ORDER NO. 2?.17.0
APPROVAL OF REFLACFMENT OF SIGNS F'OR NON-COTJNTY
ROADS
Ori this the 5th day of July 15t~~4, tx~~an motion made by
C'c~mrnissioner ffiol_ekamF, ~,Fr_~onded by commissioner Lar_.key, t.he~
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to hzv~> th<,
e'ounty At.tox nc_~y write a lc.t.ter to Mr. M,~tloney regrircti.ng the
rF;}~lr~~cement. of th? ::i.gn and ~;he co.:at. of reFlacing the sign.
-~ COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REC-QUEST
* PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND FIVE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST AND
DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT
MADE BY: Franklin Johnston. P.E OFFICE: Road & Bridae Department
MEETING DATE: Ju1v 5, 1994 TIME PREFERRED:
---------------
SUBJECT: (PLEASE BE SPECIFIC}: Consider replacement of signs for non-County roads
EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: YES
N O XX
PLEASE STATE REASON :Direction for replacement of sign
ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: 10 Minutes
PERSONNEL MATTER -NAME OF EMPLOYEE:
NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT: Fanklin Johnston. P.E.
Time for submitting this request for Court to assure the ordance
with Article 6252-17 is as follows:
` Meetings held on second Tuesday: 12:00 P.M. prey
Meetings held on Thursdays : 5:00 P.M. previous Thu I `~ /
THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY:
THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON:

All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate
information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of
Court meetings. Your cooperation will be appreciated and contribute towards your request
being addressed at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Guidelines.


C
~~n~~
~`;
~ ~ ~ _;
~~ D•
L r;
r~
~/ ~~~utFER ~ TI IRKFY
•r
IB
,~ ~
>~
~ O ?~~
~~~~ ~~
1
L~l~ p ' ,', bea
~q
_4 {~ V
\~
I.
1
i
i
PI~~I
~~
~ ~~
~rr~.
N
~1~NTECFI
w ~ ~ ,~', KERR
EMERGENCY
~ ~ ~v~ v~
T~ .Q ~ NETWORK
819 WATER ST. #120 • P.O. BOX 1422 •KERRVlLLE, TX 78029-1422.210-792-59i 1 • FAX 210-896-7070
May 3, 1994
Mr & Ms David Powers
523 Mountain Dr
Ker-rvi l le Tx 7°028
Dear M/M Powers:
Reference your request for an address in the unincorporated area
of Kerr County.
We suggest you utilize:
2926 Powers P1 (Place) as the address for the first house on
Powers P1.
2935 Powers P1 (Place) as the address for the second house on
Powers P1.
2964 Powers P1 (Place) as the address for the third house on
Powers P1.
2944 Lyle P1 (Place) as last space on West side end of Lyle PL.
2964 Lyle Pl (Place as last space on East side end of Lyle P1.
We have listed all of the above street names plus SEEFELDT LN in
the index of streets and they will be presented to the commis-
sioners court in the future for adoption as private roads within
the county. By this letter we also confirm there are no duplicate
named streets in the county with these nam•~s.
The Kerr Emergency 9-1-1 Network is currently in the process of
producing a. digital ma.p of the district_ Until this project is
completed, any address in the unincorporated Kerr County, (in-
cluding your tentative address) will be subject to change.
r~s soon as the decision is reached by the authorities involved as
to w1-~at the exact addresses of the rural area will be you will be
notified through the proper' channels.
Thanks for your assistance in this matter and if you have any
questions let us know.
„~ Respectfully,
Frank Felts, Director
~~
o ,~
cc: U S Postmaster Kerrville
Kerr County Clerks Office
Kerr Central Rppraisal District
~ ---
Memorandum
To: Commissioners' Cor~rt
From: Leonard Odom, Jr. cYr Franklin .Iohnstorl, P.I;'.
Date: 06,23/1994
Subject: Sig~r Installed orr Non-County Road
In April of 1991 the Court agreed to allowed Road & Bridge to install signs on non-county
maintained roads at a charge of $70.00 as long as they were on County right-of-ways(see attached
memos).
We received a request from Delores Powers for a street sign on anon-county road. She had a
letter form 911 approving a road name and giving her an address. June 15, 1994, Mrs. Powers
paid for the sign, we installed the sign (Powers Place) on the Kerr County right-of--way of
Mountain Drive. The neighbor removed it the following day.
We ask the Court direct us on the replacement of this sign.
t
TO: toad & Bridge Department
FRO11~L Gordon Morgan
DATE: September 12, 1991
RE: Clarification of Policy Designated for Non-County
Maintained and Private Roads
Relative to my conversation with the Road & Bridge
Department regarding the April 25, 1991, Commissioner's Court
discussion on cost and road sign policy:
The consensus of the Court was that we would only sign
County. maintained roads and would establish a charge or fee for
" signs on non-county roads or private roads. Both subject to the
discretion of the Road and Bridge Department based upon cost of
manufacturing and installation of such signs. That cost being
approximately $70.00.


Td: Commissioner's Court
FROM: Truby Hardin, Kerr County Road & Bridge
GATE; February 14, 1991
RE: Putting Signs on Non-County Roads
The Road & Bridge department has been asked to install signs
on roads that are not maintained by the County. I have been told that
the sign crew does not sign such roads. However, there are some
non-co~.~nty roads that have Kerr County signs.
I ask that you consider th 1 s 1 ssue so that we might be
consistant when answering these requests.
To a1d you 1n making your decision, I have prepared the
following cost estimate per sign.
COST GF PUTTING UP A STREET SIGN
_ ~' past
. 2' footer
24" sign
4" letter
1 bag of concrete
1 cuppling
1 clamp w/bolt
1 top cap
1.55 per f t.
1.55 per f t.
9.50
.19 (avg. name 9)
Labor per hr. 1 1.94 ~ 2.5 hrs.
T(7TAL COST
12.40
3.10
9.50
1.71
2.59
3.80
4.20
3.90
29.85
71.05
L ~
lt1C ~~ ~ ~ Z. 1Z
July 5, 1994
Kerr County Commissioners Court
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, TX 78028
RE: Placement of private sign on Mountain Drive
Dear Commisioners,
I'm requesting that no private signs on public right of way be
placed in front of my house @ 529 Mountain Drive. Specifically the
private sign for a private drive labeled "Powers Court".
I've spoken to my neighbors about this and we all agree that we
don't want the sign.
I feel that any sign placed on the road would:
1) Detract from the rural setting of Mountain Drive.
2) Cause confusion on house numbering since the sign would be in
the middle of the 500 block.
3) Serve no purpose of identification since, the private drive has
mailboxes at the entrance that are or should be clearly marked
and the mailboxes will identify the homes which are visible
from Mountain Drive.
4) Create an obstacle on the roadway.
5) Would serve no public purpose.
_ 1 do not want this sign on the road and we would appreciate anything
the court can do to keep these signs off the public roadway.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
William P. Maloney
529 Mountain Drive
Kerrville, TX 78028