
limits, the design of the feature might conflict
either visually or aesthetically with an adjacent
retail use at the intersection. In such a
situation, it may be prudent to move the entry
feature further into the community to provide a
better setting and better visibility, such as
placing it upon the thoroughfare median, if
there is one. The traffic speed at which an entry
feature is viewed must also be taken into
account, and the size, boldness and scale of the
feature should be designed accordingly.
It is important for the Town of Prosper to assert
its differing qualities to distinguish itself from
the surrounding communities. Gateway
features are a simple first step in this direction.
Priority for funding entry features, both in
terms of total dollars spent per entry and in
terms of the timing of expenditures, should be
directly related to the number of people using a
particular entry point. Often, donations can be
solicited from civic groups to assist in the
funding of specific gateways and/or their
maintenance (e.g., an "adopt a gateway"
program).
73 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Gateway size and design should consider traffic,
traffic speeds land use context. In Prosper,
primary gateways will be located along the
Dallas North Tollway, Highway 380, Preston
Road and the “corners” along the Town’s
perimeters. Secondary gateways may be
located along Coit, Legacy, Teel, Lovers Lane,
Gee and other minor entrances into Prosper.
Gateways take a wide variety of shapes, sizes
and forms. They may be very large, such as the
Frisco gateway at SH 121 and the Dallas North
Tollway, or they may be small. Some logos
include the community logo, others incorporate
art or design that is reflective of the
community’s values and history.
Prosper may desire to use the windmill as a
design element within its future gateways. The
windmill is a symbol that is reflective of the
Town’s history and past and is currently a
component of the Town’s logo. The design of the
Town’s gateways should be consistent in theme
and should help to identify Prosper to visitors as
well as welcome residents home.
74
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Maintaining compatibility between
the Zoning Map and the Future Land
Use Plan
Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government
Code states that “zoning regulations must be
adopted in accordance with a comprehensive
plan.” Consequently, a zoning map and zoning
decisions should reflect the Future Land Use
Plan to the fullest extent possible. Therefore,
approval of development proposals that are
inconsistent with the Future Land Use Plan will
often result in inconsistency between the
Future Land Use Plan and the zoning
regulations.
At times, the Town will likely encounter
development proposals that do not directly
reflect the purpose and intent of the land use
pattern as shown on the Future Land Use Plan
map. Review of such development proposals
should include the following considerations:
x Will the proposed change enhance the
site and the surrounding area?
x Is the proposed change a better use
than that originally envisioned and
depicted on the Future Land Use Plan
map?
x Will the proposed use impact adjacent
residential areas in a negative manner?
x Will the proposed use be compatible
with and/or enhance adjacent
residential uses?
x Are uses adjacent to the proposed use
similar in nature in terms of
appearance, hours of operation, and
other general aspects of compatibility?
x Does the proposed use present a
significant benefit to the public health,
safety, welfare and/or social well-being
of the community?
x Would it contribute to the Town’s long-
term economic stability?
Development proposals that are inconsistent
with the Future Land Use Plan map (or that do
not meet its general intent) should be reviewed
based upon the above questions and should be
evaluated on their own merit. It should be
incumbent upon the applicant making such a
proposal to provide evidence that the proposal
meets the aforementioned considerations,
supports community goals and objectives as set
forth within this Plan, and represents a long
term economic and/or social benefits for the
community as a whole, not just a short-term
financial gain for whoever is developing the
project.
It is important to recognize that proposals not
directly consistent with the Plan could reflect
higher and better long-term uses than those
originally envisioned and shown on the Future
Land Use Plan map for a particular area. This
may be due to changing markets, demographics
and/or economic trends that occur at some
point in the future after the Plan is adopted. If
such changes occur, and especially if there are
demonstrated significant social and/or
economic benefits to the Town of Prosper, then
these proposals should be approved and the
Future Land Use Plan map should be amended
accordingly.
75 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
The thoroughfare system forms one of the most
visible and permanent elements of a
community. It establishes the framework for
community growth and development and, along
with the Future Land Use Plan, forms a long-
range statement of public policy. As the
alignment and right-of-way of major
transportation facilities are established and
adjacent property developed, it is difficult to
facilitate system changes without significant
financial impacts. However, by incorporating
programmed land uses and densities of the
Future Land Use Plan, strategies can be
developed that maximize the land
use/transportation relationship.
Several key principles were recognized in the
preparation of Plan recommendations and
included the following:
• Prosper should have safe and
convenient internal circulation between
neighborhoods, core community assets,
and special areas.
• Transportation facilities should define
rather than split residential areas in
order to preserve neighborhood
integrity. Through traffic should be
routed to specific facilities designed to
accommodate non-local and regional
traffic.
• A sidewalk and trail system connecting
Prosper’s amenities and parks with
neighborhoods should be available.
• Key corridors and gateways should
include enhanced landscaping to
promote image/identity.
• Monitor regional growth implications in
order to proactively address mobility
and accessibility issues to/from the
Town.
76
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION
Planning Context
2010 Thoroughfare Plan
Updated in July 2010, the Prosper Thoroughfare
Plan established a traditional grid network of
streets with connectivity of major roadways to
key streets in adjacent communities. Key to this
plan is the identification of strategic corridors
for accommodating local and long-term regional
travel demand. As regional growth is rapidly
moving northward through Collin County,
several key roadway facilities have been
identified for accommodating future cross-town
movement while others are aimed at
accommodating localized traffic.
Key north-south and east-west roadways (up to
six-lane) include Dallas North Tollway (DNT),
Preston Road (SH 289), Custer, Coit, Legacy,
Teel, FM1385/Gee Road, Highway 380 and FM
1464 Frontier Parkway/Parvin Road. Several
other east-west roadways are aimed at
accommodating localized traffic on smaller
sized streets (up to four-lane divided) and
include Prosper Trail, First Street/Fishtrap, and
Lovers Lane.
The Plan also established special roadway
considerations for Old Town, Town Center area,
backage roads along DNT and portions of
Highway 380.
The roadway network established in the 2010
Thoroughfare Plan is a departure from the
“modified hub and spoke” concept established
as part of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan. That
concept was aimed at localizing traffic from
within the community to desired hubs of
development situated within the Town. While
not dissimilar in nature to the grid network, the
plan also included an internal loop road, couplet
streets and connection points for development
support along DNT.
Other Planning Initiatives
NCTCOG Planning
The Regional Thoroughfare Plan (RTP) and the
Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) are
both important to consider when making
decisions locally. Coordination of planning
efforts may help accelerate funding sources and
ultimately help to ensure that roadways at a
regional level are functional and compatible.
The North Central Texas Council of
Governments (NCTCOG) is responsible for
creating both the RTP and the MTP—both are
directly related to the ability of the region to
compete nationally for federal transportation
funds. It is important that the Town monitor
both the RTP and the MTP and communicate
any changes in order to ensure that plans within
Prosper are understood by other agencies and
reflected accordingly.
2010 Prosper Thoroughfare Plan
77 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
Collin County Transportation Plan
In 1999, Collin County adopted the first
Transportation Mobility Plan aimed at
coordinating regional roadway
improvements among the
various municipalities and
agencies to address long-term
County growth needs and
capital improvements
planning. Subsequently
updated in 2003 and 2007,
Collin County is currently in the
process of initiating the next
generational update slated for
2012.
Within the Town, the 2007
County Plan contains some
differences relative to the
Prosper Thoroughfare Plan
including:
• Prosper Trail as a six-lane
divided (Plan has four
lanes)
• First Street as a six-lane
divided (Plan has four lanes)
• Extension of Independence Parkway
north of US380 to First Street (not on
Plan)
• Extension of La Cima beyond north First
Street to Frontier Parkway (not on Plan)
As the update to the 2012 Mobility Plan is
developed, it is recommended that Prosper’s
Thoroughfare Plan elements be conveyed to
County planners for inclusion into their plan.
The County Plan also contains the northeastern
section of the planned Dallas-Ft. Worth
Regional Outer Loop. Currently, only a portion
of this corridor, from Dallas North Tollway to SH
5, remains in the NCTCOG Metropolitan
Transportation Plan: Mobility 2035 as viable
due to financial funding constraints. While not
a direct impact to Prosper, a long-term benefit
of this improvement is the potential reduction
in north/south travel on surface streets in favor
of highway access on the DNT.
Area Transportation Service
A topic identified early in the planning process
was a desire to provide shuttle service for
seniors within Prosper. Collin County Area
Regional Transit (CCART) currently provides
transit services in Collin County, including on-
call/demand response. This service provided by
the County can be utilized by seniors, or other
Town residents, when there is a need for
transportation assistance.
CCART operates Monday through Friday with
service from 6am to 6pm. Advanced
reservations also can be made from 6am to
6pm.
2007 Collin County Transportation Plan
78
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION
Highway Improvements
Plans are underway for improvements to key
highway corridors within Prosper. The
following summarizes activity on Preston Road
(SH 289), US 380 and the DNT:
• Preston Road (SH 289) Overpass at
Highway 380: Construction is underway to
expand this overpass from two to six-lane
lane divided. Work on this project began in
March 2011 and is slated for completion in
September 2012.
• Preston Road (SH 289): Preston Road will
be expanded from two to six-lane divided
between Highway 380 and
FM1461/Frontier Parkway. Construction is
set to begin in the first quarter 2012 with
completion targeted for first quarter 2014.
All major crossings with Preston will be at-
grade.
• Highway 380: TXDOT is currently
developing schematic plans to expand this
facility from 4/5 lanes to six-lanes between
Custer Road and the Collin County line.
Between Lovers Lane, both east of Preston
and west of DNT, a differing roadway
section is being planned and will contain
grade separated main lanes at Preston and
DNT and frontage roads. The Highway 380
frontage roads will intersect with frontage
roads of DNT and Preston will be similar to
the SH 121/DNT/Preston interchange (three
level interchange). This 2-3 year project is
slated to begin early 2014 with completion
in 2016 or early 2017. Within the Denton
County portion of Highway 380, there are
no current plans for expansion at this time.
• Dallas North Tollway: Currently, no timing
has been established for the
implementation of the adjoining frontage
road or extension of main lanes to FM 428
in Celina. The Town is working with the
County to potentially initiate the
implementation of the southbound
frontage road between Highway 380 and
Frontier Parkway, however no plans have
been finalized at this time. Grade
separations are envisioned at Lovers Lane,
First Street, Prosper Trail and Frontier
Parkway.
Regional Rail
In 2005, NCTCOG initially examined the
feasibility of long-term regional rail service to
various areas of the Metroplex. Within the
Prosper area, analysis of regional rail extended
only through Frisco. The Frisco Line, a 34.3 mile
line extending from Irving to just south of
Highway 380 in Frisco, was considered in the
study. Evaluations considered long-term
population and employment growth, existing
rail corridors and compatibility with other
freight operations, projected rider-ship, capital
and operations/maintenance costs, system
connectivity, among others in the analysis. A
potential station location within Prosper is the
BNSF Railroad at First Street within the Old
Town district.
The analysis concluded with a rider-ship
forecast of 1,000 to 3,000 persons daily at the
far northern end of the line in Frisco, and was
initially recommended for inclusion to Mobility
2030 as a corridor for further evaluation. While
no funding has been identified at this time, this
line has been recommended for long-term
consideration in Mobility 2035.
Mobility 2035 has also identified the
consideration of this rail line through Prosper to
the northern county limit as a “corridor for
future evaluation”.
79 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
Existing Conditions
An analysis of existing traffic volume was
conducted to identify travel patterns and serve
as a basis for identifying roadway needs. Traffic
volume data collected in April 2010 as part of
the roadway impact fee system update was
used to conduct a level of service analysis. Data
collected as part of that study effort contained
PM peak hour directional volume—roadway
capacity values based on roadway functional
class and existing street cross-section.
“Level of service” refers to the operation
condition of a roadway segment under traffic
demand and is a calculation of volume to
capacity. Level of service is gauged with a
measure of “A” through “F”, with “A” reflecting
roadways with free flow and little or no
congestion, and “F” reflecting roadways with
severe congestion. The analysis revealed that,
the majority of roadways in Prosper appear to
be operating at acceptable levels of service
(A/B/C). The exceptions were Highway 380,
Preston Road and portions of Coit and Custer
Road north of Highway 380 during the peak
hour—these segments were calculated to
operate at or below acceptable levels of service
(LOS D and E/F). Planned expansion to Highway
380 and Preston should alleviate traffic
demands currently experienced. While peak
volumes are relatively low on Coit and Custer
Roads, the narrow roadway sections contribute
to the reduction in operational service.
Projected Conditions
The assessment of projected travel conditions
on the thoroughfare network is important to
determining the capability of the roadway
system to accommodate projected area growth
and roadway needs for a 20-year planning
period.
Two approaches were used to assess projected
travel demand conditions for a 20-year horizon.
The first approach involved review of travel
model forecasts prepared by NCTCOG as part of
Mobility 2035. The second approach involved
development of travel demand characteristics
based on remaining developable land within
Prosper and then assignment of projected
growth on this remaining developable land to
the adjacent road network to yield roadway
needs.
Existing Traffic Volume and Level of Service Analysis
80
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION
Projected Traffic Conditions
The Thoroughfare Plan network was compared
to travel forecasts prepared by NCTCOG in
order to assess its ability to accommodate
traffic from future land uses within the Town.
Regional travel forecast data from Mobility
2035: The Metropolitan Transportation Plan for
North Central Texas was used as a basis for the
comparison. This sophisticated model forecasts
traffic demand on the regional transportation
network relative to projected population and
employment growth for year 2035.
Projected 2035 traffic volumes for key
roadways include:
• Preston Road – 53,000
• Highway 380 – 65,000
• Custer Road – 36,000
• Coit Road – 7,000
• Frontier Parkway – 20,000
• FM 1385—34,000
It is important to note that assumptions are
made with respect to the amount of roadway
network in place for Year 2035. For example,
with Coit Road not included to its ultimate
configuration (6-lane), travel demand shifts
occur to roadways offering availability of higher
capacity. This partly explains the higher
volumes that resulted on Preston Road. With
Coit Road fully in place, localized traffic would
shift from away Preston Road.
Under the Mobility 2035 forecast (and network
assumptions contained within), all roads within
Prosper are forecasted to operate at acceptable
levels-of-service with the exception of Preston
Road and Highway 380, which is anticipated to
experience very high travel demand.
Thoroughfare Plan Compatibility
A screen line analysis was conducted to
compare projected volume relative to capacity
provided by the Thoroughfare Plan network at
its ultimate configuration. Separate screens
were used to segregate north-south from east-
west demand, as well as demands east and
west of the Dallas North Tollway. Adjustments
were made for factor up travel demands
commensurate with a population of 60,000
within Prosper in 2035, based upon the 8%
growth projection.
The analysis revealed the Thoroughfare Plan to
have sufficient capacity at ultimate
configuration to accommodate projected
demands at year 2035. A sensitivity analysis
was then conducted to assess network impacts
with select roadways not to full buildout.
Specifically, the north-south thoroughfares of
Teel Parkway, Legacy Drive, and Coit Road were
evaluated under a 4-lane scenario (all other
Major Thoroughfares to 6-lane). The analysis
revealed sufficient capacity of the network to
be available at 2035. While ultimately, these
specific roadways may need to be built to six
lanes, a phased approach to facility
implementation could be undertaken.
81 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
Planning Principles
Prosper’s Thoroughfare Plan is built upon
traditional thoroughfare planning concepts,
which focuses on a functional roadway network
providing mobility and accessibility to vehicular
traffic. In order to address the community’s
goals of providing multi-modal options to
residents, such as sidewalks and trails for
walking and biking, it will be important to
incorporate the trail system from the recently
completed Parks Plan. Together, these
components offer a range of mode choices from
which residents move about the community.
Functional Street Classification
Functional street classification recognizes that
streets are part of a system having diverse
origins and destinations. Functional
classifications also describe and reflect a set of
characteristics common to all roadways within
each class. Functions range from providing
mobility for through traffic and major traffic
flows, to providing access to specific properties.
Characteristics unique to each classification
include the degree of continuity, general
capacity, and traffic control characteristics.
In short, the functional classification of streets
provides for the circulation of traffic in a
hierarchy of movement from one classification
to the next. Functional classes can be
subdivided further into major and minor
designations to further detail their role in the
community.
Access and movement functions are directly
related in that as uninhibited movement
increases (speed), points of access decrease and
vice versa. This is typically why freeways, with a
high level of movement, have limited access
points where as streets in neighborhood areas
have more access points and reduced speed.
Proper’s current Thoroughfare Plan recognizes
four general classifications for roadways based
upon a hierarchical function and include:
• Major Thoroughfare: 6-lane divided
roadway within 120’ ROW. These streets
are designed to provide a high degree of
mobility, service relatively high traffic
volumes, have high operational speeds,
and service a significant portion of
through travel.
• Minor Thoroughfare: 4-lane divided
roadway with a similar function to the
Major Thoroughfare, but more local in
nature. The urban section is a curbed
roadway within 90‘ROW.
• Commercial Collector: 2 and 3-lane
undivided roadway serving as connections
between arterials and local streets. The
2-lane section consists of 36’ of pavement
within a 60’ROW. This section is also
aimed at serving residential applications.
The 3-lane section contains a continuous
left-turn bay and on-street parking within
a 60’ROW and is used for handling
commercial applications.
• Neighborhood Street: 2-lane streets for
accommodating neighborhood traffic. An
urban and rural section are contained
within a 50’ ROW. The urban section is
curbed with 31’ of pavement and the
rural section contains 27’ of pavement.
Major Arterial
Major ArterialCollector Minor ArterialCollectorMajor Arterial
Major ArterialCollector Minor ArterialCollector
82
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION
Functional Street Classification Chart
Type of Roadway Function Spacing (Miles) Direct Land Access Roadway Intersection Spacing (3) Volume Ranges (Veh./Day) Speed Limit (MPH) Parking Comments Highway/ Tollway Traffic Movement;
long distance travel. 1-5 Provided by
on/off ramping
schematics to
continuous
frontage roads.
1 mile 45,000 to
125,000 55-70 None Supplements
capacity of
arterial street
system and
provides high
speed mobility. Major Thoroughfare Moderate distance
inter-community,
intra-metro area,
traffic movement.
Serves long trip
lengths. ½ -1 ½ (2) Restricted –
some
movements
may be
prohibited;
number and
spacing of
driveways
controlled.
1/4 mile
36,000 to
45,000 40-55
“Backbone” of
the street
system. Minor Thoroughfare Mobility function is
primary; access
function is
secondary. Serves
moderate trip
lengths.
May be limited
to major
generators;
number and
spacing of
driveways
controlled.
1/8 mile
20,000 to
28,000 30-45
Provides route
and spacing
continuity with
major arterials. Commercial Collector Primary – collect /
distribute traffic
between local
streets and arterial
system. Serves
commercial/ mixed
use development;
inter-neighborhood
traffic movement. ¼ -½ (2) Safety
controls;
limited
regulation.
300 feet 12,000 to
18,000 30-40 Permitted Through traffic
should be
discouraged. Residential Collector Primary – internal
to one
neighborhood;
serves short trip
lengths. Provides
land access.
300 feet 6,000 to
12,000 30-35 Permitted Neighborhood Street Land access. 2 lot lengths Safety control
only. 125 feet 200 to
1,500 25-30 Permitted (1) Spacing determination should also include consideration of (travel within the area or corridor based upon) ultimate anticipated development.
(2) Denser spacing needed for commercial and high-density residential districts.
(3) Spacing and intersection design should be in accordance with state and local thoroughfare standards.
83 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
Access Coordination
Flow of traffic is typically a major concern for
most communities. The ability to move
traffic efficiently along a corridor with
minimal interference from traffic turning off
and onto intersecting driveways/streets is a
major benefit to motorists. Ideally, traffic
should be able to avoid unnecessary “stop-
and-go” traffic due to the abundance of
intersecting driveways/ streets. While the
implementation of deceleration lanes for
streets and driveways on major and minor
thoroughfares enhances capacity and
accessibility, promotion of access
management offers added benefits for the
following reasons:
1) Reduces the number of ingress and
egress points improving vehicular flow
and reducing collisions;
2) Reduced driveways permit more
landscaping frontage thereby
enhancing roadway aesthetics; and
3) Reducing the number of driveways
enhances the pedestrian experience by
reducing pedestrian contact with
turning traffic.
Along key corridors, the concept of access
coordination can be extended from individual
sites to address corridor-wide segments.
Master planning at a corridor scale enables:
• Coordination of transportation and land
use planning/decision making;
• Allows for flexible and special area
consideration to adjacent site
development, special access and utilities
coordination, and limits unnecessary
connection points;
• Economic benefits, aesthetics and
amenity considerations; and
• Promotes activity-based development
centers, not strip retail.
In larger corridors, the implementation of
backage roads further helps to support main
road safety and operations, internal and
external site accessibility, and quality
development patterns and design.
Shared Access and Cross Access
Reducing the number of driveways enhances
corridor landscaping and aesthetics
84
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION
2007 Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Master Plan
A component in providing mobility choice is
contained within the recently completed Parks
Plan. The incorporated trail system is
particularly important to mobility choice due to
the connective nature that they serve from
both within the community and the region—
they may connect neighborhoods, schools,
retail areas, recreational facilities and other
core community or regional assets. Community
trails are able to be utilized by residents for
walking, jogging, biking and other recreational
activities. Although intangible, trails have the
ability to significantly improve the quality of life
within the community by creating recreational
options for residents and therefore serve a
multitude of purposes beyond simply
connectivity. It is important that elements of
the Parks Plan be considered as new
development occurs.
The completed Parks Plan incorporates trails
along several major roadways within the Town
such as along Prosper Trail, First Street and
Preston Road. Reflecting these trail
connections on the Thoroughfare Plan
emphasizes the significance of these trail
connections within the overall connectivity
framework.
As roadway improvements coinciding with
growth continue to occur, the Town should
work to incorporate these roadway adjacent
trail connections beginning with roadway
planning and design.
85 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
Transportation Plan
The Transportation element of this Plan is
intended to serve as a guide for
transportation decisions within the Town. It
was developed based upon past
transportation planning efforts, connectivity
efforts on key thoroughfares with adjacent
communities and input from the CPAC, Town
Staff and public input.
This Plan should be used as a reference when
updating the Town’s Thoroughfare Plan,
Thoroughfare and Circulation Design
Standards and any related ordinances, and
should be referred to when considering a
wide range of decisions related to both
transportation and land use. Transportation
decisions do not exist within a vacuum, but are
directly related to decisions regarding land use
and building form. Therefore, the ultimate
objective of this Plan is to create a balanced
transportation system within Prosper which
provides for the safe mobility of residents,
considers both current and future needs,
enhances connectivity and mobility options,
and promotes a more livable community
through a proactive approach to the Town’s
appearance.
The Thoroughfare Plan is reflected in Plate 3.
Street classifications were developed based
upon a number of factors including the
roadways regional significance, current or
projected traffic volumes, and land use. It is
important to note that although a roadway may
be identified as a Major Thoroughfare, the
roadway design should not be rigid, but should
consider a multitude of factors during its design
including adjacent land use and context, among
others.
Transportation
Building
Form
Land
Use
Example high-rated street design
photos from the VCS
86
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION
kj
kj kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj kj kj
kj kj
kjkj
kj
Parvin Rd.F.M. 1385GeeFish Trap Rd.
U.S. 380 Dallas North TollwayProsper Trail
First St.La Cima Blvd.
Frontier Pkwy.Preston Rd.Coit Rd.F.M. 1461 F.M. 2478F.M. 2478Custer Rd.F.M. 423Teel Pkwy.Legacy Dr.Virginia Pkwy.BNSF RRS. ColemanN. ColemanLovers Ln Hays RdThoroughfare Plan
Plate 3
March 2012
0 0.5 1 1.50.25
MilesZ
Thoroughfare Description
Old Town District (Section varies)
Minor Thoroughfare (4 lane; 90' ROW)
Commercial Couplet (3 lane; 65' ROW)
Commercial Collector (2 lane; 60' ROW)
Access Roads
Dallas North Tollway
Major Thoroughfare (6 lane; 120' ROW)
Town of Prosper
ETJ
100 Year Floodplain
kj Minor Gateway
Grade Separation
RR Grade Separation
Major Gatewaykj
89 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
Cross Sections
High Degree of regional mobility, traffic
volumes and higher operational speeds
Connected to regional thoroughfare
facilities
Access is carefully managed
4 lane divided roadway with median
expandable to 6 lanes
Curb and gutter with underground
stormwater drainage
Examples in Prosper include Frontier
Parkway, Legacy Dr, Teel Parkway, Gee
Rd, Preston Rd, Coit Rd and Custer Rd
High degree of regional mobility, traffic
volumes and higher operational speeds
Connected to regional thoroughfare
facilities
Access is carefully managed
6 lane divided roadway with median
Curb and gutter with underground
stormwater drainage
Examples in Prosper include Frontier
Parkway, Legacy Dr, Teel Parkway, Gee
Rd, Preston Rd, Coit Rd, Custer Rd and
Highway 380
90
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION
Cross-town mobility
Secondary to Major Thoroughfare
but still accommodate higher
operational speeds and traffic
volumes
Access is carefully managed
4 lane divided roadway with median
Examples in Prosper include Prosper
Trail, Fishtrap Rd, First Street, Lovers
Lane and La Cima Blvd
Curb and gutter drainage
Collection/distribution of traffic
Back access to Frontage Road
development
Connectivity between arterial and
residential collector streets
On-street parking permitted
91 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
Collection/distribution of traffic
Back access to Frontage Road
development
Connectivity to thoroughfare and
residential collector streets
On-street parking permitted
Local residential street.
Traverse internally within residential
neighborhoods
Access to properties
2 lane undivided roadway
Underground stormwater utilities
with curb and gutter
92
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION
Local rural residential street.
Traverse internally within residential
neighborhoods
Access to properties
2 lane undivided roadway
Bar ditches for drainage(width varies
based on area calculations)
For large rural area lots over 1 acre
93 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
Plan Modifications
Old Town District Considerations
Roadways in this district are geared toward
retaining the historic feel of the Old Town area.
A series of two-lane streets with varying cross-
sections are aimed to support residential,
boutique/cottage style office and specialty
retail, and a mixed-use core area at Broadway
and McKinley Streets. Wide landscaped
medians, parkways and sidewalks are intended
to provide an open feel to key corridors in the
district.
Section A: Four lane divided roadway with a landscaped median and a landscaped parkway
separating pedestrians from traffic. This section serves as a major entrance into Old Town
from the east. No on-street parking.
Section B: Two lane divided roadway with a large center median containing landscaping.
Wide travel lanes allow for bicycle accommodation and a landscaped parkway separates
pedestrians from traffic. No on-street parking.
Section C: Two lane divided roadway with a large center median containing landscaping. On-
street parallel parking is permitted and a landscaped parkway separates pedestrians from
traffic.
Section D: Two lane undivided urban roadway. Wide 20’ sidewalks accommodate patio
seating, pedestrian traffic and street trees. On-street angled parking is permitted and bulb-
outs are located at intersections to enhance pedestrian visibility at crosswalks.
Section E: Two lane undivided roadway with on-street parallel parking and an immediately
adjacent 8’ sidewalk. A large private setback of 25’ is included.
Section F: Two lane undivided roadway with on-street parallel parking and a 15’ sidewalk. 10’
of the sidewalk will be located within the right-of-way and the additional 5’ will be a 5’ setback
to building face.
Section G: Two lane divided roadway with a center median containing landscaping. On-street
parallel parking and a 10’ sidewalk are included.
The following details modifications to the Thoroughfare Plan developed as part of this plan
process. These adjustments were developed based upon input received from the CPAC, Town
Staff, land programming of the Future Land Use Plan and supporting transportation analyses.
Within the mixed-use core area, wide sidewalks and on-street parking are envisioned to create a
“sense of place” and allow for street amenities and gathering area. Development setbacks would
also create opportunity for outdoor activity, dining or retail.
Gateways and intersection treatments at key intersections have been identified to define district
edge as well as tie the area together. Features for these treatments should be coordinated with
theme, look and color.
94
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
TRANSPORTATION
95 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
TRANSPORTATION
DNT Backage Roads
The thoroughfare plan calls for paralleling
system of streets to support anticipated
corridor development along the Dallas
North Tollway. Sometimes referred as
backage roads, these roads help to support
development connectivity and accessibility.
At Prosper Trail, a realignment of the
backage road east of the Tollway was
identified to avoid existing development
and retain continuity for development
opportunity to the north and south. This
realigned commercial collector would still
allow for 400-600’ lot depth for properties
along the Tollway.
Hays Road Collector
Upgrade Hays Road as a commercial
collector street to support future
commercial/retail development opportunity
along Preston Road north of First Street.
Extending from First Street, Hays should be
realigned at the north end to intersect
Preston Road at Bridgeport Drive. This
realignment would also help to reduce
intersection points along Preston Road. The
realignment of Hays at Bridgeport would
also require a realigned intersection for
Chandler Circle.
South Coleman Road
Extend and realign S. Coleman Road to intersect
with Richland Blvd. at Preston Road. In addition
to supporting development within Town Center,
this connection would also create back
access/connectivity with development
anticipated east of Preston along Highway 380.
Within Town Center, S. Coleman Road should
be upgraded to a four-lane divided minor
Thoroughfare (90’ ROW) to provide roadway
capacity to support heavy development
anticipated for this area. Consequently, the
previously identified loop road extending from
S. Coleman Road and back to McKinley Street
should be removed from the Plan.
South Craig Road
Upgrade Craig Road between Preston Road and
Broadway Street as a 3 lane couplet street to
support retail development opportunity both
within the Old Town District and along Preston
Road.
Highway 380 Access Roads
The inclusion of access roads along Highway
380 between the Lovers Lane loop.
96
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
97 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Economic Analysis
Analysis from Catalyst
Acreage
Retail Demand Forecast 2011 City Estimate Total Build Out Capacity
Population 10,560 69,303
Households 3,504 23,024
2010 Median Disposable Income $67,422 $67,422
2010 Per Capita Income $35,716 $35,716
Total Retail Trade per HH $37,183 $37,183
Household Income $107,641 $107,641
Retail percentage of HH Income 34.54% 34.54%
Forecasted Total Retail Trade Potential $130,284,948 $856,013,933
Est. Retail Sales per Square Foot $300
Retail Square Footage Demand* 152,575 2,853,379
Sales Tax Analysis
Annual Total $1,103,400 $17,120,278
Allocation General Fund $551,700 $8,560,139
Economic Development $275,850 $4,280,069
Property Tax Reduction $275,850 $4,280,069
*Est. $300 sales per square foot based upon International Council of Shopping Centers
’An analysis using the projected build-out population of Prosper at 69,303 served as a basis to
project a retail purchasing power of $856,013,933, assuming 23,024 households with a $37,183
retail trade per household. This would equate to roughly 2,853,379 square feet of retail space.
For assumption purposes, we assumed a FAR of 0.18 for retail. Dividing the total square footage
of retail by the FAR and further dividing by 43,560 achieves the estimated retail acres that would
be needed to accommodate the 2,853,379 square feet of retail space. This number is 364 acres.
An important factor to consider in the planning process is how land use decisions ultimately
impact the future financial state of the community. Therefore, Prosper’s Future Land Use Plan
not only guides development within the community but it provides the financial framework
enabling Prosper to provide high-quality services for its residents. The following section
pertains to this very topic and provides estimates on the potential sales tax and ad valorem tax
revenue that could be collected by the Town at build-out. In order to provide a detailed analysis,
experts at Catalyst Commercial were consulted and provided information on future retail trade
potential in Prosper based upon the Future Land Use Plan.
98
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Future Land Use Plan Acreage
Retail Assumptions Comp. Plan Total
Acres
Retail Acres per
Category
Neighborhood Services* 331 231.7
Town Center** 575 258.8
Tollway District*** 1,426 142.6
US 380**** 1,248 124.8
Total 3,580 757.9
* Assumed 70% retail component
**Assumed 45% retail component
***Assumed 10% retail component
****Assumed 10 % retail component
In order to determine whether or not the Future Land Use Plan could accommodate the 364 retail
acreage projected by the economic analysis, a number of additional assumptions were made:
1. Approximately 70% of the Neighborhood Services will be retail in nature.
2. Approximately 45% of the Town Center would be retail in nature. The Town Center will likely
have a mixture of retail, office, residential and public space. The primary use, however, will likely
be oriented around retail.
3. 10% of the Tollway District will be retail. Office uses will constitute the largest majority of land
within the Tollway District. Retail areas within the Town Center will likely be at major
intersections and on the first floor of vertical mixed-use apartments/lofts.
4. 10% of the Highway 380 district will be retail. Commercial uses and residential uses will
constitute a significant portion of the corridor. Retail areas at major intersections, including big-
box retailers, will constitute the majority of retail establishments within the corridor.
Given these assumptions, a total of 757 retail acres is expected, based upon the Future Land Use Plan
scenario and the above assumptions. Additionally, the presence of visible and attractive corridors in
Prosper suggests the Town will be able to attract patrons from outside of the Town itself. Our
preliminary analysis indicates that, based on current spending trends experienced today, the Future
Land Use Plan contains more than sufficient retail space to meet the future needs of Prosper.
99 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Analysis
Retail Sales Tax
While 364 acres of retail is recommended by
the economic analysis, a number of different
factors may affect long-term retail needs in
Prosper and include the following:
• A potential build-out population higher
than the current estimate of69,303.
The 2004 Comprehensive Plan and
recent impact fee reports all estimate a
buildout population of over89,000
residents. Assuming a population of
82,000 residents, Prosper could
accommodate approximately 430 acres
of retail.
• Prosper will have a regional retail
center in the Town Center. This area of
the community will have a regional
draw and will attract retail patrons from
outside of Prosper. Additional retail
acreage, therefore, can be
accommodated due to the regional
nature of such retail.
• Within retail areas, other uses such as
churches, public facilities, schools and
other non-retail uses may occur.
Due to the above factors, it is believed that the
Town could potentially accommodate the 757
retail acres depicted in the chart on page 98. As
the Town grows, and as further comprehensive
plan studies are completed, this number should
be carefully examined and adjusted, if
necessary. Based upon the assumptions from
page 97, 750 acres of retail would essentially
double the initial 364 acre estimates from a
17.1 million total sales tax contribution to
approximately $34 million in sales tax revenue
($17.1 million to the general fund, $8.6 million
to Economic Development and $8.6 million to
property tax reduction). This sales tax revenue,
when combined with estimated Ad Valorem Tax
revenue, would enable Prosper to be financially
secure and provide high level services and/or
property tax reductions to its citizens. It is also
recommended that additional neighborhood
service retail zoning should be avoided.
The 750 acres recommended by this economic
analysis should be sufficient to meet Prosper’s
retail needs. Additional neighborhood services
retail zoning should be avoided. Nodal retail
activity should be concentrated at primary
intersections, and the “four corner” principle
should be avoided to reduce the possibility of
an oversupply of retail acreage. Strip center
development along major roadways should also
be avoided, as the plan recommends.
The consequences of an oversupply of retail
may include:
• Vacant, underutilized land;
• Lower rental rates leading to
undesirable uses;
• Pressures for additional multifamily to
fill vacant parcels; and
• Blighted corridors.
Based upon an extremely conservative allocation of retail acres, the Future Land Use Plan may
accommodate approximately 750 retail acres. This is significantly higher than the 364 retail acres
recommended by the economic analysis.
100
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Ad Valorem Tax
An Ad Valorem analysis was conducted. Comparative properties were selected in each of the
following Future Land Use Plan categories. Based upon the data collected from the Collin and
Denton County Appraisal Districts, an average value per acre was assessed on the comparative
properties to derive an estimated value per acre per land use category. The derived value per
acre was then multiplied by the total number of acres within each district to calculatethe total
gross value of the district. Using the current tax rate of .52 cents per $100 of assessed value, an
approximate gross Ad Valorem tax contribution per district was calculated. In order to account
for right-of-way, such as public streets, and tax exemptions, such as schools and churches, 30% of
the total value was subtracted to derive the estimated value and Ad Valorem amount that could
be contributed to the General Fund annually.
It is important to note that this analysis is for estimation purposes only and is based upon
assessed values in 2011 dollars. The purpose of this analysis is to determine the approximate Ad
Valorem contributions that could be generated based upon the Future Land Use Plan.
District Taxable Value Value per Acre Tax Revenue (.52)
Dallas North Tollway $2,790,756,612 $1,957,052 $14,511,934
Highway 380 $1,321,585,597 $1,058,963 $6,872,245
Town Center $2,465,780,302 $4,288,314 $12,822,057
Business Park $247,358,925 $666,736 $1,286,266
Neighborhood Services $478,977,403 $1,447,062 $2,490,682
Old Town $140,457,586 $407,123 $730,379
High Density $564,358,076 $928,221 $2,934,661
Medium Density $7,015,502,244 $1,223,919 $36,480,611
Low Density $3,136,282,464 $567,550 $16,308,668
Gross Ad Valorem Total
Value $18,161,059,208 - $94,437,507
Total Ad Valorem Value
(30% ROW & Exemption) $12,712,741,445 - $66,106,255
101 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Tax Gap
Total Town Ad Valorem Income at Build-out $66,106,255
Total Sales Tax Income at Build-out $17,120,278
Total Income from Tax at Build-out $83,590,594
Total Expenditures $52,323,765
Tax Gap Surplus* 31,266,829
In order to determine whether or not the sales and Ad Valorem taxes generated by the Future Land
Use Plan will be sufficient to cover the overall expenses incurred by the community at build-out, an
approximate General Fund budget was calculated based upon the average per capita expenditures
at today’s spending levels.
The Fiscal Year 2010-11 budget indicates that the Town of Prosper had a General Fund budget of
$7,115,112. When this number is divided by the 2010 population of 9,423, an average per capita
expenditure of $755 per person is derived. This per capita expenditure by Prosper is comparable
with other regional communities. Southlake has the highest per capital expenditure among the
comparative group primarily due to its high residential property values, high-quality non-residential
uses and its regional Town Center drawing patrons from outside the community. This situation
enables Southlake to provide higher level services and enhanced aesthetics to its residents. The
similarities between the economics and vision between Prosper and Southlake are similar in nature.
2010
Population
FY 2010-2011
General Fund
Budget
Per Capita
Expenditure
Southlake 26,575 $30,410,480 $1,144
Richardson 99,223 $94,180,002 $949
Allen 84,246 $72,270,464 $858
Prosper 9,423 $7,115,112 $755
Argyle 3,282 $2,320,366 $707
Plano 258,841 $182,758,485 $706
McKinney 131,117 $90,788,018 $692
Frisco 116,989 $77,945,250 $666
Celina 6,028 $3,945,684 $655
Desoto 49,047 $29,760,521 $607
Rowlett 56,199 $33,793,677 $601
Little Elm 25,898 $13,157,771 $508
Multiplying the per capita expenditure of
$755 per person by the ultimate capacity
of 69,303, an ultimate capacity General
Fund budget for Prosper of $52,323,765 is
derived.
Discussed in the previous sections, the
approximate Ad Valorem contribution to
the General Fund at build-out would be
approximately $66.1 million. The
approximate sales tax contribution to the
general fund based upon the 750 retail
acres would be approximately $17.1
million. Based upon this scenario, total
General Fund income from taxes at build-
out would be approximately $83.5
million. This scenario would position
Prosper to be in a similar situation to
Southlake and Richardson, enabling the
Town to provide high quality services for
its residents.
It should be noted that additional forms of sales tax, such as Industry Tax and Inventory Tax, are not
included and will create additional avenues for income. These numbers are approximate and are
derived for estimation purposes only.
*This is an estimate based upon the projected sales tax revenue and possible Ad Valorem revenue. This estimate
does not include additional forms of sales tax such as Industry Tax and Inventory Tax.
102
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Economic Analysis Conclusion
Forecasted potential sales tax data indicates
that Prosper has the potential to derive a
significant monetary amount from sales tax
receipts at build-out. This is ultimately
dependent upon the community attracting
high-quality retail establishments that serve
residents of the community and provide
regional retail destinations that attract patrons
from outside of Prosper. The primary regional
destinations will be located within the Town
Center and at the intersection of the Dallas
North Tollway and Highway 380. Additional
retail may be located within the Dallas North
Tollway and Highway 380 districts, but will likely
be less intense in nature.
Retail/Neighborhood Service areas away from
the major districts will likely serve the internal
needs of Prosper, providing less intensive
services to adjacent residential neighborhoods.
Additional retail/neighborhood services zoning
outside of the Dallas North Tollway, Town
Center and Highway 380 districts should be
carefully considered in order to avoid an
oversupply of retail zoning. Flexibility within
the Dallas North Tollway, Highway 380 and
Town Center districts will enable Town staff to
make appropriate, market-based land use
decisions as development occurs.
An estimate of Ad Valorem taxes at build-out
suggests that Prosper will have the potential for
a significant Ad Valorem contribution to its
General Fund. Prosper’s high-quality
neighborhoods and its dedication to providing
high-quality retail destinations will be a primary
factor in determining the ultimate Ad Valorem
value of the community. As development
occurs, the community has expressed a desire
to attract the highest quality development
possible to protect the Town’s visual character
and maximize the taxable value for both the
General Fund and Prosper ISD. Future non-
residential land use decisions should consider
the long-term potential contributions of that
particular development to the community,
favoring clustered nodal retail activity centers,
Class A office space (office space defined by
high-quality furnishings, state-of-the-art
facilities and excellent accessibility) and
corporate campuses over strip retail and stand-
alone retail establishments.
The retail data provided indicates that the
Future Land Use Plan created for Prosper
provides a significant amount of retail space to
meet the future needs of Prosper residents.
The Future Land Use Plan also gives Town Staff,
Planning & Zoning Commission and Town
Council ultimate flexibility to determine where
retail areas should be located within the
established districts.
While the numbers provided are estimates on
the potential sales tax and Ad Valorem income
of the community at build-out, it is important to
note that these are only estimates. To ensure
that Prosper has a financially secure future, the
land use and character principles outlined in
this Plan should be used as a guide to attract
the highest quality development possible. High-
quality and long-lasting development is
ultimately the key in ensuring that Prosper has
a sound financial future. Focusing on attracting
and maintaining such development will enable
Prosper to meet the essential needs of its
future residents.
103 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
Infrastructure Assessment
Planning for and providing infrastructure is
perhaps one of the most important
responsibilities of a municipality. Citizens need
to be secure in the knowledge that they can rely
on their local government to ensure that there
is adequate and safe water supply and
wastewater capacity for current populations
and that proper plans are developed to provide
for future growth. There are numerous
technical studies that can be used to analyze
these current and future needs for the Town.
This 2012 Comprehensive Plan is not intended
to take the place of these detailed technical
efforts. The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan
is to determine whether the Town has made or
plans on undertaking these efforts. This
Infrastructure Assessment is intended to
provide an overview of Prosper’s infrastructure
system and capacity of that system in relation
to the current population and the future
projected population.
Previous Planning Efforts
The most recent large scale, in-depth analysis of
future water and wastewater needs was
completed in 2006 by Freese and Nichols, Inc.
(FNI). At that time FNI developed a Water
Distribution Master Plan and a Wastewater
Collection Master Plan. These studies analyzed
growth based on the Future Land Use Plan in
place at that time and used typical usage factors
for water and wastewater based on historical
water usage and wastewater flows in Prosper.
The study developed Capital Improvement
Plans intended on implementing the
recommendations in the technical studies and
provided mapping of the proposed
improvements. The Water and Wastewater
Capital Improvement Plans were updated in
2011 for the Impact Fee Update, also
performed by FNI. The recommended
improvements outlined in the Impact Fee Study
are intended to provide the required capacity
and reliability to meet projected water
demands and wastewater flows through
Buildout. Due to timing of the Impact Fee Study
and Comprehensive Plan projects, the
recommended water and wastewater projects
developed in the Impact Fee Study were based
on growth rates and Future Land Use Plan
developed prior to the 2012 Comprehensive
Plan.
Infrastructure Goals and Objectives
The goal and objectives for infrastructure are
shown below:
Goal: Ensure that existing water,
wastewater and storm drainage
systems and future plans adequately
serve current and future residents
and businesses.
Objective 1: Investigate any deficiencies in the
infrastructure systems.
Objective 2: Develop concepts that will
address deficiencies of the
infrastructure system.
Objective 3: Strive for an infrastructure system
that will effectively and
economically serve existing and
projected needs of the
community in a safe and efficient
manner.
Objective 4: Ensure that infrastructure is
compatible or expanded to
support future development,
specifically in key development
areas.
Existing Lift Station in Prosper
104
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
Water System
Existing Characteristics
North Texas Municipal Water District (NTMWD)
is a regional water provider with a treatment
capacity of 770 million gallons of water per day
and serves approximately 1.6 million people.
NTMWD currently serves water to the Town of
Prosper through a 48” transmission line in the
northwest portion of NTMWD’s system. The
water from NTMWD is dropped into a 3 million
gallon (MG) ground storage tank and re-
pumped to serve the Prosper distribution
system through a 30” water line. The NTMWD
delivery point into the Town of Prosper is in the
southeast portion of the Town, and this is the
only existing treated water delivery point. The
Town relies on NTMWD for all treated water
and does not utilize existing wells in the system.
In addition, there are not emergency water
connections with surrounding entities.
Storage and Usage
The Town had an average daily flow of 1.9
million gallons per day in 2010, and Town
records show 3,230 active water accounts. This
number includes both normal domestic
connections and irrigation-only connections.
The Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality (TCEQ) requires 200 gallons per
connection of storage of which 100 gallons
must be elevated storage. The Town currently
has a 2 million gallon elevated storage tank near
Preston Road and First Street and 3 million
gallons in ground storage at the NTMWD
delivery point. Since the limiting factor in this
case is the elevated storage capacity, based on
the current elevated capacity of 2 million
gallons, the number of connections that would
be allowed by TCEQ is 20,000. FNI developed
criteria in the 2011 Impact Fee Update for sizing
of storage and pumping capacity for the Town.
These criteria are more stringent than TCEQ
requirements and take into consideration many
additional factors including operational
flexibility, fire protection, system redundancy,
and energy efficiency. The design criteria
recommended to size ground storage tank
capacity is to provide adequate storage volume
to meet 8 hours of maximum day demand. The
design criteria recommended for elevated
storage capacity is twice the required volume
needed to meet 35% of the peak hour demand
for a duration of 3 hours. The design criteria
recommended for pump station capacity is
providing a firm pumping capacity to meet 65%
of the peak hour demand. The firm pumping
capacity is defined as the total available
pumping capacity with the largest pump out of
service to each pressure plane.
105 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
Considerations for the Future
Generally speaking, the planning that has taken
place regarding water infrastructure has served
the Town very well. The population and land
use data in the 2011 Impact Fee Update was
used to develop future water demands.
Conservation measures in place for the future
were taken into account in determining the
projected water usage. The current Water
System Capital Improvement Plan was
completed in 2011 for the Impact Fee Update,
and recommended improvements to serve the
Town through Buildout are shown on Plate4.
Since that time, and as a result of this Plan,
population growth has changed and land uses
have changed. In order to remain relevant, the
Capital Improvements Plan should be either
revised or updated as plans are developed in
order to ensure consistency.
Water Short Term Recommendations:
1. Yearly monitoring of growth to guide
implementation of water system
projects.
2. Evaluate whether the Lower Pressure
Plane should be served through a
dedicated Lower Pressure Plane Pump
Station at the existing NTMWD delivery
point site or through a new Upper
Trinity Regional Water District (UTRWD)
delivery point on the west side of the
Town. This should be determined prior
to design of the proposed 42” Lower
Pressure Plane line and Pump Station,
and this project is recommended to be
under design in 2016 based on growth
rates and land use assumptions in the
2011 Impact Fee Study.
Water Long Term Recommendations:
1. Coordinate with NTMWD to receive
additional water supply capacity to
meet projected water demands.
2. Continue implementation of the
projects indicated in the 2011 Impact
Fee Update.
3. Update Water Master Plan and Impact
Fee CIP at least every 5 years or more
frequently if land use assumptions or
service provider assumptions change
significantly.
4. Investigate an emergency interconnect
with an adjacent entity to increase
water system reliability and
redundancy.
106
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
Collin CountyCollin County(((###UUUTTT(#UT[ÚUT!A!A!AProposed 2.5 MGFM 1385 EST (2030)Overflow Elev.: 785 ftProposed 2.5 MGCounty Line EST (2021)Overflow Elev.: 785 ftNTMWDDelivery Point2.0 MGPreston Rd. ESTOverflow Elev.: 926 ftProposed 2.0 MGProsper Trail EST (2015)Overflow Elev.: 926 ft(3(4(4(3(3(5(5(19(12(11(7(7(2(2(9(9(1B(1B(1B(LPP)(LPP)(LPP)(LPP)(LPP)(10(10(10(10(6(6(17(18(16(8(18(18(14(13(13(15(15(16(16(25(28(38(29(32(26(33(33(33(23(36(30(30(34(37(22(22(27(34(31(17(21(2012"20"42''16''3 0 ''20''24''12''16''20''30''42''16''42''16''20''42''20''20''16''42''24''20''20''20''16''16''16''20''42''20''24''42''24''20''30''12''24''20''12''20''24''12''16''16''24''16''16''12''24''42''16''16''20''16''20''16''20''30''20''24''16''16''20''20''16''20''30''20''16''20''24''8''30''20''16''12''30''20''20''16''12 ''12''12''16''30''12''20''16''20''16''20''30''20''30''12''30''20''20''12''12''20''12''20''16''16''30''16''12''30''30''16''12''20''12''20''30''30''30''36''16''12''20''24''24''36''12''12''16''16''20''36''16''16''20''16''12''16''12''16''20''12''12''16''16''16''20''16''12''16''20''16''20''16''12''12''16''16''24''12''12''12''1 2''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8 ''8''8''8 ''6''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6 ''8''8''8''8''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''6''8''6''8''8 ''8''6''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8 ''8''8 ''8''8 ''8''8''8''8 ''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''6 ''6''6''8''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8 ''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6 ''6 ''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8''6''6''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''6''8''8''8''8''6 ''8''8''6''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''6''6''6 ''8''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8''8''2''6''4''1.5''4''6''6''6''2''6''6''6''6''6''1.5''2''CR 25FM 1385E FIRST STCR 6W UNIVERSITY DRFISHTRAP RDPARVIN RDCR 51CR 83E UNIVERSITY DRN CUSTER RDCR 84W FIRST STSMILEY RDFM 2478CR 26E FRONTIER PKWYFM 423SH 289CAREY RDPROSPER RDCOIT RDN DALL AS PKWY CR 933DOE CREEK RDDALLAS PKWYGOOD HOPE RDFM 428 WCR 50CR 124FM 1461S PRESTON RDCUSTER RDCR 123HAWKINS LNBONAR RDBYRAN RDCR 86E US 380EUREKA LNS COLEMAN STCR 970BRISTOL DRCR 857CR 858ARTESIA BLVDCR 7C R 856PRESTON HILLS CIRPR 5155GIBBS RDCR 854FALCON RDVIRGINIA PKWYCR 855M A GNOLIA BLVDE BROADWAY STCR 852FIELDS RDCRUTCHFIELD DRCR 853BRINKMANN RANCH RDTWIN LAKES DRRED BUD DRHARPER RDPR 5156HERITAGE TRLBENBROOK BLVDPANTHER CREEK RDBEDFORD LNPR 5405DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAYHIGHPOINT DRVIRGINIA HILLS DRCROSSLAKE CTE SEVENTH STSEA PINES DROAK BEND TRLWHITE ROCK BLVDSHASTA DRJULIETTE DRSTO NI NGT O N DRPRESTONVIEW DRQUAIL HOLLOWWARREN DRNOLES RDTWIN MALLETS LNWENK CTPR 5436WATCH HILL LNBRADFORD DREQUESTRIAN WAYCOUNTRY VIEW DRNEWPORT LNCOASTAL DRBROWNWOOD BL V D CR 860OLD DAIRY FARM RD PHANTOM LNLONG LEAF DRCARRIAGE LNSHARED DRIVEWAYSA N M A R C O S D RS REDWOOD CIRHAVENBROOK LNPIEDMONT PLYAK DRASCOT PLGARDENIA BLVDCOVENTRY DRFALCON CTDOOLITTLE DRDERICK LNDOVE CREEK ST
GOOD HOPE RDDALLAS PKWYCR 26CR 50W UNIVERSITY DR6''8''2''6''6''8''8''8''6''6''8''6''6''6''6''6''2''6''8''6''6''6''8''6''2''2''8''6''8''6''8''6''8 ''6''6''6''6''6''8''6''6''6''6''6''6''6''6''8''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12 ''
12''Doe BranchWilso n C r e e k
Panthe r C re e k
G entle CreekParvin BranchRutherford BranchLittle Elm CreekStreamR o w le tt C re e k
Mustang CreekParvin BranchGentle CreekParvin BranchRutherford BranchStreamParvin BranchStreamLEGEND!APressure Reducing Valve(#UT2011 - 2021 Elevated Storage Tank(#UT2022 - BuildoutElevated Storage Tank(#UTExisting Elevated Storage TankUTExisting Ground Storage Tank[ÚExisting Pump Station2011 - 2021 Water Line Improvement2022 - BuildoutWater Line Improvement8" and Smaller Water Lines10" and Larger Water LinesRoadRailroadStreamLakeParcelTown LimitETJ BoundaryCounty BoundaryLower Pressure PlaneUpper Pressure PlanePLATE 4TOWN OF PROSPERBUILDOUT WATER SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTSJanuary 19, 201201,750 3,500SCALE IN FEETICreated By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: PRP11118Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\DELIVERABLES\04_W_WW_Capital_Improvements_Revisions\(Plate-3)_Water_CIP_(2021_and_Buildout).mxdUpdated: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:23:21 AMExpand UPP PS to 20 MGD and Add 5.0 MG GST(2013)Construct 10 MGD LPP Pump Station(2018)Expand UPP PS to 30 MGD, Add 5.0 MG GSTand Expand LPP to 25 MGD (2024)Expand LPP PS to 40 MGD and Add 5.0 MG GST(2034)NTMWD Delivery Point Improvements(10(24(35(1A
109 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
Wastewater System
Existing Characteristics
The Town of Prosper is currently served by the
NTMWD for wastewater treatment. The
treatment plant serving the Town is the Wilson
Creek Regional Treatment Plant located near
Fairview on Lake Lavon. This plant also serves
Anna, Melissa, Princeton, McKinney, Allen,
Fairview, Frisco, Lucas, Richardson, Parker, and
Plano. The current average day capacity of the
Wilson Creek WWTP is 48 MGD, with a build-
out capacity of 112 MGD. The NTMWD
interceptor runs through the northeast corner
of the Town of Prosper.
Due to the terrain within the Town, lift stations
are required to make the collection system
effective and send all wastewater flow to the
NTMWD system. The Town currently has 6 large
lift stations in operation for this purpose. The
Gentle Creek and Steeple Chase lift stations
have already been abandoned, and the
remainder of the lift stations with the exception
of La Cima will be abandoned in the future with
proposed projects.
Considerations for the Future
Generally speaking, the planning that has taken
place regarding wastewater infrastructure has
served the Town very well. The Town signed an
agreement with Upper Trinity Regional Water
District (UTRWD) in December 2007 to send a
majority of future wastewater flows to an
existing UTRWD interceptor in the west side of
Prosper. This was a very strategic move for the
Town as it will allow the Town to abandon a
majority of existing lift stations and significantly
reduce capital and operations and maintenance
(O&M) costs by removing lift stations and force
mains from the Wastewater Capital
Improvement Plan. The current Wastewater
System Capital Improvement Plan was
completed in 2011 for the Impact Fee Update,
and recommended improvements to serve the
Town through Buildout are shown on Plate5. As
soon as the interceptor from the abandoned
WWTP to the UTRWD interceptor is completed,
the lift station at the WWTP and 12” force main
will no longer be utilized to send Subbasin 2 and
4 wastewater flows to the NTMWD system. The
long term plan is to continue to send
wastewater flows in Subbasins 5 and 6 to the
NTMWD system, and wastewater flows in
Subbasins 1, 2, 3, and 4 will be sent to the
UTRWD system.
Since development of the Capital Improvement
Plan for the Impact Fee Update, and as a result
of this Plan, population growth has changed and
land uses have changed. In order to remain
relevant, the Capital Improvements Plan should
be either revised or updated as plans are
developed in order to ensure consistency.
Wastewater Short Term Recommendations:
1. Yearly monitoring of growth to guide
implementation of wastewater system
projects.
2. Continue to eliminate existing lift
stations to reduce O&M costs.
Wastewater Long Term Recommendations:
1. Future acquisition of additional
wastewater treatment capacity from
NTMWD and UTRWD.
2. Continue implementation of the
projects indicated in the 2011 Impact
Fee Update.
3. Update Wastewater Master Plan and
Impact Fee CIP at least every 5 years or
more frequently if land use
assumptions or service provider
assumptions change significantly.
4. Consider conversion of existing services
on septic systems to the Prosper
wastewater system.
110
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
VVVVVVVVVVääääääääääUUPTWW)"C`10''10''10''(27(212''WastewaterTreatment Plant(Abandoned)La CimaLift StationCapacity: 3.0 MGDLa Cima # 2Decommission LS and FMSteeple ChaseLift Station(Abandoned)GreenspointDecommission LS and FMWhispering FarmsDecommission LS and FMGentle CreekLift Station(Abandoned)Decommission LS and FM15"(3(3(4(4(5(5(1(1(1(13(1(1(12(27(27(27(27(27(27(1(1(9(9(11(8(8(22(21(21(21(21(23(18(18(17(17(16(16(26(25(24(20(19(6(10(14(7(7(7(8(6(15(8(15(9(9(10(14(81 2''30''15''10''18''24''27''21''18''10''10''18''10''10''24''15''21''10''10''10''12''10''24''10''10''10''24''10''18''21''10''12''15''24''10''10''10''21''10''15''27''10''10''21''15''21''10''15''1 0 ''21''18''10''10''18''10''10''24''10''10''21''10''24''10 ''12''10''10''27''10''24''21''18''12''12''10''24''15''24''21''21''24''21''10''24''21''15''10''15''27''15''10''10''24''24''12''24''10''24''15''24''10''21''24''12''18''27''15''12''12''15''1 2''27''10''1 5''27''10''18''18''10''15''10''10''10''10''12''24''12''10''10''10''10''10''10''15''10''10''27''12''10''10''24''27''10''
10''10 ''10''21''15''10''1 0''
10''24''10''10''24''24''27''24''27''10''12''10''10'' F.M27''30''24''21''12''12''12''21''21''2 4 ''24''21''12'' F.M.10'' F.M.6 '' F .M .12'' F.M.8'' F.M.10'' F.M.4'' F.M.12'' F.M.10'' F.M.12''15 ''10''21''12''10''12''12''15''12''10''10''12''10''10''12 ''10''10''15''10''15 ''6''8''4''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8 ''4''6''8''8''8''8''6''6''8''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''4''8''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''
8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''6''6''8''8''8''6''8 ''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''6''8''6''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''8''6''8''8 ''8''6''8 ''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8 ''6''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8 ''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''SUBBASIN 3SUBBASIN 3SUBBASIN 6SUBBASIN 6SUBBASIN 2SUBBASIN 2SUBBASIN 4SUBBASIN 4SUBBASIN 1SUBBASIN 1SUBBASIN 5SUBBASIN 58''6''6''8''6''6''8''8''8''8''6''8''8''8''6''6''6''15''12''15''15''15''15''W ilson C reekPanthe r C re e k
Doe BranchGentle C reek
Parvin BranchRutherford BranchStreamLittle Elm CreekR o w le tt C re e kPond
StreamParvin BranchParvin BranchStreamParvin BranchDoe BranchLEGENDUUPTWW)Wastewater Treatment PlantVäExisting Lift Station"C`NTMWD MeterExisting 10" and LargerWastewater LineExisting 8" and SmallerWastewater LineExisting Force Main2011- 2021 Wastewater Line2022- Buildout Wastewater LineUTRWD Wastewater LineNTMWD Wastewater LineRoadRailroadStreamLakeParcelTown LimitETJ BoundaryCounty BoundaryPLATE 5TOWN OF PROSPERBUILDOUT WASTEWATER SYSTEMCAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTSJanuary 19, 201201,750 3,500SCALE IN FEETIMAJOR BASINSSubbasin 1Subbasin 2Subbasin 3Subbasin 4Subbasin 5Subbasin 6Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: PRP11118Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\DELIVERABLES\04_W_WW_Capital_Improvements_Revisions\(Plate-4)_Wastewater_CIP_(2021_and_Buildout).mxdUpdated: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:24:44 AM
113 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
Storm Drain System
Freese and Nichols, Inc. assessed the Town’s
existing drainage utility system needs and
identified recommended updates to the existing
drainage utility system fee in 2010 as part of the
Drainage Utility System Fee Development
Report. The assessment included a visual
inspection, as well as discussions with Town
Staff, of several areas within the Town that
have flooding or potential flooding issues. The
study identified and prioritized storm drain
infrastructure facilities across the Town that are
in need of replacement or upsizing to anticipate
increases in flows or to correct current drainage
problems. Eight major maintenance and capital
projects and seven routine maintenance
projects were identified. All solutions
presented in the study were conceptual in
nature and only used to provide a range of
estimated construction costs for comparison
purposes. Each capital project location will
require a detailed study by a licensed engineer
that should consider other alternatives before a
final solution can be determined. As the Town
continues to develop, a Comprehensive
Drainage Utility System Master Plan should be
completed to further identify and refine storm
water management projects.
The Town is currently not subject to new
federal storm water quality regulations (Phase II
MS4) that would require the Town to further
protect and enhance water quality in creeks and
lakes through the development of a storm
water quality management program. However,
the Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality (TCEQ) will issue the next Phase II MS4
permit in August 2012, and the determination
of regulated communities would be based upon
each community’s 2010 U.S. Census population.
Based on population growth in and around
Prosper over the last decade, it is likely that the
Town will become subject to the Phase II MS4
requirements.
As an operator of a small municipal separate
storm sewer system (MS4), the Town would be
required to develop a multi-faceted program to
protect storm water quality before it enters
creeks, rivers, and lakes. The program includes
a number of measures to protect storm water
quality, such as the following:
• Drainage utility system maintenance;
• Structural and non-structural water
quality protection measures;
• Drainage utility system mapping and
inspections;
• Public education, outreach and
involvement;
• Town ordinances regulating
construction activity, illicit discharges,
and post-construction runoff; and
• Town staff training and operations
improvements.
114
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
Considerations for the Future
As development continues within the Town of
Prosper, several actions should be taken to
handle drainage and storm water management
issues.
Storm Water Short Term Recommendations:
1. Consider establishing a program to
conduct routine inspections and
operations and maintenance (O&M)
activities throughout the drainage
utility system to minimize flooding
potential, reduce creek erosion, and
protect storm water quality.
2. Yearly monitoring of capital project
needs to guide implementation of
storm drain system projects outlined in
the 2010 Drainage Utility System Fee
Development Report.
Storm Water Long Term Recommendations:
1. Develop a Comprehensive Drainage
Utility System Master Plan. This plan
will provide an in-depth analysis of
current drainage facilities and project
the need for future facilities (detention,
culverts, channel enhancements, etc.)
based on the adopted Future Land Use
Plan. The drainage utility system
master plan can be a powerful tool that
helps define the direction of future
development, the protection of natural
resources, and the integration of public
spaces such as parks in the Town.
2. Review current subdivision standards to
ensure that new developments bear
responsibility to ensure that these
developments do not adversely impact
the overall storm water system within
the Town.
3. Review the drainage utility system fee
rates in several years to consider any
changes that the Town might want to
incorporate in the drainage utility
system fee rate. Potential changes
might include increased costs for
equipment, additional CIP projects that
may be needed, increasing water
quality regulatory compliance
requirements and others.
4. Continue implementation of projects
outlined in the 2010 Drainage Utility
System Fee Development Report.
5. Prepare a storm water quality
management plan and implement over
a 5-year period a storm water quality
management program to meet the
requirements of the pending 2012 TCEQ
Phase II MS4 general permit.
115 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Implementation Plan
The importance of planning can never be overstated—planning provides for the protection of private
property and ensures future development occurs in a coordinated and organized fashion, consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. The future of Prosper will be shaped with the policies and
recommendations developed in this 2012 Comprehensive Plan. Based on this Plan, decisions will be
made that will influence many aspects of the Town’s built and social environments. Prosper has taken
an important leadership role in defining its future, with the adoption of this Plan. The Plan will provide a
very important tool for Town Staff and civic leaders to use in making sound planning decisions regarding
the long-term growth and development of Prosper. The future quality of life in Prosper will be
substantially influenced by the manner in which the Plan recommendations are administered and
maintained.
Planning for the Town's future should be a continuous process, and this Plan is designed to be a dynamic
tool that can be modified and periodically updated to keep it in tune with changing conditions and
trends. Changes in Prosper’ socioeconomic climate and in development trends that were not
anticipated during preparation of the Plan will occur from time to time, and therefore, subsequent
adjustments will be required. Elements of the Town that were treated in terms of a general relationship
to the overall area may, in the future, require more specific and detailed attention.
Plan policies and recommendations may be put into effect through adopted development regulations,
such as zoning and subdivision, and through capital improvement programs. Many recommendations
within the Plan can be implemented through simple refinement of existing Town regulations or
processes, while others may require the establishment of new regulations, programs, or processes. This
final section of the 2012 Comprehensive Plan describes specific ways in which Prosper can take the
recommendations within this plan from vision to reality.
Proactive and Reactive Implementation
There are two primary methods of Plan implementation: proactive and reactive methods. To
successfully implement the Plan and fully realize its benefits, both methods must be used in an effective
manner. Both proactive and reactive actions that could be used by Prosper are described within this
Implementation Chapter.
Examples of proactive methods include:
Establishing or updating subdivision regulations;
Establishing or updating zoning regulations; and
Developing a capital improvements program (CIP), by which the Town expends funds to finance
public improvements to meet objectives cited within the Plan.
Examples of reactive methods include:
Approving a rezoning application submitted by a property owner consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan;
Site plan review; and
Subdivision review.
116
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Roles of the Comprehensive Plan
Guide for Daily Decision-Making
The current physical layout of the Town is a product of previous efforts put forth by many diverse
individuals and groups. In the future, each new development that takes place, whether a subdivision
that is platted, a home that is built, or a new school, church or shopping center that is constructed,
represents an addition to Prosper’ physical form. The composite of all such efforts and facilities creates
the Town as it is seen and experienced by its citizens and visitors. If planning is to be effective, it must
guide each and every individual development decision. The Town, in its daily decisions pertaining to
whether to surface a street, to approve a residential plat, to amend a zoning ordinance provision, to
enforce the building codes, or to construct a new utility line, should always refer to the basic proposals
outlined within the Comprehensive Plan. The private builder or investor, likewise, should recognize the
broad concepts and policies of the Plan so that their efforts become part of a meaningful whole in
planning the Town.
Flexible and Alterable Guide
This 2012 Comprehensive Plan is intended to be a dynamic planning document for Prosper – one that
responds to changing needs and conditions. Plan amendments should not be made without thorough
analysis of immediate needs, as well as consideration for long-term effects of proposed amendments.
The Town Council and other Prosper officials should consider each proposed amendment carefully to
determine whether it is consistent with the Plan's goals and policies, and whether it will be beneficial for
the long-term health and vitality of Prosper.
Annual Review
At one-year intervals, a periodic review of the Plan with respect to current conditions and trends should
be performed. Such on-going, scheduled evaluations will provide a basis for adjusting capital
expenditures and priorities, and will reveal changes and additions that should be made to the Plan in
order to keep it current and applicable long-term. It would be appropriate to devote one annual
meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission to reviewing the status and continued applicability of
the plan in light of current conditions, and to prepare a report on these findings to the Town Council.
Those items that appear to need specific attention should be examined in more detail, and changes
and/or additions should be made accordingly. By such periodic evaluations, the Plan will remain
functional, and will continue to give civic leaders effective guidance in decision-making. Periodic reviews
of the plan should include consideration of the following:
The Town's progress in implementing the plan;
Changes in conditions that form the basis of the plan;
Community support for the plan's goals, objectives & policies; and
Changes in State laws.
The full benefits of the Plan for Prosper can only be realized by maintaining it as a vital, up-to-date
document. As changes occur and new issues within the Town become apparent, the Plan should be
revised rather than ignored. By such action, the Plan will remain current and effective in meeting the
Town's decision-making needs.
117 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Complete Review and Update with Public Participation
In addition to periodic annual reviews, the Comprehensive Plan should undergo a complete, more
thorough review and update every 5 or 10 years. The review and updating process should begin with
the establishment of a Steering Committee, similar to the one that was appointed to assist in the
preparation of this Plan. If possible, this committee or the Planning and Zoning Commission should be in
charge of periodic review of the plan. Specific input on major changes should be sought from various
groups, including property owners, neighborhood groups, civic leaders and major stakeholders,
developers, merchants, and other citizens and individuals who express an interest in the long-term
growth and development of the Town.
Regulatory Mechanisms
The usual processes for reviewing and processing zoning amendments, development plans, and
subdivision plans provide significant opportunities for implementing the Plan. Each zoning,
development and subdivision decision should be evaluated and weighed against applicable proposals
contained within the Plan. If decisions are made that are inconsistent with Plan recommendations, then
they should include actions to modify or amend the Plan accordingly in order to ensure consistency and
fairness in future decision-making. Amending the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance
represent two major proactive measures that the Town can take to implement 2012 Comprehensive
Plan recommendations.
Zoning Ordinance
Zoning is perhaps the single most powerful tool for implementing Plan recommendations. The Town’s
Zoning Ordinance should be updated with the recommendations contained within the chapters of this
2012 Comprehensive Plan. All zoning and land use changes should be made within the context of
existing land uses, future land uses, and planned infrastructure, including roadways, water and
wastewater.
Zoning Text Amendments
Consideration should be given to updating areas of the zoning ordinance that may allow ideas, principles
or design standards identified within this Comprehensive Plan to be more easily achieved. Their
implementation will not only improve future development and interaction between land uses, but will
also improve Prosper’s overall image and livability. Such changes may involve landscaping setbacks,
non-residential building design, and additional tree requirements, to name a few. These
recommendations should be itemized and prioritized, and should be incorporated into the Zoning
Ordinance accordingly.
Zoning Map Amendments
State law gives power to cities to regulate the use of land, but regulations should be based on a plan.
Therefore, Prosper’s Zoning Map should be as consistent as possible with the Comprehensive Plan,
specifically the Future Land Use Plan. It is not reasonable, however, to recommend that the Town make
large-scale changes in its zoning map changes immediately. It is therefore recommended that the Town
prioritize areas where a change in current zoning is needed in the short-term and that efforts be
concentrated on making such changes. In the long-term, consistent zoning policy in conformance with
the Future Land Use Plan will achieve the Town’s preferred land use pattern over time.
Subdivision Ordinance
The act of subdividing land to create building sites has a major effect on the overall design and image of
Prosper. Much of the basic physical form of the Town is currently created by the layout of streets,
easements, and lots. In the future, the basic physical form of Prosper will be further affected by such
118
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
action. Requirements for adequate public facilities are essential to ensure the Town’s orderly and
efficient growth. Plan recommendations, such as cross-access easements, should be incorporated
within the Subdivision Ordinance.
Implementation Goals and Objectives
Implementation is one of the most important, yet most difficult, aspects of the comprehensive planning
process. Without viable, realistic strategies for implementation, the recommendations contained within
this 2012 Comprehensive Plan will be difficult to realize.
The following section contains the original six community goals established within the Community Vision
chapter of this comprehensive plan. Under each of the six community goals, more specific objectives
are included to guide plan implementation. The objectives listed are derived from recommendations
contained within the comprehensive plan document as well as ideas heard from the CPAC and general
public.
Goal 1. Provide a variety of land uses, in accordance with the vision of Prosper Residents, which
diversify the tax base and enable residents to live, work, shop, eat and relax in Prosper
Objective 1.1: Provide a range of high-quality housing districts in Prosper.
Objective 1.2: Maximize development along the Dallas North Tollway by providing
opportunities for Class A office space (office space defined by high-quality
furnishings, state-of-the-art facilities and excellent accessibility), corporate
campus development and mixed-use retail/residential development.
Objective 1.3: Create specific landscaping and thematic design guidelines for development
along the Dallas North Tollway.
Objective 1.4: Promote larger-scale master planned developments over small-scale individual
developments along the Dallas North Tollway by discouraging individual
developments under 5 acres in size.
Objective 1.5: Maximize development opportunity along Highway 380 by providing nodal
commercial and retail activity. Retail, commercial, service and big-box uses
should be focused primarily around major intersections with mid-block sections
being utilized for medium density residential uses and office space. Continuous
strip development should be avoided.
Objective 1.6: Utilize the Town Center for a regional draw, bringing in patrons from outside of
Prosper.
Objective 1.7: Ensure that the core of the Town Center contains a higher degree of urban
design with buildings situated up to the building line, wide sidewalks, street
trees and pedestrian amenities. Preferred examples include the Shops at Legacy
and the Shops at Watters Creek.
Objective 1.8: Include public space within the Town Center to serve as a focal point for the
Town Center and to provide space for community events and festivals.
Objective 1.9: Encourage the use of structured parking within the Town Center and Dallas
North Tollway Districts to minimize the negative impact of large scale parking
lots. Require structured parking to be strategically located to minimize visibility
from the public view.
Objective 1.10: Include public facilities, such as a new Town Hall, Community Services facility or
Library, within the Town Center or Old Town districts.
119 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Objective 1.11: Provide a network of connections, both vehicular and pedestrian, that allow
movement and access to various portions of the Town Center and adjacent
neighborhoods and districts.
Objective 1.12: Preserve the integrity of Old Town and encourage complementary and
compatible redevelopment and infill development including new single family
residences containing a farm/ranch theme, residential to office conversions and
“main street” retail with studio apartments along the western end of Broadway.
Objective 1.13: Plant trees within the parkway along roads in Old Town to establish a mature
tree canopy thereby contributing to the historic theme of the area.
Objective 1.14: Utilize the Old Town Roadway Plan to prioritize street improvements within Old
Town and utilize street improvements to facilitate new development.
Objective 1.15: Utilize the BNSF railroad to create a high-tech, clean industry Business Park.
Goal 2. Maintain and enhance the high quality of life and small-town feel currently available and
expected by Prosper residents.
Objective 2.1: Encourage the implementation of the Parks Master Plan as development occurs
to facilitate the creation of an interconnected park and trails system in Prosper
at buildout.
Objective 2.2: Update the 2004 Facilities Master Plan to ensure that public facilities, such as
fire, police and other public services, are coordinated with land use projections
in the Future Land Use Plan.
Objective 2.3: Work with Prosper Independent School District to coordinate future school
facilities planning with land use projections in the Future Land Use Plan.
Objective 2.4: Continue to require developers to dedicate 1 acre of park land for every 35
dwelling units constructed.
Objective 2.5: Encourage developers to preserve riparian zones and mature tree stands on
development sites and utilize such areas for residential park and open space
areas.
Objective 2.6: Preserve existing tree cover, when possible, by creating a tree preservation
ordinance and by conducting a natural assets inventory plan.
Objective 2.7: Encourage the use of rural design characteristics on new roadway construction
projects including the use of traditional lighting features, wide setbacks, native
plant materials, wildflowers and increased tree coverage.
Objective 2.8: Utilize cladding and form-lining at culvert crossings to create the impression of a
roadway bridge.
Objective 2.9: Determine if certain roadways within the community can maintain their existing
rural context, particularly roadways that may not require widening to meet
future demands.
Objective 2.10: Identify roadways that may be intentionally designed to be more rural in
character, potentially containing bioswales and other natural drainage features.
Appropriate roadways may include those that traverse residential districts and
contain little if any commercial development.
Objective 2.11: Encourage developers to use native planting materials and rural planting
designs within the private setback zone/landscape easement.
Objective 2.12: Develop and utilize design guidelines that address the use of rural
characteristics on development walls, neighborhood entrances and other
accessory strictures visible from the public right-of-way.
120
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Objective 2.13: Consistently use rural architectural/design guidelines within neighborhood
service retail centers.
Objective 2.14: Consider “dark skies.”
Objective 2.15: Work with the Prosper Historical Society to encourage the preservation of key
historic landmarks within Old Town and ensure that new development within
Old Town is designed to reflect an early 20th century historic theme.
Goal 3. Protect the quality and integrity of Prosper’s neighborhoods.
Objective 3.1: Ensure that high quality single family housing is the predominant housing type
within Prosper.
Objective 3.2: Require the use of long-lasting/durable building materials, such as stone or
brick, and encourage the use of high pitched roofs to enhance the overall
housing appearance.
Objective 3.3: Require the formation of neighborhood associations (HOAs) with all new
developments to maintain common property, provide a sense of identity and
encourage long-term private property maintenance.
Objective 3.4: Encourage developers to include neighborhood amenities such as parks, open
spaces, neighborhood pools and other such features which enhance the overall
desirability of individual neighborhoods.
Objective 3.5: Encourage developers to arrange lots in a manner that maximizes residential
access to open space when natural areas are present.
Objective 3.6: Work with developers to ensure that the majority of lot sizes within a given
development are over 12,500 square feet in size.
Objective 3.7: Low density residential areas should not exceed a gross density of 1.6 dwelling
units per acre.
Objective 3.8: Medium density residential areas should not exceed a gross density of 2.5
dwelling units per acre.
Objective 3.9: Prohibit the zoning of any additional garden-style apartment uses within
Prosper.
Objective 3.10: Work with developers to mitigate the number of apartments currently
permitted by previously approved zoning by reducing the overall number of
permitted apartments and by encouraging the use of alternative options, such
as mixed-use lofts/apartments, patio homes, snout houses, brownstones and
townhomes as a replacement for garden-style apartments.
Objective 3.11: Ensure that single family residential neighborhoods are protected from more
intensive areas of development, such as development located within the Dallas
North Tollway, Town Center, Business Park and Highway 380 districts, by using
screening and buffering techniques. Screening may include enhanced
landscaping, brick or masonry screening walls and landscaping berms, among
others.
Objective 3.12: Encourage the use of floodways as a natural buffer between low and high
intensity areas.
Objective 3.13: Utilize the trail network identified within the Park Plan to provide access to the
network of community parks and to enhance connectivity between individual
neighborhoods.
Objective 3.14: Ensure that neighborhoods have at least two roadway access points and
encourage roadway connections between neighborhoods to provide more
direct and interconnected forms of vehicular and pedestrian travel.
121 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Goal 4. Require high-quality and visually attractive architectural characteristics in both residential and
non-residential developments.
Objective 4.1: Zone key roadway intersections for retail while utilizing remaining land adjacent
to major roadways for residential to avoid stripped out arterial roadways
Objective 4.2: Avoid four-corner retail zoning to avoid an oversupply of retail zoning.
Objective 4.3: Limit driveways within 150 feet of major intersections to encourage larger scale,
master planned retail centers over individual retail establishments.
Objective 4.4: Encourage the creation of nodal, master planned retail centers over strip center
developments to encourage long term viability and investment in retail centers.
Objective 4.5: Mandate the use of high-quality building materials, such as brick and stone, to
protect the long-term durability of non-residential construction. Require all
non-residential developments to be 100% masonry and prohibit metal building
construction.
Objective 4.6: Create a menu-choice matrix for non-residential developments, requiring new
developments to choose from a palate of predetermined colors and styles.
Objective 4.7: Require architectural enhancements, such as pitched roofs, awnings, enhanced
canopies and building articulation to create visually attractive developments.
Objective 4.8: Require all parking rows to contain ending landscape islands.
Objective 4.9: Encourage the planting of trees within parking lots so that 25% of the parking
lot is covered by a shade canopy at tree maturity.
Objective 4.10: Encourage large parking lots to contain a shaded pedestrian way.
Objective 4.11: Incentivize the use of dispersed landscaped stormwater areas within parking
lots rather than large detention ponds. Allow stormwater best management
practices (BMPs) to count towards a portion of landscaping requirements.
Objective 4.12: Encourage the use of thematic, decorative and enhanced lighting features
within the public right-of-way, residential areas (when necessary) and
retail/commercial areas.
Goal 5. Develop a quality and functional transportation network that enhances the Town’s image and
provides safe and convenient residential mobility.
Objective 5.1: Utilize the updated Thoroughfare Plan Map as future roadway improvements
are designed and constructed.
Objective 5.2: Ensure that Prosper’s thoroughfare network is coordinated with neighboring
communities and work to negotiate and resolve any conflicting issues.
Objective 5.3: Utilize the functional street classification system, a hierarchical network of
roadway classifications, to create a network of major and minor thoroughfares,
collector and local streets.
Objective 5.4: Utilize shared access and cross-access easements to provide connectivity
between adjacent non-residential uses, limiting the number of driveways along
major corridors and allowing for more continuous landscaping.
Objective 5.5: Connect various portions of the community, including neighborhoods, the Town
Center, Old Town, public facilities and parks, with a system of pedestrian and
bicyclist trails to provide interconnectivity and create a system of non-motorized
linkages within the community.
Objective 5.6: Ensure that sufficient right-of-way is acquired and dedicated during platting or
roadway design to accommodate ultimate roadway configurations and
designated trails.
122
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Objective 5.7: Utilize Context Sensitive Solutions to design roadways within the context of
their adjacent development.
Objective 5.8: Utilize the Old Town District Roadway Plan as a guide during roadway design
within the Old Town area.
Objective 5.9: Create backage roads along the Dallas North Tollway to support development
connectivity and accessibility.
Objective 5.10: Upgrade Hays Road to a commercial collector to support and provide back
access to future commercial and retail development along Preston Road.
Objective 5.11: Extend and realign South Coleman Road to intersect with Richland Boulevard. at
Preston Road providing connectivity between Old Town, the Town Center and
development along Highway 380.
Objective 5.12: Include access roads along Highway 380, between the Lovers Lane Loop, in
order to provide access to development along the grade-separated segment of
Highway 380.
Objective 5.13: Create a streetscape design program that intentionally characterizes individual
roadways based upon anticipated forms of development.
Objective 5.14: Investigate amending the Town ordinances to allow for ornamental walls and
fences and other types of materials, such as split iron/wood. Identify key
corridors where standards would be applicable in order to create greater
corridor consistency.
Objective 5.15: Consider wider setbacks along Preston Road with enhanced landscaping to
maintain a more rural feel and to create a larger barrier between Preston Road
and adjacent neighborhoods.
Objective 5.16: Monitor regional rail initiatives for changes or updates to the Frisco Commuter
Rail Line, particularly how such changes impact Prosper.
Goal 6. Ensure that water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure is able to meet future growth
demands.
Objective 6.1: Investigate any deficiencies in the infrastructure systems.
Objective 6.2: Develop concepts that will address deficiencies of the infrastructure systems.
Objective 6.3: Strive for an infrastructure system that will effectively and economically serve
existing and projected needs of the community in a safe and efficient manner.
Objective 6.4: Ensure that infrastructure is comparable or expanded to support future
development, specifically in key development areas.
123 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Prioritization
On February 13, 2012, a Town Hall meeting was conducted at Prosper High School in order to present
the Draft Comprehensive Plan to the public and to gather comments and feedback from the public on
plan recommendations. Over 275 attendees were present at the meeting. Attendees participated in
round table discussions where individualized feedback on plan recommendations was able to be
deduced. Additionally, participants were asked to prioritize implementation issues. The following are
the results of the issue prioritization exercise:
Issue Votes
Upscale small town feel 90
Keep median home value high 79
Protecting/preserving schools 71
Quality retail on major corridors 67
Large-lot homes 60
Maintain quiet feel 56
Preserve open space 46
No garden style apartments 46
Quality development “raise the bar” 43
Need neighborhood services 32
Bicycle/Jogging trails 31
Enhanced landscaping, more trees 26
Lighting in appropriate areas, but keep dark sky 25
Parks 22
Entertainment for families 12
Gateways along major corridors 10
Shuttles for seniors 8
Maximum density of 4-6 stories on Tollway 7
Larger setbacks on roadways 4
124
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
1705 N. Market Street
Suite 500
Dallas, Texas 75202
(214) 217‐2200
www.freese.com
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 1
Comprehensive Plan Update
June 26, 2012
Town of Prosper
Public Hearing
Town Council
2
Guide & Direct Growth
DFW 4th Largest
Metro Area in US
Over 9 Million People
by 2030 (NCTCOG
Projection)
Collin County 2030
Projection: 1.4 Million
Understanding
regional efforts and
how they impact
Prosper
Higher density growth
within Collin County
Growth is inevitable
Regional Context
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 2
3
Regional Context
Denton County Collin County
4
Current Guide
•2004 Comprehensive Plan
–8 Years Old
–Update was needed due to rapid
growth
–Projects buildout at 90,000 residents
•Comprehensive Plan Advisory
Committee (CPAC)
–Re‐examine Local and Regional
Issues
–Re‐define Prosper’s Vision
–Develop Land Use Scenario
–Inform Neighbors
–Ambassadors of the Process
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 3
5
Planning Process
Community
Snapshot
Visioning/
Community
Input
Plan
Development
Adoption &
Implementation
•Profile
•Existing
Conditions
•Planning
Context
•Issue
Identification
•Town Hall
•VCS
•Plan Goals
•Vision
Statement
•Community
Character
•Transportation
Plan
•Economic
Analysis
•Infrastructure
Assessment
•Plan
Objectives
•Prioritization
Community Snapshot
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 4
7
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
Community Snapshot
Population Projection (Proposed Plan)
Neighbors (1970‐2010)
Collin County: 6.3%
Celina: 4.0%
Frisco: 10.9%
McKinney: 5.5%
Prosper: 7.6%
*Compound Annual Growth
Rate (CAGR)
2011: 10,550
Buildout: 69,300
8
Community Snapshot
Existing Land Use: Town Limits
Total Area
Commercial
2%
Industrial
1%
Multi‐Family
0%
Mobile Home
0%
Office
0%
Parks & Open
Space
3%Public Semi‐
Public
2%
Retail
0%
Single‐Family
12%
Vacant
80%
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 5
9
Community Snapshot
Existing Land Use: Town Limits
Zoning
Planned
Development
Zoning
61%
Straight
Zoning
19%
Agricultural
and ETJ
20%
Community Vision
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 6
11
Input Methods
•CPAC
–Issue Identification
–Visual Character Survey
–Discussion
•Town Hall #1
–Round Table Discussions
–Visual Character Survey
•General Public
–Visual Character Survey
•Town Hall #2
–Vision & Draft Plan
12
Guiding Principles
Small‐town, rural feel
Open spaces that create a quiet, open feel
Provide large‐lot homes
“Raise the bar” on development/ attract quality development
Attract neighborhood services, such as a grocery store
System of connected parks and trails
Clearly brand and identify Prosper
Entertainment venues for families
Create high quality mixed‐use centers where residents may shop, dine,
socialize and live
Enhance Old Town Prosper
Mixture of high‐quality residential types, for “in‐town” and “rural” living
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 7
13
Vision Statement
“Prosper is a community for a lifetime; rooted in
family values, exemplary schools, distinctive and
distinguished neighborhoods and a “small town feel,”
it is a true place to call home. We aspire to create a
residential oasis in an ever increasing urban area. We
envision a community with spacious, family‐friendly
neighborhoods, exce ptional shopping areas, excellent
services, a business friendly environment and a
responsive government where citizens have a say.”
14
Community Goals
•Goal 1: Provide a variety of land uses, in accordance with the vision of Prosper Residents,
which diversify the tax base and enable residents to live, work, shop eat and
relax in Prosper.
•Goal 2:Maintain and enhance the high quality of life and small‐town feel currently available
and expected by Prosper Residents.
•Goal 3:Protect the quality and integrity of Prosper’s neighborhoods.
•Goal 4: Require high‐quality and visually attractive architectural characteristics in both
residential and non‐residential developments.
•Goal 5:Develop quality, open roadways that enhance the Town’s rural image,are
compatible with adjacent development and provide safe and convenient traffic
movements.
•Goal 6:Ensure that water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure is able to meet
future growth demands.
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 8
Community Character
16
Future Land Use Plan
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 9
17
Future Land Use Summary
Business Park
2%
High Density
4%
Low Density
34%Medium
Density
35%
Old Town
2%
Neighbor‐hood
Services
2%
Town Center
4%
Tollway District
9%
US 380 District
8%
•Residential: 72%
•Non‐Residential: 26%
•Old Town: 2%
18
Residential Areas
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 10
19
Single Family Residential
Dwelling Units Per Acre Square Footage Range
2004 Plan Draft Plan 2004 Plan Draft Plan
Low Density 2 (Maximum) 1.6 (Maximum) None
Greater than
15,000 sq. ft.
Medium
Density 2.1 to 3.5 1.6 to 2.5 None
12,500‐20,000
sq. ft.
High Density N/A
Greater than
2.5 (Only in
Artesia)
None
Less than
10,000 Square
Feet (Only in
Artesia
20
Multifamily Residential
800 MF Units
40 acres
(Zoned in 2004)
300 MF Units
20 acres
(Zoned in 2008)
504 MF Units
33.6 acres
(Zoned in 2000)
28 MF Units
(Nonconforming)
620 MF Units
42.5 acres
(Zoned in 2000)
300 MF Units
20 acres
(Zoned in 2006)
423 MF Units
28.2 acres
(Zoned in 2006)
419 MF Units
27.9 acres
(Zoned in 2006)
2,400 Mixed Use
Units - 20 acres
(Zoned in 2008)
Artesia
600 MF Units
30 acres
(MUD created 2003)
• 648 garden-style multifamily units currently exist (620 in the Mansions/Estates and 28 in downtown).
• Current zoning allows for an additional 2,746 garden-style multifamily units on 169.7 acres.
• Planned Development-41 allows for 2,400 urban-style mixed use units on 20 acres on the northwest corner of
U.S. 380 and Dallas North Tollway.
• 232.2 acres of multifamily is currently 1.45% of the land area in the Town of Prosper.
• In addition to the multifamily units in the Town of Prosper, the Artesia development agreement allows for 600
garden-style multifamily units on 30 acres in Denton County.
Approved Multifamily Units per Zoning in the Town of Prosper
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 11
21
High Density Residential
•Preferred Types
–Mixed‐Use Apartments/Lofts
–Patio Homes
•Appropriate Locations
–Dallas North Tollway
–Highway 380
–Town Center
–Major Corridors contain higher
intensities
22
Ultimate Capacity
–No new garden style apartments—replaced
with mixed‐use lofts and patio homes
–Lower single‐family density, more open feel
2004 Plan Draft Plan
Ultimate Capacity 90,000 69,300
Projected Growth Rate 9% CAGR 8% CAGR
Estimated Buildout Date 2037 2035‐2040
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 12
23
Non‐Residential Land Use
24
Neighborhood Services
•Intent
–Provide daily necessities to Prosper
Residents (grocery, bank, pharmacy,
family practice offices, etc)
•Character
–Small Scale, less intense
–Provide local services
•Percent of Land Use
–2%
–But may be located within the various
districts
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 13
25
Dallas North Tollway
•Intent
–Maximize tax base along Dallas North
Tollway
•Character
–Office, mixed‐use, retail, high density
residential
–Provides regional services, attracts
outside patrons to Prosper
–4‐6 story office building maximum height
•Percent of Land Use
–9%
26
Highway 380
•Intent
–Provide commercial services to Prosper
residents
–Maximize traffic on HWY 380
•Character
–Big Box retail, commercial services with
outside storage, hotels, automobile
service stations with convenience store,
etc
–High Density residential may be
incorporated at lower intensities
•Percent of Land Use
–8%
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 14
27
Town Center
•Intent
–Provide shopping, dining, retail, and
entertainment opportunities for Prosper
Residents
•Character
–Mixed‐use development with shopping,
dining and entertainment venues
–Public gathering space for community
events/festivals
–Office and high density residential
component
•Percent of Land Use
–4%
28
Business Park
•Intent
–Leverage railroad to attract light
industrial, business park activity
•Character
–Light Industrial/warehousing
–Office Showroom
–Office Park
–High quality landscaping and screening
along major roadways
•Percent of Land Use
–2%
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 15
29
Old Town
30
Old Town
•Intent
–Preserve Prosper’s past
–Historic core of the community
•Character
–Boutique office and retail
–Older homes along Broadway and first
converting to office and retail
–Historic theme on new infill development
–High density residential near TOD
•Percent of Land Use
–2%
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 16
31
Primary Adjustments from
2004 Comprehensive Plan
•Lowered Single‐Family Density
–Low Density: 1.6 DUA from 2.0 DUA
–Medium Density: 1.6‐2.5 DUA from 2.1 –3.5 DUA
•No More Garden Apartments
–Work with developers to reduce the amount of
previously approved garden style apartments
–Mixed use/loft apartments, patio homes, snout homes
townhomes and brownstones
•Business Park
–Leverage BNSF Railroad & DNT Access
•Industrial along Highway 380 Removed
–Part of Highway 380 District (Commercial, Big Box,
Retail)
•Old Town Plan
–Land Use and Transportation included as part of the
Comprehensive Plan
32
Residential Density Changes
Low density transition
into Prosper from
higher density MUD’s
Medium Density buffer adjacent
to Dallas North Tollway
Medium Density Residential replaces Commercial Boulevard
District; Floodplain serves as a buffer to Highway 380 District
Medium Density coincides with
development plans.
Artesia defined as High Density
Single‐Family
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 17
Livability
34
Open Space/Community
Interaction
•Plan recommends a range of
strategies to achieve open space
preservation
•Public Space/Gathering Space
Examples
–Farmers Market
–Playgrounds & Parks
–Gardens
–Town Center
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 18
35
Housing Mix
Multiple
Family
Starter
Home
Move‐up
Home
Empty
Nester
Adult
Living
Complex
Assisted
Living
36
Mixed‐Use in Prosper
•Mixed Use Areas
–Dallas North Tollway
–Town Center
–US 380
–Old Town
•Mixed‐Use Lofts/Apartments
•Favored Models
–Shops at Legacy
–Watters Creek
–Southlake
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 19
37
Image/Branding
•Image
–Small Town “chic country”
–Rural feel (open space/parks, setbacks)
–Excellent Schools
•Establish gateways into Propser
•Major Gateways
–DNT, HWY 380, Preston, Custer, Gee, FM 1385
•Minor Gateways
–Teel, Legacy, Coit
•Theme
–To be defined
Transportation Plan
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 20
39
Recommended
Thoroughfare Plan
40
Thoroughfares
•Recommendations:
–Retain Current Plan and
Associated Roadway Sections
•Proposed Modifications:
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 21
41
Old Town
42
Potential TOD
(Transit Oriented Development)
•Plan Recommendations
–Recommends a strategy that preserves our
options and choices in the future
•Monitor Regional Planning
Initiatives
–Mobility 2035
–Frisco Corridor Plan
–No Details today on operation, type, etc
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 22
43
Infrastructure Assessment
•Plans already developed for
water, wastewater and
drainage
•Plan ensures infrastructure
coordination to meet future
growth:
–Short and long term
recommendations
44
Economic Analysis
•Ensures Future Land Use Plan
is fiscally balanced.
•Based upon Future Land Use
Plan
•Based upon ultimate capacity
of 69,300
•Flexibility allows the Town to
provide a range of services
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 23
45
Economic Analysis
•Retail Acreage
–Town Supports 374 Acres
–Plan Recommends 750 Acres
•Sales Tax Estimates
–Household Income
–Number of Households
–Household Retail Expenditures
–2% Sales Tax Collection (1% for General Fund)
•Ad Valorem Estimates
–Comparative Properties (Central Appraisal
District)
–Value Per Acre
–Taxable Value ($.52 for every $100
Assessment)
46
Economic Analysis
•Tax Gap Analysis
–Sales and Ad Valorem Income
–Estimated Per Capita Expenditures
–Potential Ad Valorem Surplus/Deficit
*Income does not include additional income such as
industry, inventory and business personal property
taxes or fees, permits or fines.
Total Town Ad Valorem Income at
Build‐out $66,106,255
Total Sales Tax Income at Build‐out $17,120,278
Total Income from Tax at
Build‐out*$83,590,594
Total Expenditures $52,323,765
Tax Gap Surplus 31,266,829
2010
Population
FY 2010‐2011
General Fund
Budget
Per Capita
Expenditure
Southlake 26,575 $30,410,480 $1,144
Richardson 99,223 $94,180,002 $949
Allen 84,246 $72,270,464 $858
Prosper 9,423 $7,115,112 $755
Argyle 3,282 $2,320,366 $707
Plano 258,841 $182,758,485 $706
McKinney 131,117 $90,788,018 $692
Frisco 116,989 $77,945,250 $666
Celina 6,028 $3,945,684 $655
Desoto 49,047 $29,760,521 $607
Rowlett 56,199 $33,793,677 $601
Little Elm 25,898 $13,157,771 $508
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 24
47
Implementation Plan
•Short and Long Range Actions
•Goals and Corresponding Actions
–Goal 1: Maintain and enhance the high
quality of life and small‐town feel.
•Objective 1.1: Encourage the
implementation of the Parks Master
Plan to create an interconnected parks
and trails system in Prosper.
•Objective 1.2: Continue to require
developers to dedicate 1 acre of park
land for every 35 dwelling units
constructed.
48
Town Hall #2 Prioritization
1
2
3
4
5
* Numbers Indicate Top 5 Priorities
Draft Prosper Comprehensive Plan: Public Hearing/Town Council
Town of Prosper, TX June 26, 2012
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Page 25
49
2012 Comprehensive Plan
•New Vision, Public Input/Issue Identification
•Strategies for Future Land Use, Transportation
and Community Character
•Implementation Plan
50
2012 Comprehensive Plan“Prosper is a community for a
lifetime; rooted in family values,
exemplary schools, distinctive and
distinguished neighborhoods and a
“small town feel,”it is a true place to
call home. We aspire to create a
residential oasis in an ever
increasing urban area. We envision a
community with spacious, family‐
friendly neighborhoods, exceptional
shopping areas, excellent services, a
business friendly environment and a
responsive government where
citizens have a say.”
Ops.ops…my eyes
]
1. Call to Order / Roll Call.
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
MINUTES
Regular Meeting of the
Prosper Planning & Zoning Commission
108 W. Broadway St., Prosper, Texas
Town of Prosper Municipal Chambers
Tuesday, May 15, 2012, 6:00 p.m.
The meeting was called to order at 6:01 p.m.
Roll call taken by Chris Copple, Planning Director.
Commissioners present included: Chair Mark DeMattia, Vice Chair Mike McClung, Secretary Chris
Keith, Bill Senkel, Bruce Carlin, Jim Cox, and Rick Turner.
Staff present included: Chris Copple, Planning Director; and Suzanne Brandon, Permit Technician.
Consultant team present included: Eddie Haas and Brandon Gonzalez with Freese and Nichols.
2. Recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA
3a. Consider and act upon minutes from the following Planning & Zoning Commission
meeting:
• April 17, 2012 Regular Meeting
• May 1, 2012 Regular Meeting
3b. Consider and act upon a site plan for the Parks Maintenance Facility at Frontier Park,
located 2,000± feet on the south side of Frontier Parkway, 1,500± feet west of the Burlington
Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks. The property is zoned Agricultural (A). (D12-0017).
3c. Consider and act upon a conveyance plat of Whitley Place, Phase 3, Block B, Lot 5X on 8.4±
acres, located on the south side of Prosper Trail, 500± feet west of Escalante Trail. The
property is zoned Planned Development-9 (PD-9). (D12-0018).
3d. Consider and act upon a final plat of Whitley Place, Phase 1, Block S, Lots 1XR and 2R-4R
and Block T, Lot 30R, being a replat of Whitley Place, Phase 1, Block S, Lots 1X and 2-4
and Block T, Lot 30 on 4.5± acres, located on the northwest corner of First Street and
Whitley Place Drive. The property is zoned Planned Development-9 (PD-9). (D12-0019).
Motioned by Carlin, seconded by McClung to approve consent agenda subject to staff’s
recommendations. Motion approved 7-0 at 6:02 p.m.
REGULAR AGENDA
4. Consider and act upon the 2012 Town of Prosper Comprehensive Plan Update. (CA12-
0001).
Page 1 of 4
Discussion
Copple: Noted the staff report remains mostly unchanged with the exception of the list of
suggested revisions requested by the Commission at the May 1, 2012 Planning & Zoning
meeting. Informed this is not a public hearing due to the public hearing being closed at the May
1st meeting. Recommended approval of the 2012 Town of Prosper Comprehensive Plan (herein
called the Plan) subject to any requested revisions by the Commission.
McClung: Asked for confirmation regarding the motion to approve with regards to the suggested
changes by the Commission.
Carlin: Asked staff why the Plan will not be revised with the Commissions suggestions before it
is reviewed by Council.
DeMattia: Addressing the Commission, clarified the process of the Commission’s
recommendation to Council and Council’s process of accepting or rejecting all or part of the
recommendation, which concludes with the approval of an ordinance that adopts the Plan.
Copple: Answering McClung, confirmed the process of recommendation and acceptance or
denial of the Plan by Council is similar to that of a zoning case. Concurred with DeMattia on his
explanation of the process. Answering Carlin, noted the Council will see the same document the
Commission reviewed, and Council can decide whether or not to accept the Commission’s
recommendations.
DeMattia: Announced that while this is not public hearing, the Commission will recognize a
request to speak from the President of the Prosper Developer’s Council (herein called the PDC).
Matt Robinson (President of the PDC): Concerned regarding the medium density residential
districts, more specifically the proposed lots sizes, not necessarily the proposed density. Noted
the PDC is not requesting a change regarding the density numbers, but is requesting
reconsideration of the lot square footages (reducing the minimum from 12,500 square feet).
Listed existing medium density residential developments (Lakes of Prosper, La Cima, Villages at
Prosper Trail) that have 10,000 square foot lots and are considered medium density. Explained
that by setting specific lot sizes, products can vary because smaller lots with medium densities
force developers to provide more open space or parks. Informed that a smaller lot size would
require a Planned Development request, which can be lengthy process.
DeMattia: Opened the floor for discussion and consideration.
McClung: Requested Council consider the following: 1) the addition of an executive summary
and briefed on the points in a proposed summary he drafted (his draft is multiple pages); 2)
Council reconcile the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee’s (herein called CPAC) vision
statement with their vision statement, so the town has only one; 3) revising the Plan –
specifically referencing pages 39, 47, and 61 – to reference land densities rather than lot sizes, as
building permit data suggests that seven out of ten families moving to Prosper over the last
fifteen months are building on lots less than 12,500 square feet.
Carlin: Suggested the Future Land Use Plan (herein called the FLUP) be located in the
executive summary and the summary be at the beginning of the Plan. Commented that homes
close together hinders the open feel sought by residents. Requested a revision to require side yard
Page 2 of 4
setbacks at a minimum of ten feet. Noted that a 10,000 square foot lot with ten foot sideyard
setbacks and thirty foot front and rear yard setbacks can still allow for a 3,900 square foot
building pad and a three car garage.
Senkel: Agreed with McClung that the Plan should focus on densities, not lot sizes. Noted the
topics of quality neighborhoods and retail have surfaced amongst residents. Also noted if retail
and commercial is to be developed, homes will be needed, which equates to more density. Also,
requested a review of the language regarding garden-style apartments be performed by Council
or the Town attorney to lessen the risk of liability to the Town.
DeMattia: Suggested that from resident surveys, large lot size is a top issue. Strongly preferred
to recommend the Plan to Council as written. Understood the economic burden on developers to
create more open space lots, but noted that more open space is what the citizens want. Voiced
support for placing an executive summary at the beginning of the Plan. Noted he finds no
liabilities with the garden-style apartment language and that the Town attorney must be aware of
the proposed language.
Eddie Haas: Noted the largest resident input specified no further garden-style apartment
developments. Cited the last paragraph on page 47 of the Plan. Reminded Commission that the
Plan acknowledges that there are existing multifamily planned developments, but the Town
prefers not to have any further garden-style apartment developments.
Copple: Informed the implementation process regarding future garden-style apartment growth is
partnered with the Zoning Ordinance, not the Plan. Offered to contact the Town attorney to
ensure the garden-style apartment language is acceptable.
Cox: Preferred to have the Town’s desires regarding how to address garden-style apartments in
the Plan, rather than not have it in the Plan.
Carlin: Preferred to not have written evidence a developer could use against the Town should
they not be able to develop garden-style apartments and choose to take the Town to court.
Turner: Reminded the Commission that the Plan is a guide, not a legally binding ordinance.
Preferred to see executive summary reduced to one page. Noted the CPAC spent sufficient time
and effort to produce the Plan; therefore, he supports it as written.
Commission discussed the Plan’s language; introduction; executive summary, which includes
adding the FLUP to it; and typos.
Motioned by McClung, seconded by Senkel to approve the Plan as written subject to: 1) the
Commission’s list of revisions being applied to the Plan, and 2) the removal of references to lot
sizes on pages 39, 47, and 61. Motion failed 3-4 at 6:32 p.m. with Carlin, Keith, DeMattia, and
Turner being in opposition to the motion.
Motioned by Carlin, seconded by Turner to approve the Plan as written subject to 1) the
Commission’s list of revisions being applied to the Plan; and 2) the addition of the proposed
executive summary, which is to include the FLUP, placed at the beginning of the Plan. Motion
approved 4-3 at 6:34 p.m. with Senkel, McClung, and Cox in opposition to the motion.
Page 3 of 4
Page 4 of 4
Senkel: Reiterated his opposition regarding minimum lot sizes for single family, noting the Plan
will hamper quality development.
Staff noted a public hearing on the Plan will be scheduled for the June 26, 2012 Town Council
meeting.
5. Possibly direct Town Staff to schedule topic(s) for discussion at a future meeting.
McClung: Requested a discussion regarding the Town’s irrigation standards, noting the preference to
utilize new technologies to effort water conservation. Commented the existing ordinances only require
irrigation be installed and do not mention types, designs, et cetera. Offered his experience of saving 660
gallons of water per cycle with a newly installed system at his residence.
DeMattia: Asked Commission if they would like to discuss water conservation issues.
Copple: Informed the Zoning Ordinance regulates private property and the Subdivision Ordinance
regulates thoroughfare screening areas with regards to irrigation. Offered to forward the request to Wade
Harden, Senior Parks and Recreation Planner.
6. Adjourn
Motioned by Keith, seconded by Cox to adjourn. Motion approved 7-0.
Meeting was adjourned at 6:47 p.m.
_________________________________ ____________________________
Melanie Videan, Planning Technician Chris Keith, Secretary
Economic Analysis
The following is a brief explanation of the Economic Analysis for further clarification, as described at the
May 1, 2012 Planning & Zoning Commission hearing.
Sales Tax
In order to provide as realistic numbers as possible for the Economic Analysis, Freese and Nichols
involved the sub-consultant Catalyst. Catalyst is well versed in conducting trade and market analyses for
various entities, including retailers. The data that Catalyst provided, specifically the Retail Percentage of
Household Income, is derived from examining credit card expenditures. The program that Catalyst uses
enables them to pull actual retail and spending for various market areas, in this case for residents of
Prosper.
The analysis of retail habits from credit card expenditures indicates that, on average, Prosper residents
spent 35 percent of their household income on retail expenditures. With an average household income
of approximately $108,000, and 3,504 total households in Prosper, the Town’s purchasing power in 2011
would have been $130,284,948.
Under a perfect scenario, the Town would currently capture approximately $2.6 million in sales tax each
year if all residents could perform their shopping exclusively within Prosper. This number is derived by
taking the existing Town sales tax allocation of 2% from the $130.3 million purchasing power of the
Town’s residents. In 2012, projections indicate that the Town may collect approximately $1.1 million in
sales tax revenue, a significant difference from the $2.6 million the economic analysis would seem to
project. This difference is explained by the Town’s retail deficit. At the current time, the Town does not
have the retail base to enable residents to shop entirely within Prosper. Town residents currently go
elsewhere for a significant portion of their retail needs. As the Town begins to add more retail, the
Town will close its retail deficit.
In order to project the retail demand and sales tax contributions at build-out, the analysis used current
2011 data on household income and persons per household. The reasoning for using 2011 data stems
from the fact that it is nearly impossible to project the economic composition of the Town at build-out,
around 2040. Since all numbers used are factual in nature, they are believed to be reasonable
assumptions for projection purposes. It is important to note that numbers given do not reflect inflation
and only reflect retail sales tax—estimates do not include industry tax, inventory tax, etc.
The economic analysis created for this Comprehensive Plan is a general analysis conducted for the
purpose of determining how land use decisions and Town population translate to financial implications.
These numbers are not intended to be used for economic development or other financial purposes.
Similar to the 30,000 foot nature of the Comprehensive Plan, they are intended to generally identify the
relationship between total households, retail trade potential and how such numbers ultimately
influence the amount of retail the Town can realistically provide.
Ad Valorem Tax
In order to estimate the potential value of the Town at build-out, and to thereby estimate potential Ad
Valorem contributions, FNI did a comparative analysis of the various land use districts identified in the
proposed Future Land Use Plan. Information from the Collin County Central Appraisal District was
gathered for each comparable property and an average value per acre was derived. In order to reflect
the variety of potential land uses along major corridors, several different properties from adjacent
communities were examined. The overall value per acre derived from comparable properties was then
multiplied by the total number of acres within the specific district to calculate the potential value of the
district. Comparable residential land uses, however, were taken from Prosper itself and high density
single-family utilized properties within Artesia.
This method was used to calculate an estimated value of the Town at build-out, based upon the
proposed Future Land Use Plan, and totaled nearly $18.2 billion. In order to account for roads, streets,
schools, churches and exemptions, approximately 30% of the total value of the community was removed
leaving an estimated taxable value of $12.7 billion. At the current tax rate of .52 cents for every $100 of
assessed value, the Future Land Use Plan would equate to a total Ad Valorem contribution of roughly
$66.1 million at build-out.
Similar to the sales tax analysis, this method is only used to demonstrate the general financial
implications of the Future Land Use Plan. For example, if a community had very little in the way of non-
residential development on their future land use plan, the Ad Valorem taxes generated may not be
sufficient to cover long-term expenditures. In Prospers case, the Ad Valorem estimates indicate that
there is good mixes of land use types and that, if developed in the future, have the potential to
contribute significantly to the Town’s value and Ad Valorem contributions. The actual number derived,
however, should be treated with caution as these are educated estimates on potential land use impacts.
Additionally, Ad Valorem estimates in this analysis do not include business personal property, which are
typically assessed separately.
It should be noted that the 2004 Comprehensive Plan conducted a similar analysis. Using Prosper’s
existing .52 cent tax rate, the Ad Valorem estimates from the 2004 Comprehensive Plan would equate to
approximately $66.02 million in Ad Valorem contributions, a difference of less than $100,000 from the
2012 Comprehensive Plan estimates. While no Ad Valorem projection can be precisely accurate,
especially considering the relatively vacant nature of Prosper at the current time, the relative
consistency between two different analyses by two different planning processes seems to indicate the
numbers, while estimates, are rooted in a certain degree of accuracy.
Tax Gap Analysis
Finally, the Tax Gap Analysis was conducted to determine if sales tax and Ad Valorem contributions
would cover anticipated Town expenditures. In order to estimate Town expenditures, the existing per
capita expenditure of $755 per citizen was used at a build-out population of 69,303 residents. This
would indicate that, if current per capita expenditures remain as they currently are, the Town would
have approximately $52.3 million in general fund expenditures at build-out.
The total estimated general fund income at build-out would be approximately $83.6 million (sales tax
and Ad Valorem contributions). The difference between income and expenditures leaves an estimated
surplus of approximately $31.2 million.
A major point to note is that, as the Town continues to grow, a higher level of service may be expected
by Town residents. Quality parks, roadways and amenities may be desired increasing the per capita
expenditures of the Town. For example, Southlake currently spends $1,144 per capita in order to
provide high quality services and amenities. If Prosper spends at this level, the estimated budget surplus
is reduced to only $3 million.
Town of Prosper: Comprehensive Plan
Planning & Zoning Commission Requested Changes
May 8, 2012
Mike McClung:
Page 13, first paragraph, line 13: “Prospers” should be “Prosper’s”
Page 55, first paragraph, line 6: Insert “of” between “development” and “street.”
Page 64, fourth paragraph, line 3: “farmers” should be “farmers’”.
Page 66, first line: Remove the word “be” (it is redundant).
Page 74, third paragraph, line 10: delete “a” in the phrase “represents “a” long term economic
and/or social benefits for the community as a whole.”
Page 79, second paragraph, line 8: delete the comma after “that.”
Page 81, last paragraph, line 2: in order to clarify the statement, the second sentence should be
changed to “An urban and rural section are both contained within a 50’ ROW.”
Page 97, second paragraph, line 1: delete the leading apostrophe before the first word.
Page 97, second paragraph, line 1: for clarification purposes, expand “FAR” to read “Floor to
Area Ratio (FAR) factor of 0.18 for retail.”
Page 101, first paragraph, line 5: add a space between “calculate” and “the.”
Executive Summary at the beginning of the Plan generally highlighting some of the Plan’s key
recommendations.
Vision Statement recommendation: provide consistency between the vision developed for the
Comprehensive Plan and the vision developed by City Council.
Chris Keith:
Add a list of tables and Figures to the Table of Contents. Name selected tables and figures.
Figures include:
o Historic Population Growth (Page 4)
o Regional Growth (Page 5)
o Existing Land Use (Page 7)
o Future Land Use Acreage (Page 47)
o Existing Land Use, Plate 1 (Page 11)
o Ultimate Capacity (Page 48)
o Population Projections (Page 49)
o Future Land Use Plan, Plate 2 (Page 45)
o Functional Street Classifications (Page 82)
o Thoroughfare Plan, Plate 3 (Page 87)
o Retail Demand Forecast (Page 97)
o Ad Valorem Estimates (Page 101)
o Tax Gap Analysis (Page 102)
o Prioritization Ranking (Page 124)
Rick Turner:
Page 51, General Guidelines, first bullet, Maximum Setbacks. Change to “Reduced Setbacks”
rather than Maximum Setbacks to be more understandable.
Bruce Carlin:
Page 9, third paragraph, change “towards” to “toward.”
Page 15, change opening sentence to “The Town of Prosper completed an update to its
Thoroughfare Plan in 2010, re-examining issues and redefining the Town’s roadway network.”
Page 17, remove extra “g” in first sentence.
Page 36, second paragraph, change “Prospers” to “Prosper’s.”
Page 36, Goal 1 and Goal 2, lowercase “Residents.”
Page 35, Goal 5:
Page 35, Goal 6, change “is” to “are.”
Page 37, last paragraph, change to “but may also include a wide variety…”
Page 40, Retail and Neighborhood Services, remove “taxes” in “both property taxes and sales
taxes…”
Page 43, define the Business Park parameters.
Page 44, define DUA, “dwelling units per acre (DUA)”
Page 47, Ultimate Capacity, 4th paragraph. Add “its desire” to “The community has very strongly
expressed its desire that no new garden style apartments be permitted within Prosper.”
Page 48, first paragraph. Add “existing or desired” to “Given the existing or desired low density
nature of development within the community…”
Page 49, first sentence add “which was previously” to “which was previously discussed in more
detail in the Planning Context.”
Page 55 and 57, change the word “built environment.”
Page 58, Connectivity, change first sentence to “Encourage connected neighborhoods which
emphasize both internal and external connectivity.”
Page 93, first sentence. Change to “The following modifications to the Thoroughfare Plan were
developed as a part of the planning process.”
Page 97, define FAR. “Floor to area ratio (FAR)”
Page 98, first sentence. Change “acreage” to “acres”
Page 98, discuss how percentages were derived.
Page 99, first paragraph. Space between the words “calculate total.”
Mark DeMattia
Clarify the need to avoid any additional non-anchored strip retail.
Page 99, add “beyond what is recommended on the Future Land Use Plan” to the statement “it
is also recommended that additional neighborhood service retail zoning should be avoided.”
P 121, Objective 4.4. add “No additional unanchored strip retail is recommended.”
Note:
The blank pages identified for deletion appear to be unnecessary pages; however, many of these pages
will be the back sides of 11x17 fold-out maps in the final printed draft. For this reason, they appear as
unformatted pages in the initial draft. The remaining blank pages are necessary for formatting
consistencies. These pages are identifiable because, while they contain no content, they do contain
formatting.
1 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary
Prosper’s 2012 Comprehensive Plan is a plan to
preserve the past, realize the potential of the
present, and guide the future of the Town. It is
a coordinated effort of citizens, decision
makers, Town staff, and other stakeholders.
The Plan analyzes the issues presented by the
current conditions to develop a vision for the
future of Prosper and designs the pathway to
achieve that desired future. As we have seen in
the last decade, growth in Prosper is inevitable.
This Plan is meant to help preserve the Town’s
history, culture and resources, as well as
manage growth sensibly and responsibly. This
Plan is intended to be a dynamic, flexible and
adaptable guide to help decision‐makers,
citizens, Town staff and other stakeholders
shape Prosper’s future on a continual, proactive
basis.
This planning document forms the basis for
policy decisions. Policy‐makers and Town staff
will use this document as a guide while
reviewing development projects, Town budget,
prioritizing capital improvement projects and
drafting ordinances to direct growth that leads
to the vision identified in this document. For
citizens and potential developers, this plan can
be used as a guide to:
Compare development requests or
projects with the vision and strategies
of this plan;
Choose the right project or realign the
request to meet the vision; and
Review recommendations and
implementation ideas to determine an
appropriate development model.
Plan Elements
Prosper’s 2012 Comprehensive Plan is
structured into seven sections – Planning to
Plan, Community Vision, Community Character,
Transportation Plan, Economic Analysis,
Infrastructure Assessment and Implementation
Plan.
Planning to Plan
This section provides introductory information
that should be considered as planning decisions
are made. Historical population growth for
both Prosper and the region, general household
characteristics, existing land use, planning
constraints and past planning efforts are
identified to begin to set the baseline, or
context from which plan recommendations
should be made.
Community Vision
One of the most critical elements of the
planning process was identifying the Town’s
vision. This process included a Comprehensive
Plan Advisory Committee (CPAC) made up of 13
Town residents who were ultimately
responsible for formulating Plan
recommendations. In addition to the CPAC, two
Town Hall meetings were conducted on June
27, 2011 and February 13, 2012. Town
residents participated in roundtable discussions
and other exercises designed to gather
feedback on the Town’s vision. A Visual
Character Survey (VCS) was made available on
the Town’s website over the duration of a 4
week period. A total of over 440 Town
residents participated in the online VCS where
residents rated nearly 200 individual images.
Key characteristics identified by the public
included the desire for maintaining the small-
town feel, preserving large-lot homes and
providing high-quality retail shopping and
restaurants.
Community Character
The Community Character element examined
both land use and livability characteristics. The
existing 2004 Comprehensive Plan was used as
a basis for land use decisions and necessary and
appropriate altercations were made based upon
the Community Vision. Overall densities in all
residential categories were lowered from the
2004 Plan and lot-size guidelines were
provided. The Plan heavily emphasizes that no
new garden style apartments should be
permitted and encourages the Town to work
with developers to reduce the number of
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
2
Comprehensive Plan
Town of Prosper
garden style apartments currently permitted by
previously approved zoning. Based upon the
Future Land Use Plan, the Town could support
approximately 69,000 residents and, based
upon recent growth trends, build out could
potentially occur between 2035 and 2040.
Livability guidelines included keeping the more
intense development along the Dallas North
Tollway and Highway 380 while maintaining
Preston Road as an internal corridor respective
of adjacent residential neighborhoods. General
considerations for neighborhood design were
derived and life-cycle housing options that
permit residents to live in Prosper through
changing life circumstances were provided. A
land use and roadway character plan for Old
Town was created in order to preserve the
historical element of the Town’s founding.
Finally, gateway and image enhancement
recommendations were provided.
Transportation Plan
The Town recently completed an update to its
Thoroughfare Plan and therefore no major
modifications were needed. Minor
modifications to the South Coleman Couplet
were proposed in addition to creating backage
roads for access along the Dallas North Tollway,
upgrading Hayes Road and providing frontage
roads along Highway 380 between the Lovers
Lane Loop. Finally, roadway sections for Old
Town were created. Roadway sections are
intended to preserve and enhance the historical
elements of Old Town.
Economic Analysis
A general economic analysis was conducted to
determine the Town’s retail needs at build-out
and to approximate the financial benefits of the
Future Land Use Plan in terms of potential sales
and property tax contributions. Findings
indicate that retail acreage on the Future Land
Use Plan can support the Town’s future needs
and accounts for additional market capture due
to the Towns major regional corridors. Ad
Valorem and Sales Tax estimates, combined
with current per capita expenditures, indicate
that the Future Land Use Plan is diversified and
can potentially permit the Town to provide
additional services and amenities in the future.
Infrastructure Assessment
An evaluation of overall water and wastewater
infrastructure within the Town was conducted.
Based upon recommendations within the
Town’s recently completed water and
wastewater master plans, the Town can provide
water and wastewater services to
accommodate a potential build-out of
approximately 69,000 residents.
Implementation Plan
The Implementation Plan provides objectives
related to the six community goals identified
within the Community Vision. These objectives
are intended to provide direction towards
achieving the ultimate vision for the Town. The
Implementation Plan also includes an issue
prioritization derived from citizen voting during
the February 13, 2012 Town Hall meeting. This
prioritization is intended guide Town staff and
decision-makers as future projects and needs
are identified.
Differences from 2004 Plan
The following are the noticeable changes from
the 2004 Comprehensive Plan.
Vision Statement: the 2004 Plan does
not include a Vision Statement.
Single Family Densities and Lot Size:
The 2004 Plan recommends densities of
less than 2.0 dwelling units per acre
(DUA) in low density residential areas
and between 2.1 and 3.5 DUA in
medium density residential areas. The
2004 Plan does not give a
recommendation on lot sizes. The 2012
Comprehensive Plan recommends less
than 1.6 DUA in low density residential
area and between 1.6 and 2.5 DUA in
medium density residential areas. The
2012 Plan also recommends lots greater
than 15,000 square feet in low density
areas and between 12,500 and 20,000
3 Town of Prosper, TX
Comprehensive Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
square feet in medium density
residential areas.
Multifamily: The 2004 Comprehensive
Plan supports 215 acres of multifamily
and an estimated 3,425 multifamily
units. The 2012 Comprehensive Plan
recommends no additional garden style
apartments and recommends that the
Town work with developers to reduce
the number of previously approved
units or to construct other forms of high
density residential, such as mixed-use
apartments, patio homes and
townhomes.
Artesia Municipal Utility District: The
2004 Plan does not recognize Artesia
and recommended medium density
residential. The 2012 Plan recognizes
Artesia and identifies the area as high
density single family.
Ultimate Capacity: The 2004 Plan
estimates a build-out population of
89,919 people. The 2012 Plan
estimates a build-out population of
69,303 people.
Business Park District: Due to the
nature of existing zoning, the 2012 Plan
recommends a variety of potential uses,
such as light industrial, commercial
warehousing, office storage and
commercial uses with outside storage.
Removal of Commercial Boulevard and
Industrial along US 380: The 2012 Plan
shows medium density residential in
place of the commercial Boulevard
District and the Industrial District has
been replaced by the Highway 380
District, which allows for a variety of
uses such as big box retail, commercial
services, hotels, banks and convenience
stores, among others.
Retail Space: The 2004 Plan
recommends 1,900,000 square feet of
retail space. The 2012 Plan suggests
approximately 5.7 million square feet of
retail space due to the regional nature
of the Town’s commercial corridors.
Downtown Prosper: The 2004 Plan did
not provide specific land use or
transportation recommendations for
Old Town. The 2012 Plan incorporates
the 2007 Land Use Plan for Old Town
and provides a detailed transportation
plan for the area.
Passenger Rail: the 2004 Plan does not
mention the possibility of future
passenger rail on the BNSF Railroad.
Although not desired at this time, the
2012 Plan addresses the possibility of
passenger rail in the future but leaves
the decision of whether or not
passenger rail is appropriate in Prosper
to future community leaders.
2012 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map