091517 Friday Staff Reportv2 I Il
if
DE N T O N 215 E.MCKINNEY •DENTON,TEXAS 76201•(940)349-8200•FAX(940)349-7206
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 15, 2017
TO: The Honorable Mayor Watts and Council Members
FROM: Todd Hileman, City Manager
SUBJECT: Friday Staff Report
I. Council Schedule
A. Meetings
1. Mobility Committee Meeting on Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 9:30 a.m. in the
City Council Work Session Room
2. Work Session of the City Council on Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 12:00 p.m. in
the City Council Work Session Room followed by a Regular Meeting at 6:30 p.m. in
the Council Chambers.
3. No Agenda Committee Meeting on Wednesday, September 20, 2017.
II. General Information & Status Updates
A. Pops Carter Artwork Vandalism — The vandalism case has been assigned to an
investigator and we are currently reviewing available video footage from areas near the
park. We interviewed several people who frequent the park and located a person who
claims to have observed the piece undamaged Sunday afternoon,and then noticed it was
damaged when he saw it Monday morning. We also have reports of additional damage
to the lights at the pedestrian bridge, approximately 150 yards away. It is unlikely the
lights were broken as a means to facilitate this other act. Based on this, and previous
(unrelated) reports of similar vandalism in parks, public spaces, and around schools, it
is likely that this fits more in line with random acts of vandalism, as opposed to any sort
of targeted, racially motivated act. Staff Contact: Deputy Chief Scott Fletcher
The sculpture has been removed from the park to prevent any injuries to people or
further damages to the sculpture. The Park Foundation yesterday raised $418 to help
with repair and replacement. Staff is working with the Public Art Committee to
determine next steps. Staff Contact: Emerson Vorel
Page 12
B. Organizational Changes — Please see below a few announcements of upcoming
organizational changes.
Procurement and Compliance
• In an effort to improve oversight and compliance of procurement and contracts, a
new Director of Procurement and Compliance position has been created in the City
Manager's Office. Following an executive recruitment which resulted in two
interview panels meeting with several external candidates to discuss their skill sets
and interests, the decision was made to not extend an offer to any of the candidates.
Cassandra Ogden, who currently serves as our Utilities Business Manager, will be
promoted to this new position. Cassandra will spend the first year of her tenure in the
position developing a procurement training plan for all departments; be integrated
into the business planning for each department in order to help strategize how to best
service their procurement needs; analyze best practices to update the city's
procurement goals; and, help structure an internal contract compliance function for
all department heads. There are currently over 900 identified leases, contracts, and
professional service agreements that have been identified and a plan needs to be
developed to ensure City resources and expectations are being overseen
appropriately. Cassandra will be out for an extended leave but will fill the role upon
her return in mid to late November.
• To aid the Director of Procurement and Compliance with the contract and process
review and compliance, a Compliance Officer position has been created. Jamie
Lindsey, who currently serves as our Assistant Customer Service Manager, will be
promoted to this new position effective September 18, 2017.
Capital Projects
• As you know, the Capital Projects Department was created in February 2017 to
ensure timely delivery and coordination of capital projects. Working through the
backlog of projects,as well as the growth of our City,continues to put great demands
on this department. As a result, there is a need for additional assistance in that
department. An Assistant Director of Capital Projects position has been created that
will report to Galen Gillum. D'Lee Williams, who currently serves as our Assistant
Director of Parks and Recreation, will be transferred to the Assistant Director of
Capital Projects effective September 18, 2017.
• Also to better coordinate and support the continued growing demands and needed
improvements in traffic management (traffic signals and signs), the Traffic
Operations Division will now report to Pritam Deshmukh effective September 18,
2017.
Transportation
• In order to better coordinate and implement sidewalk projects, all requests for
sidewalks will now be worked through the Bike and Pedestrian Coordinator, Julie
Anderson. Councilmembers and staff are asked to route any requests for new or
existing sidewalks to her, either through phone or email. Contact info:
Julie.Anderson(&cityofdenton.com, (940) 349-7718.
Parks and Recreation
• Laura Behrens, who currently serves as the City's Fire Marshal, will be transferred
to the Parks and Recreation Department to fill the Assistant Director position
Page 13
effective September 18, 2017. Chief Paulsgrove is currently developing a process to
enable interested internal candidates to apply for the Fire Marshal position.
Customer Service
• The Customer Service Division will be transferred from Galen Gillum to Chuck
Springer in Finance effective September 18, 2017.
Staff contact: Todd Hileman
C. Hurricane Irma Assistance — DME crews continue to assist with power restoration
efforts in Ocala, Florida. As of today, approximately 9,000 customers (17 percent of
Ocala's total customers) are still without power. A resident of Ocala sent the following
message:
"I live in southeast Ocala, FL and would like to thank and commend you all. Your crew
is stellar. They worked late in my neighborhood with a great attitude and diligence and
would not leave till we were back on. Thank you again for all your help!"
D. DEC Construction Update — Construction on the Denton Energy Center (DEC) is
approximately 55% complete. Expenditures to date are approximately 52.3% of the
allocated project funds.
Hurricane Harvey and the flooding of the greater Houston area has caused a delay in the
delivery of the last six remaining engines and generators to Denton.
The first North Hall generator left Houston on Tuesday,via heavy haul truck and trailer,
for the two-day trip to Denton. The remaining generators will depart next week.
All six North Hall engines have been off-loaded at the Houston port. ETA of engines to
Denton is September 21 or 22.
The estimated equipment schedule impact attributed to Hurricane Harvey is unknown
at this time, but could be anywhere from 0 to 10 days. The potential labor schedule
impact due to Hurricane Irma will not be known for several weeks.
Major Project Accomplishment:
First assembled engine (engine #7) was placed in the South Engine Hall on September
2. All six engines were in place by September 14. Site is averaging 200-225 daily
workers.
Project Schedule:
South Engine Hall - Enclosed and Dried In 8.2.17 (Completed ahead of schedule)
North Engine Hall - Enclosed and Dried In 8.2.17 (Completed ahead of schedule)
3 Plant Power Transformers arrive in 8.12.17 (Arrived as scheduled)
Denton via rail
6 South Hall Engines arrive in Denton via 8.22.17 (6 engines have been trucked to site)
rail
Plant Central Control Section- Enclosed 8.25.17 (completed ahead of schedule)
and Dried In
Page 14
6 Engines moved into South Engine Hall 9.15.17 (Completed)
6 North Hall Engines arrive in Denton Mid-September (Possible delay)*
6 Engines moved into North Engine Hall 10.6.17 (Probable delay)*
Start-Up and Commissioning—Balance of Spring 2018*
Plant
Start-Up and Commissioning Preliminary Late Sprint 2018*
Engine Testing
Commercial Operation of Plant COP During Summer 2018*
(generating power)
Engine Reliability Tests Immediately following COP
Air Emissions Test Ongoing after Preliminary Engine Testing
*Schedule contingent on the arrival of the last six North Hall engines and generators to
Denton.
Please see attached project photos from the Denton Energy Center.
E. Property at 2910 E University Drive — At the August 8 Council work session, City
Council considered the potential disposal of a list of City owned property tracts. During
this discussion, Council inquired if a one-acre parcel located at 2910 E University Drive
had the potential to be a fire station site. Staff has reviewed the parcel and determined
that it is not feasible due to the reduction of the size and usable property on the site after
the utility easements and a floodplain overlay are accounted for. Staff contact: Chief
Paulsgrove
F. 2017/2018 Strategic Plan—A draft strategic plan was included in the Friday, September
8 staff report with a request for any Council feedback on the updated plan. Staff received
feedback from Council Member Gregory to add strategic initiatives to 1) decrease the
number of structures in the 100 year floodplain and 2) increase the number of
accommodations (trails, side paths, sidewalks, and bike lanes) for active transportation
(walking and biking).
A goal has been added under KFA 2 to decrease the number of structures in the 100
year floodplain by 3% by 2020. Currently there are 1,304 buildings located in the 100-
year floodplain, so a 3%decrease represents removing approximately 45 buildings from
the floodplain. Over the next three years, staff plans to complete phase 1 and 2 of the
PEC-4 drainage project that will convert an aging, undersized concrete channel in
downtown Denton to a closed system to provide flood protection for the neighboring
homes and businesses. Completion of these phases of the project would meet this goal.
Under KFA 5, a work plan item is included to "Continue to improve continuity and
infrastructure for bike and pedestrian transportation". A component of that work plan
item will be to conduct a comprehensive sidewalk inventory, as the last sidewalk
inventory was done in 2015, and develop a plan to address the capital planning and
replacement of city sidewalks.Once an accurate inventory is achieved,staff can develop
a strategic initiative with a metric and number to increase the number of
accommodations (trails, side paths, sidewalks, and bike lanes) for active transportation
(walking and biking).
Page 15
Consideration of approval of the 2017/2018 Strategic Plan is included on the September
19 City Council agenda with the above modifications. Staff contact: Sarah Kuechler
G. Smoking Ordinance—On April 21,2015,the City Council passed Ordinance No. 2015-
121 adopting additional regulations governing smoking in the city, including banning
smoking indoors and adding electronic cigarettes and vapor products to the definition
of smoking. Bars permitting smoking as of the date of passage of the ordinance were
permitted to temporarily continue operating as a"smoking bar"until the sunset date of
December 31, 2017. The delayed implementation was intended to allow time for them
to remodel or relocate if they wanted to provide smoking options in outdoor patios.
Staff is preparing to send a series of letters to the original list of grandfathered"smoking
bars" to remind them of the ordinance and approaching date for compliance. Staff
contact: Sarah Kuechler/Brian Daskam
H. Landfill Buffer — During the citizen reports portion of the August 15, 2017 Council
meeting, resident Robert Donnelly raised a concern about the number of trees in the
landfill buffer zone not being sufficient to satisfy the landfill's specific use permit
(SUP).
Many trees have been lost in the buffer zone through the years due to drought and
diseases. Staff have been in the process of evaluating planting in the buffer zone, but
determining the appropriate type and location of trees to ensure survival is challenging
due to existing utility infrastructure, a future DME transmission project and associated
easements, and the widening of Mayhill Road. Staff met with Mr. Donnelly earlier this
summer and explained that the planting would be delayed in order to develop a plan that
addresses these challenges while ensuring the long term health of the trees. Staff is
currently in the process of requesting professional services to complete a study that will
recommend the tree species, location, and maintenance required for the planting to be
successful. Upon conclusion of the study, staff will provide an update to the City
Council and implement the recommended tree planting and maintenance program. Staff
contact: Ethan Cox
I. Friday Reports on the Website—The Friday staff reports will be posted on the website
going forward. The reports can be found under Open Government and clicking on Staff
Reports.
III. Community Events & Updates
A. Denton Blues Festival—The Denton Blues Festival will take place this weekend in
Quakertown Park. The free event starts tonight and goes through Sunday.
IV. Attachments
A. Photos from Denton Energy Center
Page 16
V. Informal Staff Reports
A. Summary of the 85th Texas Legislative Sessions
B. DCAD Board Nominations
C. Red Light Camera Intersections (Mario)
VI. Council Information
A. Council Requests for Information
B. Draft Agenda for September 26
C. Council Calendar(September-October 2017)
D. Future Council Items
E. Street Construction Report
Denton Energy Center Proeect • •
F
Gantry Crane
�� � � y. � �:;�,,. :�.•��:h -1 =ems
f
supporting enginprior to placement in Hall
tAYI N tATI '] ??
Assembled Engine being
i
C/i !illl
Wartsila Mechanics installing internal oil filters
Atg
Generator being slid into place
i
y
r
a
r e-
First Genset (engine and generator)joined and set in place
Date: September 15, 2017 Report No. 2017-066
INFORMAL STAFF REPORT
TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT:
Summary of the 85th Texas Legislative Sessions
BACKGROUND:
The City compiles its key legislative issues into a State Legislative Program that is adopted by the
City Council in advance of the regular Texas Legislature session every two years. The City's 2017
State Legislative Program for the 85th session was adopted by the City Council on December 13,
2016. The Program included a general policy that the City will oppose any legislation viewed as
detrimental to the City's strategic goals or would limit home rule authority; is contrary to the
health, safety, and welfare of its citizens; mandates increased costs or loss of revenues; or would
diminish the fundamental authority of the City.
DISCUSSION:
Please find attached an End of Session Report from the City's legislative consultant, Focused
Advocacy,presenting a recap of the outcomes for the regular and special sessions of the 85th Texas
Legislative, both in terms of cities affected statewide and Denton specifically.
Below are a couple noteworthy items from the special session:
• SB 6 passed requiring cities in large counties to receive voter approval before annexing
new areas. This is harmful to cities that use annexation as a means to ensure that residents
and businesses outside a city's corporate limits, who benefit from access to the city's
facilities and services, share the tax burden associated with constructing and maintaining
those facilities and services. Texas Municipal League (TML) is working to update an
annexation paper and provide guidance based upon the requirements of the legislation.
Staff plans to present an overview on annexation changes to the City Council at a work
session in October.
• HB 7 passed pre-empting some aspects of local tree ordinances. HB 7 does not allow cities
to charge homeowners fees for removing trees that are under 10 inches in diameter. There
is additional regulations regarding offset fees—homeowners can entirely eliminate fees by
planting new trees,residential developers can offset 50%of fees, and commercial property
owners can offset fees by at least 40%. This bill goes into effect December 1, 2017. Staff
is working together to compare this legislation with the City's tree ordinance and will
report back to Council in October on this legislation and any associated impacts.
Please do not hesitate to contact staff with any questions on the legislative session or the attached
report from Focused Advocacy.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. End of Session Report
STAFF CONTACT:
Date: September 15, 2017 Report No. 2017-066
Sarah Kuechler
Assistant to the City Manager
(940) 349-8356
Sarah.Kuechler@cityofdenton.com
9/13/2017
SESSION
END OF • N REPOR
CITY OF •
IOCUSID (C�,�) ADVOCACY
Brandon Aghamalian Snapper Carr
Curt Seidlits Andrew Keefer
DENTON
HOUSE •
x
T � }
J
Tan Parker Lynn Stucky Pat Fallon
Investments&Financial Agriculture&Livestock Culture,Recreation&Tourism
Services(Chair) Land&Resource Management Elections
International Trade&
Intergovernmental Affairs
Redistricting
1
9/13/2017
DENTON
SENATE •
1
Jane Nelson Craig Estes
Finance(Chair) Natural Resources&Economic Development(Chair)
State Affairs Business&Commerce
Health and Human Services Transition Nominations
Legislative Oversight Committee(Co-chair) State Affairs
State Water Implementation Fund for Texas Advisory
Committee
WHERE WE STARTED
LEADERSHIP AGENDAS
• Solid GOP majorities in both chambers
— House 95 R/55 D Senate 20 R/ 11 D
• Abbott
— Four Emergency Items: CPS, Sanctuary Cities, Ethics, and a Convention
of the States; added a fifth: Voter ID
• Patrick
— SB 1-30: Property Tax Caps, School Choice, "Bathroom Bill," Sanctuary
Cities,Voter ID, State Spending Caps, Hailstorm
• Straus
— School Funding, CPS, Mental Health, Infrastructure, Higher Education
2
9/13/2017
BY THE NUMBERS
• 6,568 #of bills filed (i.e.— proposed ideas)
• 169 #of constitutional amendments filed
• 80 #of bills filed per day
• 3,089 #of bills filed last 10 days before deadline (47%)
• 2,508 #of"city bills" tracked and monitored by
Focused Advocacy
• 1,211 # of bills passed (18% passage rate)
• 9 # of constitutional Amendments passed
• 1,007 #of bills signed into law
• 153 #of bills filed without signature
• 50 #of bills vetoed
DENTON
LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
As adopted by Council (Resolution #043 2016)
1. Protect Revenue Sources & Budget Setting Authority
2. Protect Land Use Regulations & Authority
3. Preserve DME as Community Owned & Operated
4. Seek introduction and passage of legislation to authorize
City to utilize local Hotel Occupancy Tax (HOT) funds for
enhancement of city-owned recreation fields (as adopted
by Council Resolution #11 2017)
3
9/13/2017
RESULTS
1. Protect Revenue Sources & Budget Setting Authority
Defeated SB 1 / SB 2
2. Protect Land Use Regulations & Authority Authority ✓-
Defeated all bad land use bills but "Vote to be Annexed"
passed in special — however Denton SPA protected by
Focused Advocacy efforts
3. Preserve DME
No bad MOU bills passed
• HB 2445 by Rep. Stucky & Estes — %SSED
• Rep. Stucky filed it
• Delicate bill that required a lot of negotiating with Texas
Hotel Association
• Mayor & lobby team invested a lot of time/effort
• The bill became subject to a lot of other (unrelated)
amendments
• It was one of the very last bills passed on the last day
• Hard fought victory with all credit to Stucky & Estes
4
9/13/2017
• SB 744 by Sen. Kolkhorst(author)&Rep. Phelan (sponsor)—PASSED
— Passed during regular session but vetoed by the Governor
— Governor veto statement: "...compromise bill that imposes a very minor
restriction on some municipal tree ordinances...I believe we can do better for
private property owners"
• HB 7 by Rep. Phelan (author)&Sen. Kolkhorst(sponsor)—PASSED
— Passed during special session
— HB 7, unlike SB 744,doesn't allow cities to charge homeowners fees for
removing trees that are under 10" in diameter
— More specific about offset fees: homeowners can entirely eliminate fees by
planting new trees, residential developers can offset 50%of fees, and
commercial property owners can offset fees by at least 40%
— Goes into effect Dec. 1
ANNEXATION
• SB 715 by Sen. Campbell (author) & Rep. Huberty (sponsor)—DEFEATED
— Defeated with a filibuster during regular session
• SB 6 by Sen. Campbell (author) & Rep. Huberty(sponsor)—PASSED
— Passed during special session
— Rewrites Municipal Annexation Act to severely curtail the ability of
cities to annex property
— "Bracketed" to apply only to certain cities
— Goes into effect on Dec. 1
5
9/13/2017
WHAT PASSED
MUNICIPAL
Author
.
Description
Sponsor
P
SB 4 Perry GerenSanctuary Cities PASSED
Paddie TNC's (Transportation Network
HB 100 PASSED
Schwertner Companies) - Uber
SB 1004 Hancock Small Cell Deployment (right of PASSED
Geren way fees) -AT&T
11 �
• SB 1004 by Sen. Hancock (author) & Rep. Geren (sponsor) — MA CC
C^
• Taxpayer subsidy for use of public property
• Mandates the use of street signs, traffic structures, and street lights
for antennas for cell phone companies
• Subsidizes the cell phone industry with below market rental rates
and capped application fees
• Under the Texas Constitution, cities are mandated to receive fair
market rental value for use of public rights-of-way.
• City coalition led by McAllen and Dallas have filed a state suit
challenging constitutionality of the statute. More cities are
expected to join coalition as the suit moves forward
6
9/13/2017
WHAT DID NOT PASS
REGULAR SESSION
Author Description
r=. SponsolA
SB 2 Bettencourt 4%Property tax rate caps&budget DEFEATED
referendums
SB 715 Campbell Vote-to-be-annexed in certain counties DEFEATED
HB 424 Huberty
SB 241 Burton Prohibiting Cities From Advocating/Lobbying DEFEATED
SB 445 Burton
SB 451 Hancock Preempting short term property rental DEFEATED
HB 2551 Parker ordinances(i.e.—Home Away/Air B-n-B)
SB 488 Bettencourt Requiring cities to get Secretary of State DEFEATED
approval for all ballot propositions
HB 1658 Phelan Requiring voluminous financial information to DEFEATED
SB 461 Lucio appear on bond proposition ballots
SB 737 Hancock Requiring cities to send email notification and DEFEATED
HB 1577 Parker hold hearings before adopting/raising"fees"
WHAT DID • PASS
REGULAR SESSION
Author Description
Sponsor
HB 1572 Workman Preempting tree ordinances if owner believes DEFEATED
removing tree necessary for safety
HB 744 Farrar Making cities broadly liable for attorney's fees in DEFEATED
civil litigation
HB 3801 Capriglione Prohibiting municipal regulation of payday DEFEATED
SB 1530 Estes lenders
HB 2076 Schubert Allowing former owners to repurchase DEFEATED
SB 628 Schwertner condemned property for lack of progress
HB 1271 Lang Elimination of May city election date DEFEATED
SB 88 Hall Banning city red light cameras DEFEATED
HB 808 Fallon
7
9/13/2017
UTILITY
BILLS
WHAT PASSED
Author Description
Sponsoj,, , A�=
SB 758 Menendez Bill payment assistance program PASSED
Rodriguez, J. for CPS
Extends ERCOT IOUs to file at the
SB 735 Hancock PUC to make rate changes PASSED
between base rate cases
8
9/13/2017
DOMAINEMINENT
DescriptionAuthor
Sponsor --�M
Acquisition of property by an
SB 740 Kolkhorst entity with eminent domain DEFEATED
authority
acquisition of property by an
DeWayne entity with eminent domain
HB 2684 authority; waiving certain DEFEATED
Burns sovereign and governmental
immunity
WHAT DID NOT PASS
Author Description
Spons �1�m Uor
HB 1460 Workman AE customers to petition the PUC to DEFEATED
review rates
Allow Austin City Council to transfer
HB 1458 Workman management of AE to an appointed DEFEATED
Board of Trustees
HB 1459 Workman Cap AE general fund transfer and limit DEFEATED
use of revenue
Require AE to transfer outside of city
HB 1461 Workman limits customers to neighboring electric DEFEATED
cooperatives
9
9/13/2017
ELECTRIC MARKET
STRUCTURE
Author Description I
Sponsor Ad&�M
SB 736 Hancock General Land Office Power PASSED
Clardy Program
SB 758 Menendez Bill payment assistance programs PASSED
Rodriguez, I
SB 1976 Whitmire Eligibility process for customer PASSED
service benefits
REGULATIONSBILLS AFFECTING CITIES
LAND USE
110011-.
20"WI=MW
SB 744 Kolkhorst Tree planting credit to offset tree VETOED
Phelan mitigation fees
SB 1248 Buckingham Limits municipal regulation of PASSED
Lucio IIII manufactured home communities
HB Simmons Prohibits cities from imposing affordable PASSED
1449 Nelson housing fees on new construction
HB Kuempel Loser pays court costs and attorney's fees PASSED
1704 Huffman in "permit vesting" lawsuits (chapter 24S)
10
9/13/2017
CONTRACTINGBILLS AFFECTING CITIES
' •
Author® Description
SponsorII Capriglione Personal financial statements filed by public
HB 501 Taylor,V. officers and candidates,disclosure of certain PASSED
contracts
Zaffirini Contracts with and training for governmental
SB 255 Simmons entities and vendors, including purchasing and PASSED
contract management training
SB 1289 Creighton Purchase of iron and steel made in the United PASSED
Paddie States for certain governmental entity projects
SB 1221 Watson Annual report submitted to comptroller for PASSED
Hinojosa hotel occupancy taxes
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• No "bad" economic development bills passed this session.
• However, dozens were filed and considered.
• "Economic Development" has become a bad word. It's now thought
of by most as cronyism, picking winner and losers, corporate welfare
and/or violating property rights.
• Texas Enterprise Fund reduced to $86M (down from $90M).
• FYI - Chapter 312 (tax abatements) expires next session.
11
9/13/2017
LOCALCONTROL
VS. LIBERTY
• "If 2015 was the year local control began to lose its luster as a
governing principle..., the 2017 Session saw the culmination of this
unfortunate trend.
• The new, improved mantra at the Capitol is "liberty," which translates
to liberty to do anything you want in a city without consideration for
the liberty or property values of your neighbors.
• How did we arrive at this state of affairs?
• There are three principle reasons." --TML
LOCALCONTROL
VS. LIBERTY
• First, national think tanks are pushing the idea that state legislatures know better
than local governments...that preemption ... is the way forward... These groups are
well funded by the national business lobby.
• It's a simple concept:why deal with multiple cities' regulations when you can have one-
stop shopping at the statehouse?
• Second,years of litigation against the federal government have convinced some that
state government is the pinnacle... That state government is supreme,and higher and
lower levels of government need to get on board with that concept.
• Finally,(there is)a new effort to politicize the non-partisan nature of city government...
Supporters of the two major parties are active in local city elections.This trend toward
politicizing local government may be one of the biggest challenges the League faces in
the coming years."--TML
12
9/13/2017
SPECIAL •
• During regular session, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick held key
"sunset" legislation hostage
• It was an effort to force a special session on other issues
• Namely bathrooms and property tax reform and some
other "red-meat" issues
MAKE IT COUNT
1 ISSUES
• "Because of their inability or refusal to pass a simple law that would
prevent the medical profession from shutting down, I'm announcing a
special session to complete that unfinished business. But if I'm going to
ask taxpayers to foot the bill for a special session, I intend to make it
count"—Greg Abbott
• Promised to add 19 more issues but only after the Senate passed sunset
• 20 for 20 became the mantra—especially in the Senate and with the
Governor
• "As your governor, I will not allow Austin,Texas,to California-ize the Lone
Star State"—Greg Abbott
13
9/13/2017
ABOUTPATRICK COMMENT
• Dan Patrick: "People are happy with their governments at
the state level.
• They're not with their cities...
• Our cities are still controlled by Democrats" — Dan Patrick
ABOUTPATRICK COMMENT
• "Where do we have all our problems in America? Not at the state
level, run by Republicans, but in our cities mostly controlled by
Democrat mayors and city councilmen.
• That's where you see liberal policies, that's where you see high
taxes, where you see high street crimes. Look at New York, look at
Chicago, look at...go around the country.
• So the only place Democrats have control of is our cities and they're
doing a terrible job"- - Dan Patrick
14
9/13/2017
THESCORECARD
WHAT PASSED
1. Medical Board Reauthorization (sunset) ✓
2. Annexation by Referendum ✓
3. Preemption of Tree Ordinances ✓
4. Reforming Health Insurance funded Abortions ✓
5. Abortion Complication Reporting ✓
6. Commission for School Finance ✓
7. Teacher Pay & Benefits (Band Aid School Finance) X ✓
8. Mail-in Ballot Fraud ✓
9. Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders ✓
10. Maternal Mortality Task Force ✓
THESCORECARD
WHAT FAILED
1. Property Tax Rate Caps/ Budget Referendums (3%) X
2. Spending Caps on Local Governments X
3. Preemption of Ordinance on Private Property X
4. Preemption of Hands Free Ordinances X
5. Expedited Permitting X
6. Bathrooms/ Privacy X
7. Prohibiting Taxpayer Funded Abortions X
8. School Choice (Special Needs Student) X
9. Union Dues X
10. Spending Caps on State X
15
9/13/2017
THE BLAME GAME
• "We missed some major opportunities, but what I'm most
upset about is the House quit tonight," Patrick said at a
press conference Tuesday evening." With 27 hours to go,
they walked off the job," he added.
• Gov. Greg Abbott put blame on the House — particularly
Speaker Joe Straus — for the shortcomings of the special
session and left the door open to calling another one.
• Asked if he assigned blame to Straus, a San Antonio
Republican, Abbott replied, "Well, of course."
THE BLAME GAME
• "There is a deep divide between the House and Senate on
these important issues," Abbott said.
• "So I'm going to be making decisions later on about
whether we call another special session, but in the
meantime, what we must do is we need to all work to get
more support for these priorities and to eliminate or try to
dissolve the difference between the House and the Senate
on these issues so we can get at a minimum an up-or-down
vote on these issues or to pass it"
16
9/13/2017
LOOKING AHEAD
JUDICIARY
• Sanctuary Cities (SB 4) — TRO issued Aug. 30, 2017
• Voter ID — permanent injunction issued Aug. 23,
2017
• Small Cell Deployment (HB 1004) — lawsuit filed
LOOKING AHEAD
ELECTIONS
• Statewide Officers on the ballot in 2018 (US Senate top of
ticket along with Governor, Lt. Gov, etc.)
• Primary races essentially start now (March 6, 2018)
• General Election (Nov. 6, 2018)
• Retirements / Seeking other offices will continue to drive
turnover in Legislature
17
9/13/2017
MEMBERS NOT RETURNING
. • REPRESENTATIVES
1. Taylor,Van (R)—Plano 1. Keough, Mark(R)—The Woodlands
2. Gonzales, Larry(R)—Round Rock
3. Laubenberg,Jodie(R)—Parker
4. Cindy Burkett—running for Senate
5. Pat Fallon—running for Senate
AHEADLOOKING
NEXT SESSION
• Anti-First Amendment Movement(limiting cities voice in legislature)
• Property Tax Rate Caps&Budget Referendums
• Local Control v. Liberty(i.e.-municipal preemption)
— Land use
— STR
• Right of Way Revenues
• Debt Issuance
• Re-Addressing Unconstitutional Bills
18
9/13/2017
THANKYOU
lo�
FOCUSED ADVOCACY
Brandon Aghamalian
Snapper Carr
Curt Seidlits
Andrew Keefer
19
Date: September 15, 2017 Report No. 2017-067
INFORMAL STAFF REPORT
TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT:
Nominations for DCAD Board of Directors
BACKGROUND:
The Denton Central Appraisal District (DCAD) has requested nominations to their Board of
Directors (memo attached). This item will be included on the October 10, 2017 City Council
Agenda. The purpose of this informal staff report is to notify you of the nomination process in
advance so that you can give adequate consideration to your nominee(s). The City can nominate
up to five candidates. Please let me know of your recommended nominee(s) by September 28,
2017, in order to prepare the documents for the City Council Agenda.
Board members serve two-year terms, and all five board member positions are subject to the
nomination process every two years. The number of votes a taxing unit has is determined by their
proportional share of the total levy in the district from the prior tax year. There are a total of 5,000
votes throughout the district. One thousand votes are the maximum number needed to elect a local
representative/nominee to the Board of Directors. In 2015, the City of Denton cast 192 votes for
Charles Stafford to serve on the DCAD Board of Directors.
The current Board of Directors is as follows:
Charles Stafford - Chairman
Connie Smith—Vice Chairman
David Terre— Secretary
Mike Hassett—Member
Robert Gallagher—Member
Michelle French—Ex Officio Member
DISCUSSION:
This year, the City has 191 votes and DISD has 658 votes. The following is a summarization of
DCAD's nomination process.
Prior to October 1st-DCAD notifies taxing entities of the number of votes they are entitled to cast
for appointing board members.
Prior to October 15th-Nominations are submitted to DCAD by each jurisdiction. Each jurisdiction
can nominate up to five candidates.
Date: September 15, 2017 Report No. 2017-067
Prior to October 30th - DCAD compiles a comprehensive list of the nominees and forwards to
each taxing unit in the form of a ballot.
Prior to December 15 - The taxing jurisdictions choose by written resolution the candidate (s) of
their choice. The jurisdiction then submits the name (s) and the votes cast to DCAD.
Prior to December 31 st - DCAD tabulates the votes and forwards the results back to the
jurisdictions. The five candidates that receive the most votes become the Board of Directors as of
January 1 st.
ATTACHMENT:
1. DCAD Memo
STAFF CONTACT:
Chuck Springer, Director of Finance
(940) 349-8260
Charles.Springerkcityofdenton.com
DENTON CENTRALAPPRAISALDISTRICT
3911 MORSE STREET,P O BOX 2816
DENTON,TEXAS 76202-2816
MEMO
TO: Denton County, School Districts and Cities That Levy A Tax
FROM: Rudy Durham, Chief Appraiser
SUBJECT: Request for Nominations for DCAD Board of Directors
DATE: August 28, 2017
It is time again for the taxing jurisdictions to select five individuals to serve as the DCAD
Board of Directors. Each jurisdiction may nominate up to five people to be considered
for the Board of Directors. According to Section 6.03 of the Property Tax Code, it is the
chief appraiser's responsibility to initiate this process, which is the purpose of this memo.
Please note that a chief appraiser does not have the authority, or the duty, to investigate,
or judge, the qualifications of the nominees. Further, a chief appraiser cannot extend the
deadline for receiving nominations.
Attached is a nominee form. Please return a form for each nominee before
October 15, 2017.
CALENDAR FOR APPOINTMENTS:
1. Before October 1st - Each jurisdiction will be advised of the number of votes they are
entitled to cast for Board members. (See Attached)
2. Before October 15th -The governing body of each jurisdiction may nominate up to
five candidate(s) to the DCAD Board of Directors. The number of votes that each
jurisdiction has is not relevant in the initial nomination phase.
3. Before October 30th -A comprehensive list of the nominees will be compiled and this
information will be sent to the taxing jurisdictions in the form of a ballot.
4. Before December 15th -The taxing jurisdictions choose by written resolution the
candidate, or candidates, of their choice. The jurisdictions then submit the names of
their candidates and the votes they cast for each candidate before the December 15th
deadline.
5. Before December 31 st—A tabulation of the votes will be forwarded to the
jurisdictions. The five candidates that have received the most votes become the Board
of Directors as of January 1st.
PHONE: (940) 349-3800 METRO: (972)434-2602 FAX: (940)349-3801
Memo, Appointing Board of Directors, August 28, 2017 Page 2
SELECTING A NOMINEE
AUTHORITATIVE GUIDELINES - The selection process is set forth in Section 6.03 of
the Property Tax Code. This process is not an "election" governed by the Texas
Election Code. It is an independent procedure unique to the property tax system.
ELIGIBILITY -An appraisal district director must reside in the appraisal district for at
least two years immediately preceding the date he or she takes office. Most residents
are eligible to serve as a director. An individual that is serving on the governing body of
a city, county, or school district is eligible to serve as an appraisal district's director.
An employee of a taxing unit served by the appraisal district is not eligible to serve as a
director. However, if the employee is an elected official, he or she is eligible to serve.
A statute relevant to the Board selection process prohibits nepotism and conflict of
interest for appraisal district directors and chief appraisers. In summary, the law states
that:
.........."a person may not serve as director if closely related to anyone in the appraisal
district or if related to anyone who represents owners in the district, or if the person has
an interest in a business that contract with the district or a taxing unit. A chief appraiser
may not employ someone closely related to a member of the board of directors".
FREQUENCY OF MEETINGS - The applicable statutes require the board of directors to
meet not less often than once each calendar quarter.
NOMINATION FORM
Please return this form to DCAD before October 15, 2017. Reminder....your jurisdiction
may nominate up to five candidates to the Denton Central Appraisal District Board of
Directors.
Please include the address and phone number of your nominees.
Name of your jurisdiction:
Name of nominee:
Name
Address
City Zip
Phone
Return this form to:
Kathy Williams
Denton Central Appraisal District
P.O. Box 2816
Denton, TX 76202
DENTON CIFNT'RAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT
2017 DISTRIBUTION OI'VOTES
%OFTOTAI, NUMBER
JURISDICTIONS 2016 Lt:VY LGVIES OF VOTES
SCHOOL DISTRICTS:
S01 ARGYLE ISD 24,268,557.39 1.4557% 73
S02 AUBREiY ISD 12,363,170.95 0.7416%' 37
S03 CARROLLTON-FB ISD 48,142,581.32 2.9876% 144
SO4 'C ELINA ISD 391,045.31 0.0235°% 1
S05 DENTON ISD 219,694,795.75 13.1775% 658
S15 FRA ISD 2,727.25 0.0002°% 1
S06 FRISCO ISD t 129,164,592.16 7.7474°% 387
S07 KRUM ISD 10,194,531.49 0.6115% 31
S08 LAKE:DALLAS ISD 26,220,441.64 1.5727%, 79
S09 1.EWISVILI.1?ISD 460,594,336.33 27.6269%I 1381
S10 LPl"I'LF FLM ISD 49,086,035.96' 2.9442°%' 147
S11 lNORT'HWESE ISD 94,099,163.48 5.6442% 282
S12 PILOT'POINTISD 7,196,449.60, 0.4317% 22
M3 PONDER ISD 8,972,869.46 0.5382% 27
S17 PROSPER ISD 5,221,828.70 0.3132°% 16
S14 SANGER ISD 12,636,013.60� 0.7579°% 38
S16 SLIDELL ISD 467,606.19 0.0280% 1
SCHOOL DISTRICTS TOTALS $1.108,716,746.59 66.502% 3325
I
G01 DENTON COUNTY S 197,577,33 1.97 11.85% 593
CITIES:
('26 TOWN OF ARGYLE....... 2,184,044.35 0.1310%; 7
C01 CITY OF AIJBRFY....... 1,055,677.91 0.0633°% 3
C31 TOWN OF 13ART'ONVII.1.I?.. 631,787.92. 0.0379°% 2
CO2 CITY OF CARROLLTON 38,898,307 21. 2.3326°%' 115
C49 CITY OF CELINA......... 5,549.59, 0.0003%! 1
('03 �CIT'Y OF TI IE COLONY... 24,415,468.691 1,4645°%) 73
C21 TOWN OI-COPPFL[. 937,425.62 0.0562% 3
C27TOWN OF COPPER CANYONI 649,532.61 0.0390% 2
C04 iCITY OI CORIN'I'H...... 10,509,683.29' 0.6304% 32
C47 TOWN OI'DRAPFR 8,217.69' 0.00051% 1
C20 ;CITY OF DALLAS....... 10,208,152.451 0.6123%� 31
C05 CITY OF DI NT'ON....... 64,302,599.15 j 3.8569% 191
('42 ICITY OF DISI I......... 125,470.82' 0.0075°% 1
('30 IT'OWN OF DOUBLE OAK... 979,984.89- 0.0588%,, 3
C07 OF FLOWER MOUND.I 41,287,914.95' 2.4765% 122
ITOWN
('36 CITY OF FOR1 WOR1ll....... ' 12,067,337.59! 0.723895 36
('32 CITY OF FRISCO........ 42,581,062.96 2.5541% 125
C39 CITY OFGRAPEVINF........ } 194.98 0.0000°% I
C22 TOWN OF HACKBERRY.... 126,624.53 0,0076% 1
i
C38 CITY OF I IASLF'1........ 4,990.76 0.0003%, 1
C19 TOWN OF HICKORY CRF,FK.; 1,657,786.99� 0.0994% 5
('08 ;CITY OF HIGHLAND VILLAG 11,599,268.94 0.6957% 35
C09 CITY Ol;JUSTIN....... 1,922,922.09 0.1093°% 5
C18 CITY OF KRUGFRVILLF.. 502,066.921 0.0301°% 2
CI CITY OF KRUM......... 1,913,205.13' 0.1 148%, 6
CI I CITY OI:LAKE DALLAS.. 2,707,832.98 0.16_24% 8
C25 ,CITY OF LAKEWOOD VILLA, 265,021.25 0.0159%i 1
C12 CITY OF LEWISVILLE... 36,618,908.05 2.1964°% 109
C13 TOWN OF LITTLE ELM... 18,490,410.60 1.1091% 54
('33 ;TOWN OF NORT'HLAKIi.... 1,175,586.111 0.0705%, 4
C24 CITY OF OAK POINT.... 1,946,255.35 0.1 167% 6
t
C14 CITY OF PILOT POINT'.. 1,443,726.62 0.0866% 4
C'29 CITY OF 11 LAN 0.......... 5,093,232.89 0.3055%. 15
C715 TOWN OF PONDER....... 733,805.87' 0.0440°%' 2
C48 CITY OF PROSPER 1,166,654.94 0.0700% 4
C51 TOWN 017 PROVIDIiNCE:VILI 3,552,928.11, 0.2131%1 11
C17 CITY OF ROANOKE...... 6,509,645.41 0.3905% 20
C16 CITY OF SANGFR....... 3,625,622.99, 0.2175°%' 11
C34 TOWN OF SHADY SHORES 1 842,603.44; 0.0505% 3
C37 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE....... 582,976.961, 0A3_50°% 2
C28 CITY OF TROPHY CLUB.. 7,676,161.09' 0.4604% 23
C44 CITY OFWFSTLAKE j 1,586.60 0,0001% 1
CITY TOTAL S360,898,237.19 21.65% 1082
TOTAL ALL JURISDICTIONS $1,667,192,315.74 100.00% 5000
Date: September 15, 2017 Report No. 2017-068
INFORMAL STAFF REPORT
TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT:
Information regarding the City of Denton's Red Light Camera Program
BACKGROUND:
A recent investigative news story from KXAN-TV of Austin reported that several cities within the
state were not in compliance with state law regarding their red light enforcement program. The
story explained that several Texas cities had not conducted the required engineering study
prescribed by Senate Bill 1119 (which became Chapter 707, Texas Transportation Code), which
was enacted on September 1, 2007. As a result of this news piece, some concerns were raised at
the September 12, 2017, City Council meeting about whether Denton's program is in compliance.
A request was made to provide a report of Denton's red light enforcement program and the
associated engineering studies.
City Staff has confirmed that Denton's red light enforcement program is in compliance with state
law.
The City of Denton has 13 cameras monitoring 11 intersections. The camera intersections are:
1) Bell Avenue (northbound) at Hickory(installed 2006)
2) W. Oak(westbound) at Carroll (2006)
3) Mayhill (northbound and southbound) at Spencer(2006)
4) Shady Oaks (eastbound) at Woodrow (2006)
5) Ft. Worth(northbound) at I35E Service Road(2011)
6) University(eastbound and westbound) at Mayhill (2011)
7) Ft. Worth(southbound) at 135E Service Road(2013)
8) Loop 288 (northbound) at Spencer(2014)
9) Loop 288 (southbound) at I35E Service Road(2014)
10)Lillian Miller(eastbound) at I35E Service Road(2014)
11)University(westbound) at I35 Service Road(2014)
The City had contracted to install red light cameras at four intersections in 2006 and at that time
there was no requirement to conduct an engineering study and therefore they were never
completed. All other red light cameras since SB 1119's passage engineering studies have been
completed. Subsequent installations were placed on TXDoT controlled roadways and all data has
been acquired and submitted to TXDOT in accordance to their format.
There is an exception for three of the cameras installed in 2011. When plans began for this these
cameras TXDoT had not created the standard form. As a result, staff gathered the required
information and presented our engineering findings to the Traffic Safety Commission in December
2007 and to the City Council in subsequent meetings. This information was then submitted to the
Dallas TXDOT office. Since that time, all subsequent cameras have used the standard TXDoT
format.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. KXAN News—Red Light Cameras
2. Municipal Maintenance Agreement Red Light
3. Engineering Report—Ft. Worth @ IH35E
4. Engineering Report—University(380) @ Mayhill
5. Engineering Report—Ft. Worth @ I35
6. Engineering Report—Loop 288 @ Spencer
7. Engineering Report—Loop 288 @ I35
8. Engineering Report—Lillian Miller @ I35
9. Engineering Report—380 wb @ I35
STAFF CONTACT:
Mario Canizares, Assistant City Manager
(940) 349-8535
Mario.Canizares @ cityofdenton.com
Canizares, Mario
Red light cameras across Texas could be
operating illegally
-
INVESTIGATES
EC •
a
Red light cameras investigation.
By Jody BarrPublished: September 10, 2017, 7:30 pm Updated: September 10, 2017, 9:21 pm
Austin's Red Light Cameras
AUSTIN (KXAN) --There are nine intersections in Austin, armed with a red light camera. You might not notice
them, but roll through a red light or roll past that white stop bar painted on the ground and you're likely to end
up with a $75 ticket in the mail.
Austin is one of 60 cities across Texas to have installed red light cameras. Several of those cities have gotten
rid of their cameras; mostly because when voters have a say, they vote the cameras out of town.
But, a KXAN Investigation of how these cities installed the cameras shows most all are not in compliance with
state law—the law that gave cities the right to charge a civil fine for running a red light.
i
Before Sept. 1, 2007, there were no rules on how much Texas cities could charge for running a red light. There
were no rules on how cities could contract with camera companies with respect to keeping cameras from being
used to fill quotas and be turned into money makers for cities.
With the passage of Senate Bill 1119 in 2007, that all changed. The new law gave cities the right to charge
drivers civil fines for red light running instead of the criminal penalty. The law became part of Texas
Transportation Code, Section 707.003.
The law had one major requirement before a city could install a red light camera: perform a traffic engineering
study. Those studies required cities to look for other adjustments that could be made to an intersection to
reduce crashes before installing a red light camera—or to help reduce the chances of people running a red
light.
In order to find out which cities complied with the law, KXAN filed public records requests with every city that
we could find records of ever using a red light camera. KXAN received records from 50 cities. Our analysis of
those records shows only three cities appear to have conducted a traffic engineering study that was signed
and sealed by a licensed Texas engineer: Abilene, College Station and Southlake.
"We found—more than once, on multiple, multiple occasions...there's a lot of cities that just didn't comply with
this traffic engineering study requirement—at all," Russell Bowman told KXAN. Bowman is an attorney in Irving
and got a red light ticket in Richardson, Texas in November of 2012. Bowman said he wasn't driving the car at
the time, but someone in his family was. Bowman still got the ticket and would have to prove it wasn't him
running the red light.
Bowman chose to fight the $75 ticket. It was nothing more than a fight on principal, Bowman said.
"They ticketed the wrong guy this time," Bowman told KXAN investigator Jody Barr.
Bowman filed records requests with Richardson's city hall. The lack of response, he said, caused him to sue
the city.
Knowing the state required cities to perform a traffic engineering study for each red light camera as of Sept. 1,
2007, Bowman wanted to see if Richardson ever performed the study. Richardson officials, Bowman said,
never answered his request to see their study.
"I know why they didn't respond to my letter because they never did those things," Bowman said. "When I'm
looking at the statute, it provides that if the traffic engineering study is not done, they can't impose a red light
camera penalty—they just can't—the statute prohibits it."
The Lack of an Engineering Study
Our analysis of the 49 cities that responded shows only Abilene , College Station and Southlake hired
professional engineers who signed and sealed those cities' engineering studies.
"We did not want these to become little ATMs along the highway," State Rep. Jim Murphy, R-Houston, who co-
authored the 2007 red light camera law, along with former Dallas-area State Senator, John Carona. Carona—
who lost his seat in 2015—declined to participate in this report.
Lawmakers took suggestions from the engineering field before writing the red light law so they could clearly
detail that requirement in the bill, Murphy said.
"Part of the engineering study is to say: are there other things you can do because there are measures that are
much easier to do, sometimes they're less expensive," Murphy said. "It was to say the conditions merit a red
light camera and there is no other alternative."
2
On Aug. 2, the city of Austin sent KXAN a response to a public records request, asking the city for its traffic
engineering study. What we got back was 10 pages titled, "Assessment Sheet: Engineering Countermeasures
to Reduce Red-Light Running."
We looked for an engineer's name on each of the pages. There wasn't one. There also isn't an engineer's seal,
identification number or signature on any of the 10 pages.
We showed Austin's study to Rep. Murphy. For comparison, we also showed Murphy a copy of Abilene's 109-
page engineering study; a study Irving Attorney Russell Bowman calls the "standard" for how these studies
should be done.
w ti.rr�.w
Red light Camera Project
r G'�
"Clearly, these are in two different worlds," Murphy said as he looked over Austin and Abilene's studies last
month. "This is not a sealed study. It does not identify the level of detail and it doesn't seem to have any
options."
Aside from College Station, Abilene, and Southlake, our research shows nearly every other city we got records
from did what Austin did. Those cities performed assessments of each intersection, keyed in figures on the
assessment sheet and provided those to us as their traffic engineering studies.
The only other city with a signed, sealed study that appears to meet the requirements of the engineering study
was the city of Willis. Willis didn't perform its engineering study until more than five years after installing its red
light cameras and did so amid a lawsuit over its cameras, according to records provided to KXAN by the city.
Austin's Red Light Cameras
Since 2008, Austin's cameras have issued 81,493 red light tickets, according to records provided by the city's
municipal court. Find out which cameras have caught the most red light runners.
App users tap here for the interactive map.
Cities Could be Forced To Issue Refunds
3
The concern with those fighting cities like Austin in court is that those cities might be forced to repay the money
it has collected one day. According to figures from the Texas Comproller's Office, cities have netted around
$537 million from red light camera tickets since 2008.
We tried for nearly three weeks to have someone from the city of Austin's Transportation Department interview
with us as part of this investigation. For nearly three weeks, the city would not provide an interview.
The city's transportation department sent us an email, defending the city's position on its engineering study
requirement of the red light camera law. Transportation spokeswoman, Cheyenne Krause, wrote in an Aug. 17
email: "The Austin Transportation Department completed a traffic engineering study, as required by state law,
in 2008. Per section 1001.053 of the Texas Engineering Practices Act, a seal is not required if the project is a
public work that does not involve electrical or mechanical engineering if the contemplated expense for the
project is $20,000 or less."
We wanted to see if the city installed the nine cameras without any sort of electrical or mechanical engineering,
along with the cost of the project. We filed a formal request under the Texas Public Information Act on Aug.
22. On Sept. 6, the city turned over 26 pages to KXAN.
The 26 pages show engineering drawings from REDFLEX Traffic Systems, the company the city contracts with
for its red light cameras. Each page contains an engineer's seal and signature, indicating engineering work
was performed as part of the design and installation of the city's red light cameras.
The city told KXAN it did not have any records related to the "total cost of the design, engineering, planning,
materials, equipment installed, labor costs, and construction" for any of the nine red light cameras, Austin
Transportation Department employee Joana Perez wrote in a Sept. 7 email. The city claims it had nothing to
do with the installation of those cameras and Redflex, the private camera company, installed the cameras on
its own.
The documents appear to contradict the city's Aug. 17 statement indicating that it did not need a signed,
sealed traffic engineering study.
Russell Bowman, the Irving attorney who successfully sued the city of Richardson over its red light cameras,
told KXAN, the city of Austin is "flat out mistaken," in its interpretation of the Texas Engineering Practices Act.
Krause wrote in her email there's evidence the city's engineering assessments looked for alternatives to the
red light cameras because, "...rather than recommend red light cameras at some locations, the study resulted
in design and signal timing changes."
After the Transportation Department denied our requests for an on camera interview to address the
allegations, KXAN asked for an interview with Interim City Manager Elaine Hart. The city denied each request
to interview Hart, who is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the city.
Many of the cities that did not perform any type of study told KXAN they were "grandfathered" into the state's
2007 red light camera law and were exempt from the traffic study if they signed a contract with a red light
camera company before Sept. 1, 2007.
"There was no grandfathering of this law," Rep. Murphy told KXAN. "Every red light camera in the state of
Texas must have this study done."
Murphy explained the section of the law dealing with red light camera contracts is what many cities are
confusing with a grandfather clause. The confusion comes from the section that states, "added by this Act,
applies only to a contract entered into on or after the effective date of this Act."
The Sept. 1, 2007 "grandfathered" date only applies to contracts, not the implementation of and operation of
red light cameras, Bowman said. "The contracting of a red light camera program has absolutely nothing at all
4
to do with how those cameras are operated and used to fine drivers," Bowman said. "And, those attorneys
those cities are hiring know that."
Bastrop, which once had a red light camera that collected $2.8 million in fines, hired a Fort Worth attorney to
help the city defend itself in a lawsuit filed by people ticketed by red light cameras. The attorney, George
Staples, wrote in an email response to KXAN that Bastrop and cities like it that signed contracts before Sept. 1,
2007 did not have to conduct a traffic engineering study. "I see no point in researching the history and
determining whether 707.003 [the law] was followed or not followed. It is as irrelevant to me as confederate
statues. I see no point to trying legal issues in the news media; my forte is the court room. It also pays better,"
Staples wrote.
But the lack of an official traffic engineering study isn't the only part of the law cities haven't conformed to. The
red light camera law requires that cities compile annual crash data for each intersection with a red light camera
and turn those reports into the Texas Department of Transportation, which are then posted for the public to
see.
We showed Murphy our analysis of TxDOT records that show 29 of the 59 red light camera cities have not
consistently submitted annual reports to the state agency.
TxDOT records show the city of Austin didn't submit annual reports for 2010 and 2012. KXAN requested those
records but the city did not provide any documents for those years.
TxDOT's web site shows the city of Hutto, for example, never submitted any annual reports after it installed
cameras in November 2009. Round Rock never submitted its 2011 or 2012 annual reports and the city of
Diboll hasn't submitted any reports since 2011, TXDOT's accounting shows.
Even though the law requires the data to be filed with TxDOT, the agency says it doesn't have the authority to
enforce cities to comply. "TxDOT's role is to provide crash data and publish the red light camera reports," the
agency wrote in an email.
"TxDOT's supposed to get those reports so we can monitor: were they successful? Good data leads to good
decisions. Right now it appears we're not getting it on the front end, which makes it really hard to compare on
the back end," Murphy said.
After considering the results of what we uncovered in this KXAN investigation, Murphy said he's going to do
something about it in the next legislative session.
"I will suggest the folks in transportation they do some sort of an interim study on this and find out what the
compliance issues are," said Murphy, "and be talking about putting some penalties in, some sanctions in or
some relief in if people aren't using these cameras as we designed them to be done."
As for the half-billion dollars collected in the last decade with these cameras, Murphy thinks cities could be
facing some trouble for not having the authority to fine drivers this way.
"A lot of cities could potentially be on the hook for millions," Barr asked the lawmaker.
"I think that could very well be the case," Murphy said.
5
FT WORTH DRIVE/US377 AND THE NORTHBOUND IH35E FRONTAGE ROAD
A traffic engineering study for the intersection of Ft Worth Drive/US377 and the northbound IH35E
frontage road for the purposes of the installation of red light running camera(s) and enforcement.
The intersection of IH35E at Ft Worth Drive/US377 is a standard grade separated Texas Diamond
interchange with frontage roads that intersect Ft Worth Drive/US377 at grade and the main lanes of
IH35E crossing over Ft Worth Drive/US377.
Ft Worth Drive/US377 is considered the north/south highway and the IH 35E north/south bound (by
name only herein) IH35 frontages are west/east in this report and therefore all directional references
provided are in relation to this accordingly.
Ft Worth Drive/US377 is a TxDOT maintained highway and constructed of Portland Cement Concrete.
IH35E northbound frontage road is a TxDOT maintained highway and constructed of Portland Cement
Concrete.
The northerly leg (top side of the intersection) is Ft Worth Drive/US377. It is 2-way and a divided
highway with a raised median with curb and gutter; with three approach lanes and three exiting lanes.
Currently the three approach lanes are designated as:
• Inside lane—exclusive advance left turn movement that continues under the IH35E overpass
and turns left onto the eastbound IH35E southbound frontage road
• Middle lane—exclusive through movement that continues south on Ft Worth Drive/US377
• Outside lane—exclusive right turn movement that continues westbound on the IH35E
northbound frontage road.
The southerly leg (bottom side of the intersection and under the IH35E overpass) is Ft worth
Drive/US377. It is 2-way and a divided highway with a painted median, with 3 approach lanes and two
exiting lanes. Currently the three northbound approach lanes are designated as:
• Inside lane—exclusive left turn movement to the westbound IH35E northbound frontage road
• Middle lane—optional left turn movement to the westbound IH35E northbound frontage road
or through movement that continues northbound on Ft Worth Drive/US377
• Outside lane—exclusive through movement that continues northbound on Ft Worth
Drive/US377
• Note there is an additional lane width that is marked out and therefore, currently not used.
The easterly leg(right side of the intersection) is the IH 35E northbound frontage road. It is one-way
westbound; with a 3 approach lanes at Ft Worth Drive (note:there is an additional lane just east of the
intersection that serves a Texas U-turn)that are designated as:
• Inside lane—exclusive left turn movement to southbound Ft Worth Drive/US377
• Middle Lane—exclusive through movement that continues westbound on the IH35 northbound
frontage road
• Outside Lane—exclusive right turn movement to northbound Ft Worth Drive/US377
The westerly leg (left side of the intersection) is the IH 35E northbound frontage road. It is one-way
westbound; with 3 exiting lanes (because it is one-way there are no approach lanes) at Ft Worth Drive
(note: there is a Texas U-turn just west of the intersection).
There are no sight restrictions at the intersection due to foliage, buildings or other structures and/or
street furniture.
As one approaches this intersection:
• the southbound Ft Worth Drive/US377 signal head(s) can be observed in excess of 725 feet
from the stop bar,
• the northbound Ft Worth/US377 signal head(s) can be observed in excess of 500 feet from the
stop bar, understanding that a driver must first pass through the signal for the southbound
service road and so are already acclimated to observing a signal,
• The westbound IH35 northbound frontage road signal head(s) can be observed in excess of 900
feet from the stop bar
As one approaches this intersection on:
• Ft Worth Drive/US377 from the north(southbound) has no appreciable horizontal curves. It has
at an incline of approximately (-) 2.79%slope towards the intersection with the crest being
approximately 390 feet upstream of the stop bar,
• Northbound Ft Worth Drive/US377 has no appreciable horizontal curves. It has at a slight
incline of approximately(+) 2.79%slope towards the intersection (under the IH35N bridge) and
has a negligible slope just south of the IH35 southbound frontage road
• Westbound IH35 northbound frontage road has no appreciable horizontal or vertical curves and
only a marginal slope.
Speed limits on both highways are recommended by TxDOT based upon speed studies and established
by ordinance by the City of Denton City Council:
• Ft Worth Drive/US377 is 45 MPH
• IH 35 northbound service road is 45 MPH
Both the IH 35E northbound and southbound frontage roads at their intersection with Ft Worth
Drive/US380 are signalized and run in the standard 4-phase TTI.
The signal is constructed with TxDOT standard metal poles with mast-arms and the vertical poles being
on the standard right side of the approach lanes and on the far side of the intersecting roadway.
Signal head placement is as follows:
• Southbound Ft Worth Drive/US377—2, 3-section heads on the mast arm
• Northbound Ft Worth Drive/US377—2, 3-section heads and 1, 5-section head on the mast arm
• Westbound IH35 northbound frontage road-2, 3-section heads on the mast arms
The number of heads and head placement are typical of a TxDOT designed traffic control signal for this
type of arrangement.
The number of heads and head placement are typical of a TxDOT designed traffic control signal for this
type of arrangement.
Amber times are currently set at 4.5 seconds for all directions,which conforms to the ITE recommended
amber times and are also established for use by TxDOT.
All signing and markings conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Controls (MUTCD)
As a result of this investigation, there are no improvements of any significance that could be made to
this intersection that could substantially improve the visibility of the intersection to help reduce the
potential for red light running.
Bernard Jerome Vokoun P.E. Date
A sampling of crashes in the area, as reported by the City of Denton Police Department is as follows:
Accident Date Accident Time DOW Address Intersecting Street
03/02/02 4:40:00 AM Sat 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
04/02/02 1:35:00 PM Tue 500 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
04/19/02 4:00:00 PM Fri 400 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
04/19/02 2:32:00 AM Fri 400 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
06/11/02 3:49:00 PM Tue 500 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
07/15/02 10:52:00 AM Mon MM 466 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
11/01/02 12:04:00 AM Fri 400 S 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
10/31/02 10:15:00 PM Thu N 135E FORT WORTH DR
11/27/02 8:20:00 PM Wed N 135E FORT WORTH DR
12/06/02 2:38:00 PM Fri 500 S 135E S/R 900 FORT WORTH DR
12/06/02 6:33:00 PM Fri 500 N IH35E S/R 700 FORT WORTH DR
02/05/03 7:46:00 PM Wed N 135E FORT WORTH DR
02/16/03 10:57:00 PM Sun 5005 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
02/25/03 11:20:00 AM Tue 600 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
02/25/03 1:00:00 PM Tue 6400 135 3950 FORT WORTH DR
03/12/03 1:25:00 PM Wed 600 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
05/09/03 11:50:00 AM Fri 500 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
09/18/03 11:42:00 AM Thu 200 S 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
10/28/03 7:00:00 AM Tue 300 S 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
11/29/03 7:49:00 AM Sat 519 N 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
12/03/03 12:59:00 PM Wed 500 S 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
01/08/04 10:44:00 PM Thu 400 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
01/24/04 10:22:00 AM Sat 600 N 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
01/31/04 10:47:00 PM Sat 1600 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
02/10/04 12:05:00 PM Tue 700 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
02/17/04 10:00:00 AM Tue 200 S 135E FORT WORTH DR
05/03/04 5:59:00 PM Mon 500 N 135E 900 FORT WORTH DR
08/04/04 2:00:00 PM Wed 500 S 135E 900 FORT WORTH DR
08/19/04 12:45:00 PM Thu 700 S 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
09/02/04 3:35:00 PM Thu 500 N 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
10/07/04 4:21:00 PM Thu 500 S 135E 900 FORT WORTH DR
02/15/05 4:32:00 PM Tue 100 S 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
04/04/05 2:16:00 PM Mon 500 N 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
06/02/05 12:52:00 PM Thu 600 N 135E FORT WORTH DR
06/26/05 12:37:00 PM Sun 600 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
10/01/05 11:03:00 PM Sat 800 FORT WORTH DR 500 N 135E
11/10/05 2:49:00 AM Thu 600 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
11/09/05 1:45:00 PM Wed 400 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
11/15/05 8:07:00 AM Tue 600 N 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
12/19/05 8:15:00 PM Mon 800 FORT WORTH DR 600 N 135E
12/27/05 2:12:00 PM Tue 800 FORT WORTH DR 500 N 135E
03/01/06 10:40:00 PM Wed 300 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
03/20/06 8:30:00 PM Mon 800 FORT WORTH DR 600 N 135E
03/24/06 12:37:00 AM Fri 600 N 135E 500 FORT WORTH DR
04/12/06 8:38:00 PM Wed 600 N 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
06/30/06 10:21:00 PM Fri 900 FORT WORTH DR 500 N 135E
01/20/07 6:54:00 PM Sat 400 N 135E 900 FORT WORTH DR
03/28/07 4:35:00 PM Wed N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
03/30/07 6:37:00 PM Fri 500 N 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
04/26/07 11:11:00 AM Thu 500 S 135E 900 FORT WORTH DR
06/20/07 8:39:00 AM Wed 500 N 135E 800 FORT WORTH DR
06/22/07 5:40:00 PM Fri 800 FORT WORTH DR 500 N 135E
O8/12/07 11:17:00 AM Sun 700 FORT WORTH DR 500 N 135E
O8/24/07 4:10:00 PM Fri 900 FORT WORTH DR 500 N 135E
09/22/07 1:28:00 AM Sat 100 N 135E 700 FORT WORTH DR
Arial Map of Location
1 �
rs
J
{ WON
Pr
jt
11
�j �'• ( Or —
1
1 � -
c
As .� y . -
.�'�'U
UNIVERSITY DRIVE/US380 AND MAYHILL ROAD/COOPER CREEK ROAD
A traffic engineering study for the intersection of University Drive/US380 and Mayhill Road/Cooper
Creek Road for the purposes of the installation of red light running camera enforcement.
The intersection of University Drive/US380 and Mayhill Road/Cooper Creek Road is a standard four
legged intersection with each roadway intersecting the other at nearly perpendicular angles to the
other.
Mayhill Road/Cooper Creek Road is considered the north/south roadway and US380/University Drive
the east/west roadway in this report and therefore all directional references provided herein are in
relation to this accordingly.
University Drive/US380 is a TxDOT maintained highway and constructed of Portland Cement Concrete.
Mayhill Road/Cooper Creek Road are City maintained roadways and constructed of Asphaltic Concrete.
The westerly leg (left side of the intersection) is University Drive/US380. It is two-way and an undivided
highway with a continuous 2-way left turn pocket upstream of the intersection which turns into a
dedicated one-directional left turn pocket at the intersection, with four approach lanes and three exiting
lanes. The four approach lanes are designated as:
• Inside lane—exclusive left turn movement to northbound Cooper Creek Road
• Middle 2 lanes—exclusive through movements continuing eastbound on University Drive/US380
• Outside lane—optional through movement continuing eastbound on University Drive/US380
and right turn movement to southbound Mayhill Road and.
The easterly leg(right side of the intersection) is University Drive/US380. It is two-way and an undivided
highway with a continuous 2-way left turn pocket upstream of the intersection which turns into a
dedicated one-directional left run pocket at the intersection, with four approach lanes and three exiting
lanes. The four approach lanes are designated as:
• Inside lane—exclusive left turn movement to southbound Mayhill Road
• Middle 2 lanes—exclusive through movement continuing westbound on University Drive/US380
• Outside lane—optional through movement continuing westbound on University Drive/US380
and right turn movement to northbound Cooper Creek Road.
The southerly leg (bottom side of the intersection) is Mayhill Road. It is two-way and a typical undivided
rural type roadway with borrow ditches on both sides. There is one approach lane and one exiting lane.
Currently the approach lane is designated for all movements including: left turns to westbound
US380/University Lane,through movements continuing northbound to Cooper Creek Road and right
turns to eastbound US380/University Drive.
The northerly leg (top side of the intersection) is Cooper Creek Road. It is two-way and an undivided
roadway for approximately 200ft at which point, partial improvements widen it to a 41ane width with
raised median with curb and gutter for approximately 325ft at which it then tapers back to a two lane
roadway. There are no substantive borrow ditches within this length of roadway. There is one
approach lane and one exiting lane. Currently the approach lane is designated for all movements
including: left turns to eastbound US380/University Lane, through movements continuing southbound
to Mayhill Road and right turns to westbound US380/University Drive.
There are no significant sight restrictions at the intersection due to foliage, buildings or other structures
and/or street furniture.
As one approaches the intersection:
• The eastbound US380/University Drive signal head(s) can be observed in excess of 3000 feet
from the stop bar. There is a lack of overhanging vegetation into the street, that could restrict
visibility,within this distance,
• The westbound US380/University Drive signal head(s) can be observed in excess of 3500 feet
from the stop bar as a result of the crest vertical curve noted herein. There is a lack of
overhanging vegetation into the street,that could restrict visibility, within this distance,
• the northbound Mayhill Road signal head(s) can be observed in excess of 1000 feet from the
stop bar, largely as the result of overhanging vegetation into the street,
• the southbound Cooper Creek Road signal head(s)can first be observed in excess of 1600 feet,
however, because of a combination of the horizontal curve noted in this report and trees on the
side of the roadway,the signal heads cannot be observed continuously until approximately 700
feet from the stop bar. It should be noted that the tress indicated herein do not overhang the
street which, if it were the case, could cause additional visibility issues,within both of these
distances.
As one approaches this intersection on:
• US380/University Drive from the west(eastbound) has no horizontal or vertical curve(s) of any
significance within any critical distance that restricts visibility of the signal heads.
• US380/University Drive from the east (westbound) has no horizontal curve(s) of any significance
within any critical distance that restricts visibility of the signal heads.The crest of a vertical curve
exists approximately 2900ft east of the stop bar.
• Mayhill Road from the south (northbound) has no horizontal curves of any significance within
any critical distance that restricts visibility of the signal heads. The crest of a vertical curve exists
approximately 1450 feet south of the stop bar.
• Cooper Creek Road from the north (southbound) has a horizontal curve that ends approximately
375feet north of the intersection but, has no vertical curve(s) of any significance within any
critical distance that restricts visibility of the signal heads.
All approaches gently slope to the intersection.
The speed limit on US380/University Drive is 55mph and recommended by TxDOT based upon speed
studies and established by ordinance by the City of Denton City Council:
The speed limit on Mayhill Road is 35mph and established by ordinance by the City of Denton City
Council
The speed limit on Cooper Creek Road is 30mph and established by the state of Texas' prima fascia law.
This intersection is signalized and runs in a 6-phase, dual lefts with leading left turns in the east/west
(US380/University Drive) directions. The north/south (Mayhill Road/Cooper Creek Road) directions are
2-phase and all movements run at the same time for each direction.
The signal is constructed with TOOT standard metal poles with mast-arms with the vertical poles being
on the standard right side of the approach lanes and on the far side of the intersecting roadway.
Signal head placement is as follows:
• Southbound Cooper Creek Road—2, 3-section heads on the mast arm for all movements
• Northbound Mayhill Road—2, 3-section heads on the mast arm for all movements
• Eastbound US380/University Drive-2, 3-section heads for the through/right turn movements
and 1, 5-section (protected/permissive) head for the left turn lane, all heads being on the mast
arm
• Westbound - 2, 3-section heads for the through/right turn movements and 1, 5-section
(protected/permissive) head for the left turn lane, all heads being on the mast-arm.
The number of heads and head placement are typical of a TOOT designed traffic control signal
arrangement.
Amber times are currently set at:
• 5.5 seconds for both directions of US380/University Drive
• 4.0 seconds for northbound Mayhill Road
• 4.0 second for southbound Cooper Creek Rd (note: although the speed limit, as noted earlier
for Cooper Creek Road is 30MPH, the City's policy is to take the worst case scenario of the two
opposing legs, in which case the 35MPH [4.0 seconds] for northbound Mayhill would control),
which conforms to the ITE recommended amber times and are also established for use by TxDOT.
All signing and markings conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Controls (MUTCD)
As a result of this investigation, there are no improvements of any significance that could be made to
this intersection that could substantially improve the visibility of the intersection to help reduce the
potential for red light running.
Bernard Jerome Vokoun P.E. Date
A sampling of crashes in the area, as reported by the City of Denton Police Department is as follows:
Accident date Accident time DOW Block Street Name Intersecting_Street_RR_Xing
5/4/2005 10:04 AM Wed 1500 N MAYHILL RD 3600 E UNIVERSITY
E UNIVERSITY
10/16/2005 7:18 PM Sun 3500 DR N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
10/26/2005 9:20 AM Wed 3600 DR 1500 N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
11/21/2005 8:30 PM Mon 2500 DR 1500 N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
11/21/2005 8:28 PM Mon 2500 DR 1500 N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
6/21/2006 6:17 AM Wed 3700 DR 1500 N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
7/15/2006 11:50 AM Sat 3500 DR 1500 N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
8/17/2006 5:50 PM Thu 3600 DR 1500 N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
9/22/2006 11:53 PM Fri 3600 DR 1599 N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
2/27/2007 1:40 PM Tue 3500 DR 1500 N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
3/5/2007 5:55 PM Mon 3600 DR 1600 N MAYHILL RD
E UNIVERSITY
8/10/2007 6:00 AM Fri 3500 DR 1500 N MAYHILL RD
9/10/2007 3:55 PM Mon 1500 N MAYHILL RD 3500 E UNIVERSITY
9/15/2007 8:39 PM Sat 1700 N MAYHILL RD 3500 E UNIVERSITY
E UNIVERSITY
9/22/2007 12:42 AM Sat 3500 DR 1900 N MAYHILL RD
Arial Map of Location
w Erb ! At
-- -
Av
t
_ ♦ z � ' S , t
low
,,,per _ - �'_ � � 1 d• 7 .r �-t,
�,� ��� �� 'f �. Wit'.. •��.�•�� r�
- ; -
•a r
iCL ,-..: -
; � _ 11� � 'ram _ _• -•
til 1, -78c�w
•
CL
ti
� is �•
dP
lb
ok
_ : 0 ,
woos
• lad �,�' � �� ''� � t
• Evaluation of the Need for Red Light Running Cameras
�'•• Engineering Analysis Template
Form 2296-RLC
(12/08)
Page 1 of 5
City: Denton County: Denton
Intersection: s/b Fort Worth Drive (SH 377) @ 135E n/b service road
A. Intersection and Signal Data
1. Signal Visibility
a. Minimum Sight Distance to Signal
Approach Grade Speed Limit(mph) Measured (ft) Required (ft)*
-2.8% 45 712' 460'
* See TMUTCD Table 4D-1 for minimum sight distance requirements
b. Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs present? ❑Yes ®No
Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs needed? ❑Yes ®No
Are other warning signs present in the vicinity of the intersection?
❑Yes ®No
Explain:
c. Information on Signal Heads
Approach Lens Size Lens Type Back Plates Retroreflective
(LED or Bulb)_ (Y or N) Border Y or N
12" LED Y N
2. Pavement and Markings Data
a. Are stop bars in "good" condition? ®Yes ❑No
Explain
b. Are lane lines "clearly" visible? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
c. Are crosswalks "clearly" marked? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 2 of 5
d. What is the pavement condition (ruts, potholes, cracking, etc.)?
N Good Explain:
❑ Fair Explain:
❑ Poor Explain:
e. Do pavement surface treatments exist (rumble strips, texturing, pavers,
etc.)?
❑Yes Explain:
NNo
3. Provide diagram of intersection including: pavement markings, width of lanes
and medians, location of signal heads and signs, locations of loops/detectors,
and grades.
North
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 3 of 5
B. Signal Timing and Traffic Data
1. Clearance Intervals
Approach Posted Grade Width of Yellow Interval All Red Interval
Speed Limit Intersection Existing Calculated* Existing Calculated*
45 -2.7% 58' 4.5 4.7 1.5 1.1
* Reference ITE for calculation of clearance intervals.
2. Include existing controller settings for each phase and each time-of-day.
Information should include applicable settings such as minimum green, max 1 &
2, passage, minimum gap/ext, protected-permissive, lead-lag, yellow and all
red, walk and ped clearance time, recall settings, offsets, cycle length, etc.
Include analysis of peak hour conditions and a determination of whether signal
timings are contributing to red-light running problems.
a. Does signal timing or phasing factor in as a possible contributor to red
light running at this intersection?
❑Yes Explain:
®No
b. List comments or recommendations on potential signal timing or phasing
changes:
3. Vehicle Detection Data
Approach Detection Type Detector Location
(loop,video, etc.) (measured from stop bar)
loops both side of stop bar
4. Traffic Volume Data
Approach Daily Volumes Peak Hour Volumes
Total Heavy Vehicles Total Heavy Vehicles
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 4 of 5
C. Crash and Enforcement Data
1. 18 Months of"Before" Crash Data
Approach Collision Type Total Number of Number of Crashes Associated
Injury Crashes Fatal Crashes with Red Light Running
Rear End 11 4 0 0
Angle 1 0 0 1
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total 12 4 0 1
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 5 of 5
2. Violation Rate
a. Number of red light running citations per year issued by law enforcement
Number: 0 Year: 2012
b. Observed Violations:
Date: Time Period: 24 hour 6a-6p
Approach Traffic Volume Number of Violations
51
3. Enforcement and Operational Issues
a. Describe the difficulty experienced by law enforcement officers in patrol cars or
on foot in apprehending violators. traffic volume too high for safe
apprehension of observed violations
b. Describe the ability of law enforcement officers to apprehend violators safely
within a reasonable distance from the violation. not possible due to high
traffic volume.
c. Are pedestrians at risk due to violations? ®Yes ❑No
Explain: increased number of pedestrians crossing from south to north on
northwest side of intersection (traveling to local retail)
Number of pedestrians per hour: nia
Pedestrian crosswalk provided? ®Yes ❑No
d. Have there been any changes to the operations of the intersection (signal timing,
restriping, increased enforcement, etc.) with the past three years?
D. Other Supporting Information:
• Evaluation of the Need for Red Light Running Cameras
.... Engineering Analysis Template
u 0.il4rYn1
ibydl/lwA.
Form 2296-RLC
(12/08)
Page 1 of 5
City: Denton County: Denton
Intersection: S. Loop 288 n/b @ Spencer Road
A. Intersection and Signal Data
1. Signal Visibility
a. Minimum Sight Distance to Signal
Approach Grade Speed Limit(mph) Measured (ft) Required (ft)*
6ACYO 40 1297 390
* See TMUTCD Table 4D-1 for minimum sight distance requirements.
b. Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs present? ❑Yes ®No
Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs needed? ❑Yes ®No
Are other warning signs present in the vicinity of the intersection?
❑Yes ®No
Explain:
c. Information on Signal Heads
Approach Lens Size Lens Type Back Plates Retroreflective
(LED or Bulb) (Y or N) Border Y or N
12" LED Y N
2. Pavement and Markings Data
a. Are stop bars in "good" condition? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
b. Are lane lines "clearly" visible? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
c. Are crosswalks "clearly" marked? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
Forth 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 2 of 5
d. What is the pavement condition (ruts, potholes, cracking, etc.)?
® Good Explain:
❑ Fair Explain:
❑ Poor Explain:
e. Do pavement surface treatments exist (rumble strips, texturing, pavers,
etc.)?
FIYes Explain:
®No
3. Provide diagram of intersection including: pavement markings, width of lanes
and medians, location of signal heads and signs, locations of loops/detectors,
and grades.
AL
North
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 3 of 5
B. Signal Timing and Traffic Data
1. Clearance Intervals
Approach Posted Grade Width of Yellow Interval w All Red Interval w
Speed Limit Intersection Existing Calculated Existing Calculated__
40 +.8% 137 4.0 3.9 2.0 2.6
* Reference ITE for calculation of clearance intervals.
2. Include existing controller settings for each phase and each time-of-day.
Information should include applicable settings such as minimum green, max 1 &
2, passage, minimum gap/ext, protected-permissive, lead-lag, yellow and all
red, walk and ped clearance time, recall settings, offsets, cycle length, etc.
Include analysis of peak hour conditions and a determination of whether signal
timings are contributing to red-light running problems.
a. Does signal timing or phasing factor in as a possible contributor to red
light running at this intersection?
❑Yes Explain:
®No
b. List comments or recommendations on potential signal timing or phasing
changes:
3. Vehicle Detection Data
Approach Detection Type Detector Location
(loop,video, etc.) (measured from stop bar)
video both sides of stop bar
4. Traffic Volume Data
Approach Daily Volumes Peak Hour Volumes
Total Heavy Vehicles Total Heavy Vehicles
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 4 of 5
C. Crash and Enforcement Data
1. 18 Months of"Before" Crash Data
Approach Collision Type Total Number of Number of Crashes Associated
Injury Crashes Fatal Crashes with Red Light Running
Rear End 7 2 0 0
Angle 9 5 0 0
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total 16 7 0 0
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Form 2296-RLC (12108)
Page 5 of 5
2. Violation Rate
a. Number of red light running citations per year issued by law enforcement
Number: 23 Year: 2012
b. Observed Violations:
Date: Time Period: 24 hour 6a-6p
Approach Traffic Volume Number of Vioiations
23
3. Enforcement and Operational Issues
a. Describe the difficulty experienced by law enforcement officers in patrol cars or
on foot in apprehending violators. this area has been worked by placing officer
on foot watching violation and calling them out to stationed squad cars. Very
labor intensive and difficult to stop in timely manner. High traffic volume
b. Describe the ability of law enforcement officers to apprehend violators safely
within a reasonable distance from the violation.
c. Are pedestrians at risk due to violations? ®Yes ❑No
Explain: Increasingly high amount of pedestrian traffic due to area retail
growth.
Number of pedestrians per hour: nia
Pedestrian crosswalk provided? ❑Yes ®No
d. Have there been any changes to the operations of the intersection (signal timing,
restriping, increased enforcement, etc.) with the past three years?
D. Other Supporting Information:
=0* Evaluation of the Need for Red Light Running Cameras
Engineering Analysis Template
Form 2296-RLC
(12/08)
Page 1 of 6
City: Denton County: Denton
Intersection: S. Loop 288 @ n/b 135E service road
A. Intersection and Signal Data
1. Signal Visibility
a. Minimum Sight Distance to Signal
Approach Grade Speed Limit(mph) Measured (ft) Required (ft)*
+1.18 40 2305 390
" See TMUTCD Table 4D-1 for minimum sight distance requirements
b. Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs present? ❑Yes ®No
Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs needed? ❑Yes ®No
Are other warning signs present in the vicinity of the intersection?
❑Yes ®No
Explain: sufficient sight distance
c. Information on Signal Heads
Approach Lens Size Lens Type Back Plates Retroreflective
(LED or Bulb) (Y or N) Border Y or N
1211 LED Y N
2. Pavement and Markings Data
a. Are stop bars in "good" condition? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
b. Are lane lines "clearly" visible? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
c. Are crosswalks "clearly" marked? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
Form 2296•RLC (12108)
Page 2 of 5
d. What is the pavement condition (ruts, potholes, cracking, etc.)?
® Good Explain:
❑ Fair Explain:
❑ Poor Explain:
e. Do pavement surface treatments exist (rumble strips, texturing, pavers,
etc.)?
❑Yes Explain:
®No
3. Provide diagram of intersection including: pavement markings, width of lanes
and medians, location of signal heads and signs, locations of loops/detectors,
and grades.
North
Form 2296-RLC (12/06)
Page 3 of 5
B. Signal Timing and Traffic Data
1. Clearance Intervals
Approach Posted Grade Width of Yellow Interval All Red Interval
Speed Limit Intersection Existing Calculated* Existing Calculated*
40 +1.18 58' 4.0 3.9 1.5 1.3
* Reference ITE for calculation of clearance intervals.
2. Include existing controller settings for each phase and each time-of-day.
Information should include applicable settings such as minimum green, max 1 &
2, passage, minimum gap/ext, protected-permissive, lead-lag, yellow and all
red, walk and ped clearance time, recall settings, offsets, cycle length, etc.
Include analysis of peak hour conditions and a determination of whether signal
timings are contributing to red-light running problems.
a. Does signal timing or phasing factor in as a possible contributor to red
light running at this intersection?
❑Yes Explain:
®No
b. List comments or recommendations on potential signal timing or phasing
changes:
3. Vehicle Detection Data
Approach Detection Type Detector Location
(loop,video, etc.) (measured from stop bar)
loops both sides of stop bar
4. Traffic Volume Data
Approach D ily Volumes Peak Hour Volumes
Total Heavy Vehicles Total I Heavy Vehicles
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 4 of 5
C. Crash and Enforcement Data
1. 18 Months of"Before" Crash Data
Approach Collision Type Total Number of Number of Crashes Associated
Injury Crashes Fatal Crashes with Red Light Running
Rear End 21 3 3
Angle 6 1 4
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total 27 4 7
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Form 2296-RLC (12108)
Page 5 of 5
2. Violation Rate
a. Number of red light running citations per year issued by law enforcement
Number: Year: 2012
b. Observed Violations:
Date: Time Period: 0600-0600
Approach Traffic Volume Number of Violations
:34
3. Enforcement and Operational Issues
a. Describe the difficulty experienced by law enforcement officers in patrol cars or
on foot in apprehending violators. nowhere safe to observe violation. traffic too
heavy to apprehend violators in safe or timely manner.
b. Describe the ability of law enforcement officers to apprehend violators safely
within a reasonable distance from the violation. not possible due to heavy traffic
volume.
c. Are pedestrians at risk due to violations? ❑Yes ®No
Explain:
Number of pedestrians per hour: n/a
Pedestrian crosswalk provided? ❑Yes ®No
d. Have there been any changes to the operations of the intersection (signal timing,
restriping, increased enforcement, etc.) with the past three years?
D. Other Supporting Information:
Evaluation of the Need for Red Light Running Cameras
Engineering Analysis Template
�nruowar:.i
Form 2296-RLC
(12/08)
Page 1 of 5
City: Denton County: Denton
Intersection: Lillian Miller Pkwy @S135E s/b Service Road
A. Intersection and Signal Data
1. Signal Visibility
a. Minimum Sight Distance to Signal
Approach Grade Speed Limit(mph) Measured (ft) Required (ft)x
Lillian -5.34 35 176 325
Miller
s/b SR _
See TMUTCD Table 4D-1 for minimum sight distance requirements.
b. Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs present? ❑Yes ®No
Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs needed? ®Yes ❑No
Are other warning signs present in the vicinity of the intersection?
®Yes ❑No
Explain: There is a "SIGNAL AHEAD" for signal just to south of this
intersection (turning into Albertsons parking lot.
c. Information on Signal Heads
Approach Lens Size Lens Type Back Plates Retroreflective
LED or Bulb Y or N Border Y or N
Lillian 12" LED Y N
Miller @
s/b SR
2. Pavement and Markings Data
a. Are stop bars in "good" condition? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
b. Are lane lines "clearly" visible? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
c. Are crosswalks "clearly" marked? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 2 of 5
d. What is the pavement condition (ruts, potholes, cracking, etc.)?
® Good Explain:
❑ Fair Explain:
❑ Poor Explain:
e. Do pavement surface treatments exist (rumble strips, texturing, pavers,
etc.)?
❑Yes Explain:
®No
3. Provide diagram of intersection including: pavement markings, width of lanes
and medians, location of signal heads and signs, locations of loops/detectors,
and grades.
North
Form 2296-RLC (12108)
Page 3 of 5
B. Signal Timing and Traffic Data
1. Clearance Intervals
Approach Posted Grade Width of Yellow Interval All Red Interval
Speed Limit Intersection Existing Calculated* Existing Calculated*
35 -5.34% 66' 4.0 4.1 2.0 1.6
" Reference ITE for calculation of clearance intervals.
2. Include existing controller settings for each phase and each time-of-day.
Information should include applicable settings such as minimum green, max 1 &
2, passage, minimum gap/ext, protected-permissive, lead-lag, yellow and all
red, walk and ped clearance time, recall settings, offsets, cycle length, etc.
Include analysis of peak hour conditions and a determination of whether signal
timings are contributing to red-light running problems.
a. Does signal timing or phasing factor in as a possible contributor to red
light running at this intersection?
❑Yes Explain:
®No
b. List comments or recommendations on potential signal timing or phasing
changes:
3. Vehicle Detection Data
Approach Detection Type Detector Location
(loop,video, etc.) (measured from stop bar)
loops on both side of stop bar
4. Traffic Volume Data
Approach Daily Volumes Peak Hour Volumes
Total I Heavy Vehicles Total Heavy Vehicles
Form 2296-RLC (12108)
Page 4 of 5
C. Crash and Enforcement Data
1. 18 Months of"Before" Crash Data
Approach Collision Type Total Number of Number of Crashes Associated
Injury Crashes Fatal Crashes with Red Light Running
Lillian Rear End 8 1 _ 0 0
Miller @ Angle 2 0 0 2
S135E s/b Head-On 0 0 0 0
Service Pedestrian 0 0 0 0
Road Pedalcyclist 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0
Total 10 1 0 2
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 5 of 5
2. Violation Rate
a. Number of red light running citations per year issued by law enforcement
Number: 2 Year: 2012
b. Observed Violations:
Date: 12/01/2012-12/02/2012 Time Period: 0600-0600
Approach Traffic Volume Number of Violations
;53
3. Enforcement and Operational Issues
a. Describe the difficulty experienced by law enforcement officers in patrol cars or
on foot in apprehending violators. no location to both observe violation and safely
apprehend violator. Traffic too heavy.
b. Describe the ability of law enforcement officers to apprehend violators safely
within a reasonable distance from the violation. see above
c. Are pedestrians at risk due to violations? ❑Yes ®No
Explain:
Number of pedestrians per hour: nia
Pedestrian crosswalk provided? ®Yes ❑No
d. Have there been any changes to the operations of the intersection (signal timing,
restriping, increased enforcement, etc.) with the past three years?
D. Other Supporting Information:
Evaluation of the Need for Red Light Running Cameras
4nenl
Engineering Analysis Template
al T'en.yarrNiv,
Form 2296-RLC
(12/08)
Page 1 of 5
City: Denton County: Denton
Intersection: Highway 380W w/b @ 135 n/b service road
A. Intersection and Signal Data
1. Signal Visibility
a. Minimum Sight Distance to Signal
Approach Grade Speed Limit(mph) Measured (ft) Required (ft)"
-2.7% 45 3000' 460'
"See TMUTCD Table 4D-1 for minimum sight distance requirements.
b. Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs present? ❑Yes ®No
Are "SIGNAL AHEAD" warning signs needed? ❑Yes ®No
Are other warning signs present in the vicinity of the intersection?
❑Yes ❑No
Explain:
c. Information on Signal Heads
Approach Lens Size Lens Type Back Plates Retroreflective
(LED or Bulb) (Y or N)___Border(Y or N)
12" LED Y N
2. Pavement and Markings Data
a. Are stop bars in "good" condition? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
b. Are lane lines "clearly" visible? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
c. Are crosswalks "clearly" marked? ®Yes ❑No
Explain:
Form 2296-RLC (12/06)
Page 2 of 5
d. What is the pavement condition (ruts, potholes, cracking, etc.)?
® Good Explain:
❑ Fair Explain:
❑ Poor Explain:
e. Do pavement surface treatments exist (rumble strips, texturing, pavers,
etc.)?
❑Yes Explain:
®No
3. Provide diagram of intersection including: pavement markings, width of lanes
and medians, location of signal heads and signs, locations of loops/detectors,
and grades.
North
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 3 of 5
B. Signal Timing and Traffic Data
1. Clearance Intervals
Approach Posted Grade Width of Yellow Interval All Red Interval Speed Limit Intersection Existing Calculated Existing Calculated*
45 -2.72% 72' 4.5 4.7 1.5 1.4
* Reference ITE for calculation of clearance intervals.
2. Include existing controller settings for each phase and each time-of-day.
Information should include applicable settings such as minimum green, max 1 &
2, passage, minimum gap/ext, protected-permissive, lead-lag, yellow and all
red, walk and ped clearance time, recall settings, offsets, cycle length, etc.
Include analysis of peak hour conditions and a determination of whether signal
timings are contributing to red-light running problems.
a. Does signal timing or phasing factor in as a possible contributor to red
light running at this intersection?
❑Yes Explain:
®No
b. List comments or recommendations on potential signal timing or phasing
changes: none
3. Vehicle Detection Data
Approach Detection Type Detector Location
(loop,video, etc.) (measured from stop bar)
video both sides of stop bar
4. Traffic Volume Data
Approach D ily Volumes Peak Hour Volumes
Total Heavy Vehicles Total Heavy Vehicles
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 4 of 5
C. Crash and Enforcement Data
1. 18 Months of"Before" Crash Data
Approach Collision Type Total Number of Number of Crashes Associated
Injury Crashes Fatal Crashes with Red Light Running
Rear End 10 3 0 0
Angle 3 0 0 3
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total 13 3 0 3
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Rear End
Angle
Head-On
Pedestrian
Pedalcyclist
Other
Total
Form 2296-RLC (12/08)
Page 5 of 5
2. Violation Rate
a. Number of red light running citations per year issued by law enforcement
Number: Year: 2012
b. Observed Violations:
Date: Time Period: 24 hours 6a-6p
Approach Traffic Volume _ Number of Violations
76
3. Enforcement and Operational Issues
a. Describe the difficulty experienced by law enforcement officers in patrol cars or
on foot in apprehending violators. traffic volume too heavy to observe or
apprehend violators in safe manner
b. Describe the ability of law enforcement officers to apprehend violators safely
within a reasonable distance from the violation. traffic volume too heavy
c. Are pedestrians at risk due to violations? ❑Yes ®No
Explain:
Number of pedestrians per hour: n/a
Pedestrian crosswalk provided? ❑Yes ❑No
d. Have there been any changes to the operations of the intersection (signal timing,
restriping, increased enforcement, etc.) with the past three years?
D. Other Supporting Information:
Revision Date
9/15/17
Council Re uests for Information
Request Request Date Staff Responsible Status
1. Report on the background and level of service for gas 3/21/17 Kuechler A work session is scheduled for Oct.
well inspections/work session on gas well setbacks 17.
2. Work session to 1)review Comp Plan for Economic 5/30/17 Booth A work session is scheduled for Oct.
Development and 2) incentive policy discussion 10.
3. Work session on landfill mining operation and ROI 6/5/17 Cox A work session is scheduled for Sept
19.
4. Information on cost determination for curb rate vs drop- 6/5/17 Cox Staff is working with a consultant to
off rate at landfill provide a revised cost of service study.
5. Update on stack of railroad ties—are they being picked 6/5/17 Nelson Ties removed from area along Mingo
up? Rd near Service Center. Crews are
working on downtown area.
6. Discussion of development code criteria for width of 6/6/17 Canizares Water and WW criteria is in process of
streets being updated. Street design criteria is
next.
7. Work session on planning & development studies 6/20/17 Mauladad A work session is scheduled for Oct.
10.
8. Full climate cycle analysis for Denton Energy Center 7/25/17 Banks Provide an update later in the year after
Black&Veatch study; potential Q 1
2017/18 project.
9. Survey and report of how other municipalities and 7/25/17 Howell An ISR is expected for the Friday Sept.
school districts fund their School Resource Officers, as 22 report.
well as analysis of calls to school and efficiency
10. Work session on parking requirements in the Code 8/1/17 Mauladad Staff is working on a proposed parking
amendment for a work session on Oct.
17.
11. Analyze and present options to restrict or address 8/1/17 Howell A work session is scheduled for Sept.
deliveries on the Square 19.
12. Analysis and options for public restrooms on the square 8/3/17 Rosendahl An ISR is expected for the Friday Sept.
22 report.
13. Info on landfill SUP requirement 8/15/17 Cox Landscape architect being retained.
Working with legal counsel on
updating SUP.
14. Work session on Section 35.12.10.p of the Code 8/15/17 Mauladad A work session is scheduled for Sept.
regarding music/art studios SUPS 19.
Request Request Date Staff Responsible Status
15. Request to consolidate Council subcommittees and 8/22/17 Walters/Kuechler Staff is working on an interim solution
agendas on the website in one spot to consolidate to one website page, as
well as a plan to transition more
meetings to the Granicus platform.
16. Request to minimize extra utility poles and what can be 8/22/17 Langley/Gillum
done
17. Information on paid parental leave benefits 8/22/17 Romine An ISR is expected for Friday Sept. 22.
18. Regular Council updates on DDC progression 9/12/17 Mauladad An update will be included in the
Friday Sept 22 report with ongoing
updates following.
19. Options for missing sidewalk segments along 9/12/17 Nelson/Gillum
McKinney(across railroad tracks and correcting the rise
in the sidewalk), in front of Mack Park, and new DME
substation
20. Provide the results of the engineering studies for red 9/12/17 Canizares An ISR is included in the Friday Sept.
light camera intersections 15 report.
21. Plan to replace or minimize trees that will be removed 9/12/17 Banks/Gillum Staff will look at options, including
for the Ma hill Rd widening project regulations for planting in the medians.
22. Work session on S134—how it will impact the 9/12/17 Howell/Leal A work session is scheduled for Oct.
community and update on lawsuit 17.
23. Work session on funding for downtown reinvestment 9/12/17 Booth A work session is scheduled for Oct.
rant 10.
24. Consider an ordinance for building height restrictions 9/12/17 Mauladad
around the Square
25. Information and plan for city property at North Lakes 9/12/17 Vorel/Langley
ark(parcel adjacent to Hwy 77 by the animal shelter
26. Work session on McDonalds SUP 9/12/17 Mauladad A work session is scheduled for Sept.
19.
Cityof Denton City Hall
215 E. McKinney St.
Denton,Texas 76201
www.cityofdenton.com
DENTON Meeting Agenda
City Council
Tuesday, September 26, 2017 8:30 AM Work Session Room
After determining that a quorum is present, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas will convene in a
Closed Meeting on Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City
Hall,215 E. McKinney Street,Denton,Texas at which the following items will be considered:
1. Closed Meeting:
A. ID 17-1273 Deliberations regarding a Personnel Matter under Government Code Section 551.074
Conduct City Attorney candidate interviews and discuss and deliberate regarding the
evaluation of candidates and the appointment/employment of a City Attorney.
ANY FINAL ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE ON A MATTER DELIBERATED IN A CLOSED
MEETING WILL ONLY BE TAKEN IN AN OPEN MEETING THAT IS HELD IN COMPLIANCE
WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT SUCH FINAL
ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE IS TAKEN IN THE CLOSED MEETING IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE PROVISIONS OF §551.086 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE (THE `PUBLIC POWER
EXCEPTION'). THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO A CLOSED
MEETING OR EXECUTIVE SESSION AS AUTHORIZED BY TEX. GOV'T. CODE, §551.001, ET
SEQ. (THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT) ON ANY ITEM ON ITS OPEN MEETING AGENDA
OR TO RECONVENE IN A CONTINUATION OF THE CLOSED MEETING ON THE CLOSED
MEETING ITEMS NOTED ABOVE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS
ACT, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION §551.071-551.086 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS
ACT.
CERTIFICATE
I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of
Denton, Texas,on the day of ,2017 at o'clock(a.m.)(p.m.)
CITY SECRETARY
NOTE: THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ROOM IS ACCESSIBLE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE CITY WILL PROVIDE
SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48
HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE CITY
SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349-8309 OR USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE
DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800-RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN
BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
Page 1 Printed on 911512017
4 Au.2017 September 2017 •
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Labor Day 4 p.m.Public Art Committee
City Holiday
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
9:00 Public Utilities Board 9:30am Audit/Finance 11:00 Economic Development 5:30 Traffic Safety Commission
12:00 Committee on the Committee Partnership Board
Environment Noon CC Work Session
5:30 PM-Historic Landmark 6:30 CC Regular Session 5:30 pm Airport Advisory
Commission Cancelled Board Meeting
6:00 p.m.Park Board—adjourn t
9118 6:30 PM-Planning&Zoning
Commission
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
6 p.m.Park Board 9:30 Mobility Committee 4:00pm HaBSCo Meeting
Noon CC Work Session
6:30 CC Regular Session
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
9:00 Public Utilities Board 6:30 PM-Planning&Zoning
9am-4pm 4th Tuesday Commission
4:00 PM-Zoning Board of Session(tentative)
Adjustment
Created with WinCalendar Calendar Creator More Calendar Templates:2017 Calendar,2018 Calendar
• October Nov 2017
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11:30 Council Luncheon 9:00 Council Airport
1:30 Committee on the Committee
Environment
5:30 Traffic Safety Commission 4 p.m.Public Art Committee
6 p.m.Park Board
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
9:00 Public Utilities Board 11:30 Mobility Committee 5:30 pm Airport Advisory
5:30 PM-Historic Landmark 2:00 2nd Tuesday Session Board Meeting
Commission
6:30 PM-Planning&Zoning
Commission
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
2:00 CC Work Session 4:00pm HaBSCo Meeting
6:30 CC Regular Session
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
9:00 Public Utilities Board 6:30 PM-Planning&Zoning
2:00 4th Tuesday Session Commission
29 30 31 Notes:
4:00 PM-Zoning Board of
Adjustment
Created with WinCalendar Calendar Creator More Calendar Templates:2017 Calendar,2018 Calendar
09/15/17
FUTURE CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
Note: This is a working draft of pending Council items and is subject to change without notice.
Meeting Date Deadlines Item
September 26—41h Tuesday Session Captions— September 11 City Attorney Interviews
Backup— September 22
October 2—Luncheon Captions - September 18 Council Appointee Reviews
Backup - September 28
October 3 —No Meeting TML, Houston, TX 10/3-6 1 National Night Out
October 10—2nd Tuesday Session Captions— September 25 Council Appointee Reviews
Backup—October 6 WS —Development Department Update
WS —CNG contract update
WS —Downtown TIF discussion
WS —Denton Plan 2030
WS —Economic Development Update
WS —Housing Tax Credit Application Process
October 17—Work/Regular Session Captions - October 2 WS —Water Park Update
Backup—October 13 WS —Code Parking Requirements
WS —Downtown Visitor Center
WS —Gas Wells
October 24—4"' Tuesday Session Captions—October 9 WS — SB 4
Backup—October 20 ICMA, San Antonio, TX 10/22-25)
October 31 —No Meeting 5' Tuesday
November 6—Luncheon Captions—October 23
Backup—November 2
November 7—Work/Regular Session Captions—October 23
Backup—November 3
November 14—2nd Tuesday Session Captions—October 30 NLC, Charlotte,NC I I/15-18
Backup—November 10
November 21 —No Meeting Thanksgiving, 11/23-24
November 28 —4th Tuesday Session Captions—November 13
Backup—November 21
December 4—Luncheon Captions—November 20
Backup—November 30
December 5 —Work/Regular Session Captions—November 20
Backup—December 1
December 12—2 nd Tuesday Session Captions—November 27
Backup—December 8
CA-Consent Agenda IC-Individual Consideration WS-Work Session
CM-Closed Meeting PH-Public Hearing
Meeting Date Deadlines Item
December 19—No Meeting
December 26—No Meeting Christmas, 12/24-25 1 City offices closed 12/25 & 12/26
CA-Consent Agenda IC-Individual Consideration WS-Work Session
CM-Closed Meeting PH-Public Hearing
Construction Projects Report Starting Sept 18-24, 2017
road closures Barthold Rd at Intersection of 135 Service Rd going West 700'will be closed
(Jun 12-Oct 15)
lane closures
Detour Routes Proposed Date of Proposed Date of Contact
Street 1 Intersection (if applicable) Construction Completion Brief Description of Construction Department
RESIDENTIAL
Bolivar yes Jul 6, 2017 Oct 30, 2017 Street Reconstruction Streets
Sunset to College
Carmel no Aug 30, 2017 Sep 29, 2017 Sewer Main Construction Wastewater
Hobson to Chiquita
Emerson yes Aug 14, 2017 Oct 2, 2017 Street Reconstruction Streets
Nottingham to Hanover
Highland yes Sep 18, 2017 Sep 25, 2017 Concrete Valley and Curb Repair Streets
IOOF to Carroll
Huisache/Retama/Sagebrush no Sep 5, 2017 Oct 13, 2017 Water Line Replacement Water
Yucca to Yuccca
Kendolph yes Jul 22, 2015 Temporary Closure I-35E Hwy Constr. Intersection work Engineering
North Bound
Kingfisher Ct yes Aug 1, 2017 Oct 9, 2017 Street Reconstruction Streets
Kingfisher to Dead End
Kingfisher Ln yes Aug 1, 2017 Oct 9, 2017 Street Reconstruction Streets
Oriole to Cardinal
Kings Row no Aug 7, 2017 Sep 22, 2017 Curb and Gutter/Drive Approaches Engineering
WB Right Ln Wellington and Sherman
Knight yes Jul 22, 2015 Temporary Closure 1-35E Hwy Constr. Intersection work Engineering
South Bound
McCormick no Jul 31, 2017 Sep 22, 2017 Sidewalk/driveway/Valley gutter repair Streets
Willowwood to 135 Service Rd
E Oak yes Aug 14, 2017 Sep 29, 2017 Street Reconstruction Streets
Wood to Crawford
Ponder yes Aug 21, 2017 Oct 6, 2017 Street Reconstruction Streets
Broadway to Panhandle
E Sherman Dr no Aug 7, 2017 Oct 15, 2017 Curb and Gutter/Drive Approaches Engineering
NB Right Ln Stafford and Wellington
Ridgecrest no Aug 30, 2017 Sep 29, 2017 Street Construction Streets
Pennsylvania to Southridge
Springtree yes Sep 13, 2017 Nov 15, 2017 Water and Sewer Line Construction Engineering
East McKinney St to Pecan Grove Dr
Victoria Dr yes Aug 1, 2017 Sep 25, 2017 Street Reconstruction Streets
Churchill to Nottingham
MAJOR ROADS
Barthold yes Jun 12, 2017 Oct 15, 2017 Street Construction Engineering
135 Svc Rd Intersection to 700'West
Bernard no Sep 5, 2017 Sep 22, 2017 Utility Improvements Engineering
Maple and Bernard Intersection
Centre Place no Sep 25, 2017 Nov 10, 2017 Concrete Street Panel Repairs Streets
1-35 Service Rd to Alegre Vista
S. Bonnie Brae no Aug 9, 2017 Oct 1, 2017 Shoulder Widening Engineering
Vintage Blvd to 1500 ft N of Vintage Blvd
Fulton yes Aug 14, 2017 Sep 22, 2017 Utility Improvements Engineering
Crescent to Emery
Hickory yes Aug 23, 2017 Nov 22, 2017 Duct Bank Construction Engineering
Bonnie Brae to E of Ave H
Hickory yes Sep 8, 2017 Nov 22, 2017 Duct Bank Construction Engineering
Stella to Hickory
Hickory yes Sep 5, 2017 Nov 3, 2017 Waterline Replacement Water
North Texas Blvd to Ave D
Hickory yes Jun 16, 2017 Sep 1, 2017 Waterline Replacement Water
Ave F to North Texas
NB 135 Frontage Rd no Aug 3, 2017 Oct 1, 2017 Drive Approaches Engineering
N of Scripture to S of US380
Oak no Aug 30, 2017 Sep 29, 2017 Sewer Line Replacement Wastewater
Oak& Bell Intersection to Dead End
Roselawn St no Aug 9, 2017 Oct 1, 2017 Shoulder Widening Engineering
Old Bonnie Brae to Roselawn Cemetery
Welch no Sep 5, 2017 Sep 22, 2017 Utility Improvements Engineering
Maple and Welch Intersection
US 380 no Aug 7, 2017 Oct 1, 2017 Drive Approaches Engineering
East of Ector to Bonnie Brae
This provides an Estimate of work to be done the next two weeks. Weather, equipment breakdowns, or other unforeseen problems could cause this
schedule to change.
Drainage 349-7116 / Water Distribution 349-7181 / Wastewater 349-8489 / Traffic 349-7342 / Streets 349-7160,streets@cityofdenton.com
Engineering 349-8910,engineering@cityofdenton.com / TX DOT 387-1414,romulo.bahamon@txdot.gov / Denton County 349-3420
COMPLETED PROJECTS
Alan A Dale no Jul 17, 2017 Aug 25, 2017 Street Reconstruction Streets
Archer Trl to Northern dead end
Cordell no Aug 14, 2017 Sep 29, 2017 Utility Improvements Engineering
Fulton to Crescent
Geesling yes Jul 24, 2017 Sep 1, 2017 Sewer Line Replacement Wastewater
2836 Geesling to Fishtrap
Royal Ln no Aug 15, 2017 Oct 15, 2017 Sewer Main Construction Wastewater
Mistywood to Rockwood
Shady Shores no Aug 9, 2017 Aug 25, 2017 Concrete Panel Repair Streets
Lake View to Old Hwy 77
Worthington no Jun 5, 2017 Sep 15, 2017 Concrete Street Panel Repairs Streets
Schuyler to Barcelona
Maple Leaf
a off€
Z&k 00 • N
111uja+ MCD
� 1_Wan �vae
• „
1 �1 a�
• 1 1 1— a m ;g 2y;
ccEE
z$�e
am:
N
T
m
C
Of u
�— E 2 Y
4 = .o `o
y y T
N _O m Of 7
U 0 O
f
m
8=
a
cli
W rn N r- o
ui O p
N 'V
0 m T a0 4U7
�{ = N
■b Z 10 1� N d�
V01 O N y
N
m
J
� r
�s
N N ° aJ
CM)
°J
P O
N 8IL
�5;��
Z 9,og
H
Od
W tZ.W=6
RJ oclu,
'�SS���� �'S'^•��t JI W F
Rtt H b `t
Maple Leaf
w ao�
LU
aaQQ m`'LC
Z � f�� �� � �•s]
• TmOO
]-L
nm w"
1 r • 6 c/
U
a s�
~ C•
amt
m
C
C
m Y
m u a
= o
m U
m m
= C J m A
0� !0
U ❑ a ,
� - fn
. N
Of pp
to
i
7r' m t
IS OaAj • TIM
O N
t IO
A
ca a�
a V)
=ODU
<LL< )
LL a>mi�LL
TWI-b�
?Sp
r
Maple Leaf
LL
W
•• 1 � 1 1 e�
• ¢
4
f V1
T
N
C
N Y
m u y
E f �
O ot7 N
2 _ O
is H U
m d
m O m O
� rn os
VON
MR P:A d
_ ,Lr if MY
N
N
m �
a
u
t
A
t t
-� 251
Z /1\ »CrLLO
W or(iWz
azJ�sr
r V � awmo00
o_
f ll J FFN
.�� ` % i W •�/� o orm=xW
ozw=om
q Jp
N V oz. O
' 4 Z wO
rwz
DME Hickory Duct Bank
`47 N
WIL
Row I rGZO 2 I l
- 20ft 1
A�E, soon
Buffer x
Work' }—
.
Zone (1 �.�♦
. aTr ,. Roie sstttt���i�i ,
�r
.. tNo
i wns Hoak
'r ` Tel• $ G20.2
• taro
� wren Zone - 'a
��.
11110
LLAp 1 1„•S • I• R 4I R� a�Q ,f
'1•' • v�onwic
•,I ;S t' it +�1��� h '. ,a,, 16-1,W r wrin ro CLOBED µ u�rao � a,.
Ilk.
olio +�
• i 40 L 0 120ft
all, t
at
•. r
ao� '
µin
�r
V T t + ?r , _.
NOTE:Changes requested by Contractor may not conform to TXDOT/MUTCD standards. Q
as
Buyers Barricades shall not be held responsible for results of deviation from standardized traffic/safety control.
l h r t
SALESMAN/EXECUTIVE cnmaecl+zl..
NOTES Larrett Inc. �ci °o. •
Jessica Paredes CITY: ._
Paul Roy Denton
TCP DESIGNER . ionaamE
940-222-9616 Denton Municipal Electric BUVF.RS
Hector Gonzalez
SAIL �sceuo0. EST BA R RIC ADES I4tll4
THIS PLAN IS FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY AND O Navigator 08/04/2017 Hickory St&Ave H -
I NOT INTENDED TO RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM
H REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH Type 1 Barricade All Traffic Control Plans(TCPs)are the property of Buyers
DOCUMENTS,
CUMENTS,THE TEAS MANUAL L ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC RELATED CONTRACT Devices spaced on 20ft centers s Barricades,Inc.and are included with Buyers Barricades
CONTROL DEVICES(MUTCD)OR THE OVERALL H Type 3 Barricade Posted speed limit 30MPH Road Closure rental agreements.Traffic Control Plans issued without a
RESPONSIBILITY TO TRAFFIC CONTROL SAFETY. rental agreement will be charged to the customer.
0.71
W XE
•i r ROAD It Yt7�
r WORK
1 O S
��� R N PPP \ OAD
• '* �. .-j CLOSED �
AHEAD ROAD
Itq N
M a 120ft 120ft
10 JC DETOUR
- — -- aasoroavoa Ran M4-9L
woRK
�•lfll�'it�t'�lHI':/H 1 � �
4 N
ROAD DETouR
AHEAD
CLOSED
_ � o
L r ROAD N
r \A ' CLOSED
ROAD o?�ff C/L ooDETOUR
RO
DETOUR O Off r ROAD O — oEr
AHEAD 2Of( AHEAD • f ROAD CLOSED NARK
t AA THRU TRAFFIC AHLAD
.J�• e! �h,M��1,;y/ � .. r rftx Itlrtye� r. as-vw
CLOSED Et felt (KI Vic` 120ft 120ft - an�oiaa
I w
THRU TRAFFIC..
'- p �, ♦ ;' 120ft 120ft ( 1=
- ( ` !, t • ' ¢ • �Fj AHEAD�oo AHEAD o N �o
SI F + � � • DETOUR O
AHEAD
'IT r
I r ♦ I � 1 - � N -
1
4 CLOSED RO
�
_ rN :
ROAD
WORK
� ..ke - to��� 1 � � � � •
1• �c�
� I .� r �� r f� a.► M 1�l�M►lr �11�tHit�1E+►rdi�
SALESMAN/EXECUTIVE OONTRAOTOR —
Jeremiah Keys NOTES Dickerson Construction ROAD
�_
��� Blake Denton
TCP DESIGNER "TROT"""1B JOe E: BUYERS
Reedie Lea eR972-982-2043 Pecan Creek Interceptor IV Phase 2
LOCATION_ EST I.—
THIS PLAN IS FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY AND 08/16/2017 Fulton St&Cordell St 817.535.3939
IS NOT INTENDED TO RIELI VE THE CONTRACTOR THE REQUIREMENTS S SET FORTH BY ELATED CONTRACT score of woRK All Traffic Control Plans(TCPs)are the property of Buyers
DOCUMENTS,THE TEXAS MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC Devices spaced on 20ft centers Barricades,Inc.and are included with Buyers Barricades
CONTROL DEVICES(MANUAL
OR THE OVERALL T e 3 Barricade Road Closure rental agreements.Traffic Control Plans issued without a
RESPONSIBILITY TO TRAFFIC CONTROL SAFETY. I"I yP Posted speed limit 30MPH rental agreement will be charged to the customer.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
D E N T O N 215 E. McKinney * Denton, TX 76201 * 940-349-8509
Public Works Information Sheet
1. Location: McCormick St from Willow Wood St. to 1-35 Service Rd.
2. Proposed Date of Construction: July 31- 2017
3. Proposed Date of Completion: August 31- 2017
4. Brief Description of the Project: Provide a summary of the work being completed and
the reason for the project.
Replacing Bad Sidewalk, Driveways,Valley Gutters and Curbs.
The work starts with sawing the damaged concrete and then the contractor will remove
the concrete with backhoe, then forming up location to get poured with brand new
concrete.
5. Special Requirements: No Parking on Street. Limited access to driveways while crews
are present.
6. Funding Source: O&M
7. Council District:
8. Public Outreach: Door hangers, Street Construction Report
9. Map: Attached
10. Contact Information: Streets Manager. Robbin Webber 940-349-7146
- � • � 151 1520 4 1305
1514
- *1KNIGHT ST
r, IR F_
1519*_ � 1515 1516 r1 , v N
W
1512 r1518 t 1433 1427 1423 1413 1521 J 1219 1215 1207
1511 ;1 1512 Z 1125
1515 i 1514 1508 W {r -
1515 1517 i.
1519 1 1520 1511 1510 AL 1507 -1508 1507-1509 1504 O 1504 /."� 1432
£ 1425
1� •. 1507 1506 1428
1503
N 1516 0 1425 W 1424 H 1502 1300
p� 1503 0 �1502 � J 1424 SAVE BJP
1423
1513 O O 1421 Z 1525 Q 1300
1419 O .. 1418 J = 1420 p
1420 V 1421 Q- O 1125 1121
0 �+•-O 1500 1415 Ye 1414 1416 1419 1413 O`
• Q � �V
J� �O 1414 �'. 1210
?� i1►1414 1411 1415 . 1409 -�
1412 1412 Co _ .LU t1420
1513 - J�O
1407 • 1406 1411 1410 e. 1201
L05
O
1608 - 1526 1524 1520 i f�: .ram 1
1712 1200 128 1124� _ �
1403 •r 402 1600 1530 s 1516 1512 + i
MCCORMICK ST
ALI,: M
1918 1906 1711 1707 1703" 1619 1613 1603 1501 1204 1328
y 1310 t1529 1523 1519 1 1219
L103 1221
h�
1310
1223
1315
1232
1710 1706 1702 1100 1126J
1230 1216/1220
•�-�. � ._ 1905 i E1302
1304
, 1919 1915 1307 O '
_ WESTWOOD DR • p !`� O 1234
' s O j 1305 1302 JNG / m 1218
201, 1914 1906 :�• - O 1218 �Qi� Z 1228 1226
1703 Y �, r
_ 1815 1807 ! AVEA
WESTWOOD DR < 1214 �� 1301 1300 ' 4 J�O �h `ti 1100 m ^
O / � —— 1201!
� 1210 '� / pt� �1212 a+• �1207 1203 c
1919 1915' 1810 ' 1702 1213 OJ �G�' F
mw 1206 1220 5
MERCEDES�RD 1202 1211 �v �N4 1107 1110 - 1115
1210 �: 1108-
2014 2010 2 - f 1106
1118 1209 � y �1322 13201310
1711 1707 1703 A1102
1910 1906 •190
61 u I I 1114 1206 ' a � �� A I �
1 1 11 111
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
D E N T O N 215 E. McKinney * Denton, TX 76201 * 940-349-8509
Public Works Information Sheet
1. Location: Schuyler St. (1-35 service road to Worthington)
Worthington (Schuyler to Worthington)
2. Proposed Date of Construction: 6-5-2017
3. Proposed Date of Completion: 7-7-2017
4. Brief Description of the Project: Concrete street panel repair. The process starts with
Barricading the street then sawing the Base failures on the concrete and removing them.
Then they will compact the subgrade with flex base and pour back 10" of concrete.
5. Special Requirements: No Parking on Street. Limited access to driveways while crews
are present.
6. Funding Source: O&M
7. Council District: Department of Community Affairs will provide this information.
8. Public Outreach: Door hangers, and Street Construction Report
9. Map: Please attach a map of the area under construction, and any detour map if
applicable.
10. Contact Information: Robbin Webber 940-349-7146