HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 11, 2011 Agenda
AGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
October 11, 2011
After determining that a quorum is present, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas will
nd
.
convene in 2 Tuesday Session on Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 4:00 p.m in the City Council
Work Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the
following items will be considered:
nd
NOTE: A 2 Tuesday Session is used to explore matters of interest to one or more City Council
Members or the City Manager for the purpose of giving staff direction into whether or not such
matters should be placed on a future regular or special meeting of the Council for citizen input,
nd
City Council deliberation and formal City action. At a 2 Tuesday Session, the City Council
generally receives informal and preliminary reports and information from City staff, officials,
members of City committees, and the individual or organization proposing council action, if
invited by City Council or City Manager to participate in the session. Participation by
individuals and members of organizations invited to speak ceases when the Mayor announces the
nd
session is being closed to public input. Although 2 Tuesday Sessions are public meetings, and
citizens have a legal right to attend, they are not public hearings, so citizens are not allowed to
participate in the session unless invited to do so by the Mayor. Any citizen may supply to the
City Council, prior to the beginning of the session, a written report regarding the citizen’s
opinion on the matter being explored. Should the Council direct the matter be placed on a
regular meeting agenda, the staff will generally prepare a final report defining the proposed
action, which will be made available to all citizens prior to the regular meeting at which citizen
input is sought. The purpose of this procedure is to allow citizens attending the regular meeting
the opportunity to hear the views of their fellow citizens without having to attend two meetings.
1. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding drafting a new
Planned Development (PD) ordinance for inclusion within the Denton Development
Code (DDC), with associated development standards. The discussion will include a
general overview of the outline of the draft PD ordinance that will be included in the
DDC.
nd
Following the completion of the 2 Tuesday Session, the City Council will convene in a Closed
Meeting to consider specific items when these items are listed below under the Closed Meeting
section of this agenda. The City Council reserves the right to adjourn into a Closed Meeting on
any item on its Open Meeting agenda consistent with Chapter 551 of the TEXAS
GOVERNMENT CODE, as amended, as set forth below.
1. Closed Session
A.Consultation with Attorneys – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071.
1.Consult with, and provide direction to, City’s attorneys on legal rights,
restrictions, obligations, and issues associated with the proposed
annexation of DH-12, where a public discussion of such legal matters
would conflict with the duty of the City’s attorneys to the City of Denton,
Texas under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the
State Bar of Texas, and where such matters may become an issue in
potential litigation.
B.Deliberations regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters –
Under Texas Government Code Section 551.086; and Consultation with
Attorneys – Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.071.
City of Denton City Council Agenda
October 11, 2011
Page 2
1.Receive a briefing from Staff regarding public power competitive and
financial matters regarding Wholesale Transmission Charges for
September through December 1999; and consult with the City’s attorneys
regarding legal issues involved in Public Utilities Commission of Texas
Docket No. 20381 and 39066 and Cause No. 99-14787 that have resulted
in a decision by the Supreme Court of Texas, styled Texas Municipal
Power Agency et al. v. Public Util. Commission of Texas, 253 S.W.3d 184
(Tex. 2007), which has now resulted in a Stipulation disposing [I have
deleted “all”] of the pending litigation regarding this matter, where a
public discussion of this legal matter would conflict with the duty of the
City’s attorneys to the City under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of
Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. Discuss, deliberate and
provide Staff with direction.
Following the completion of the Closed Session, the Council will convene in a Special Called
Session to consider the following:
1. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending a Service Plan adopted on August 16, 2011,
for an area of land to be annexed to the City of Denton, Texas, pursuant to an annexation
plan, generally identified as DH-12 consisting of approximately 1,167 acres located south
of east University Drive, east of north Mayhill Road, north and south of Blagg Road,
north and south of Mills Road and east and west of south Trinity Road, and more
specifically identified and depicted in Exhibit “A” attached hereto, which area is adjacent
to and abuts the existing city limits of the City of Denton, Texas; providing for a savings
clause; and providing an effective date.
2.Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving and
authorizing the “Stipulation and Motion for Approval Thereon” regarding Public Utilities
Commission of Texas Docket No. 39066 that involves the wholesale transmission cost
payments for the period September 1, 1999 through December 31, 1999; authorizing the
settlement of claims and authorizing the city’s legal counsel of record to execute and
deliver the stipulation; authorizing the city manager to receive payments and to pay out
the applicable payments in such amounts as provided in said stipulation; and providing an
effective date.
C E R T I F I C A T E
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 ___________________, 2011 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.
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE: October 11, 2011
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Development
ACM: Fred Greene
SUBJECT (DCA11-0005)
Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding drafting a new Planned
Development (PD) ordinance for inclusion within the Denton Development Code (DDC), with
associated development standards. The discussion will include a general overview of the outline
of the draft PD Ordinance that will be included in the DDC.
BACKGROUND
first Planned Development (PD) regulations were approved between the adoption of
the 1966 and 1969 Zoning Ordinances. Within Article IV of the 1969 Zoning Ordinance
(Exhibit 1), PD Districts were authorized if certain minimum standards such as minimum
acreages for proposed uses and site plan standards were met. Additionally, each adopted PD
district became an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance itself via appendices and was designated
with a specific number within the Ordinance and on the official City of Denton Zoning Map. In
1969 there were five (5) PD districts listed with in the Zoning Ordinance and identified on
the official zoning map.
In 2002 the City adopted the Denton Development Code (DDC) and initiated a city-wide
rezoning which eliminated the option to create new PD districts. Several reasons for
discontinuance of the PD district and process at the time of the DDC adoption include:
1.Below par guidelines within the PD district and the disparity in guidelines from PD to PD
which caused difficulty with interpretation and enforcement at the time of development;
2.Many PDs did not have timelines for development and over time, uses proposed within
the district were no longer compatible with adjacent districts, infrastructure serving the
proposed uses and future land uses at the actual time of the development were below par
but vested;
3.The original purpose of PDs was to achieve higher standards of development than what
was typical of conventional standards, but this was not necessarily achieved;
4.PDs became a means to circumvent conventional development code requirements;
5.Many PDs were not consistent Plan;
and,
6.There was great difficultly tracking and administering all paper work and amendments,
minor and major, as PDs were approved.
1
At the time of the adoption of the DDC in 2002, there were two hundred (200) PDs within the
city limits; however, only fifteen (15) PD districts were retained and vested in the DDC as part of
Section 35.1.5.B (Exhibit 2). To provide for some make-up for the elimination of PD
opportunities, the DDC allows mixed-use zoning districts with the intent to allow some
flexibility which PDs had typically provided within the former Zoning Ordinance. Granted,
these mixed-use zoning districts still have limitations to the size of the proposed uses, location
and site design parameters found in the Subdivision Regulations.
In 2007, the City adopted the Master Plan Community (MPC) District, codified in Section
35.7.12 of the DDC. A MPC is a PD in application, and to date, four (4) MPCs have been
approved: Hills of Denton; Hills of Denton, North; Inspiration (AKA Hunter Ranch); and Cole
Ranch. Within the City of Denton, PDs and MPCs currently account for 25.21% (15,010 acres)
and of the 59,533.34 acres.
On March 1, 2011 via a work session, staff presented a report and held a discussion with the City
Council that included a general overview of PDs, a brief history of PDs in Denton, effect of 2002
city-wide rezoning and the rescinding of previous PD districts. At the conclusion of the work
session, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the drafting a new ordinance to establish
a process and development standards governing PD districts for inclusion in the Denton
Development Code.
DISCUSSION:
The following is a general overview of the outline of the draft PD Ordinance that will be
included in the DDC.
I.Planned Development District, Purpose
The purpose of Planned Development (PD) zoning districts is to provide for the
development of contiguous land as an integral unit for single or mixed uses in accordance
with a plan that may vary from the established regulations of other conventional zoning
districts within the DDC. Provision for PD districts is also meant to encourage flexibility
under controlled conditions and to allow for creative planning with regards to design,
building placement, and the inclusion of densities and intensities that also ensure
compatibility of land uses. The PD zoning districts are further established to allow for
the adjustment to changing demands to meet the current needs of the City; and to provide
for a development model that is superior in attractiveness, quality, efficiency and
effective use of land in its natural state when compared to what could be accomplished
via traditional zoning districts. For these reasons, staff is recommending that all PDs be
designed, constructed and maintained so that the following intents are achieved:
A.
general welfare;
B.Produce developments that are designed in accordance with sound site planning
principles and development techniques that properly relates to the immediate
surrounding area, the planned mobility system, and other public facilities
such as parks, schools, water and sewer systems, and other utilities;
C.Produce a more creative approach in the utilization of land in order to accomplish
an effective, highly aesthetic and desirable development which may be
characterized by special features of the, topography, size or shape of a particular
property, and to accomplish a more economical and efficient use of land;
D.Encourage the establishment of planning and development standards tailored to
the opportunities and constraints of the property intended to be developed, while
allowing sufficient flexibility to permit final detailed planning and the precise
distribution of the approved density and intensity of the project; and,
E.Create viable economic development opportunities through a balance of land-uses
and job creation that is financially beneficial to the development and surrounding
community or area of influence.
F.PD districts shall not be used as a tool to achieve a de facto use variance, nor shall
they be used as means of circumventing the administration of the conventional
zoning and development regulations that are established in this Chapter of the
City of Denton Code of Ordinances.
II.Planned Development Districts
Staff recognizes that one type of PD district may not create adequate opportunities to
achieve the intended purpose of establishing the district, or be practical for all scenarios
where the facilitation of such district might be appropriate. Staff further recognizes that
the location of PDs are not necessarily limited to undeveloped non-urban areas, and to be
most effectively governed, recognizes the need to establish a minimum project size for
PDs. Therefore, provisions are made for the following three (3) types of PD districts
processed, reviewed, approved, constructed, and maintained in accordance with all
applicable requirements. The following are the three (3) types of PD districts that are
permissible:
Planned Development, Small-Scale
A.. Permitted on undeveloped or developed
sites that are five (5) contiguous acres or greater but not to exceed fifteen (15)
contiguous acres. This type of PD shall be designed, constructed and maintained
in a single phase.
Planned Development, Mid-Scale
B.. A PD that provides a combination of land
uses, which may include a variety of residential types, commercial, industrial,
public and semi-public uses, arranged and designed in such a manner as to be
properly related to each other on undeveloped or developed sites that are greater
than fifteen (15) but less than one hundred and twenty five (125) contiguous
acres.
Planned Development
C., Large-Scale (AKA Master-Planned Community). A PD
that provides a combination of land uses, which may include a variety of
residential types, commercial, industrial, public and semi-public uses, arranged
and designed in such a manner as to be properly related to each other on
undeveloped or developed sites that are one hundred and twenty five (125)
contiguous acres or greater.
III.Pre-Application Conference and PD Concept Plan
Pre-Application Conferenc
A.e. An applicant for a PD district is required to meet
with the DRC and present a PD Concept Plan for the proposed PD district prior to
submitting an official application for a PD Development Plan. The PD Concept
Plan (both Narrative and Map) is an unofficial document, is non-binding, and
shall not be considered a permit pursuant to §245.001 of the Texas Local
Government Code (Tx.LGC).
The purpose of the Pre-Application Conference and the PD Concept Plan is to
achieve the following:
1.Familiarize b
with respect to the intended PD district;
2.Familiarize the developer with the process for obtaining a rezoning for a
PD district and to discuss potential issues that should be considered in
planning the project;
3.Provide the applicant with any forms required for the PD district
application; and
4.
comprehensive plan.
PD Concept Plan Map
B.. The PD Concept Plan Map will be drawn to a scale
sufficient for all information presented thereon to be legible, and will contain the
following information:
1.Topography. Topographic contours of ten (10) feet or less.
2.Acreage. Total acreage of the project.
3.Survey. Survey boundaries of the project.
4.Land Use. Proposed general land uses and the acreage of each use,
including open space.
5.Mobility. Proposed major street layout.
6.Environmental. 100-year floodplain, floodway, major drainage ways and
ESAs.
7.Jurisdiction. City limits and Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ)
boundaries.
8.Existing Conditions. Adjoining zoning districts and land uses.
9.Infrastructure. Existing transportation, water, wastewater, and storm
sewer facilities.
PD Concept Plan Narrative
C.. The PD Concept Plan Narrative will include the
following:
1.A general statement setting
forth how the proposed PD district will relate to the Denton Plan pursuant
to §35.7.12.6.A;
2.Relation to the PD district purpose. A general statement setting forth how
the proposed PD district will achieve the purpose and intent established in
§35.7.12.1;
3.Relation to the Texas Local Government Code. A general statement
setting forth how the proposed PD district will meet the requirements of
§211.004 of the Texas Local Government Code (Tx.LGC).
IV.Community Input Meeting
After presenting the PD Concept Plan to the DRC but before the official submission of
PD Development Plan application, the City and the Applicant will conduct a Community
Input Meeting (CIM). The purpose of the CIM is to provide a public forum for
discussion and to formulate potential resolutions to community concerns and
development constraints within the context of this Code and other applicable City
regulations and policies. The CIM will not be considered a permit pursuant to §245.001
of the Tx.LGC. The CIM portion of the ordinance will address the following:
A.Notice and Schedule.
B.Attendance at Community Input Meeting by City agencies.
C.Facilitation of the Community Input Meeting.
D.Proposed Comments and Conditions.
VI.General PD Requirements
The following general requirements will be established to ensure realization of the
purpose and intent of the PD district.
A.Conformance with the Denton Plan.
Conformance with Texas Local Government Code
B.. All PD districts will include
within its Zoning and Development Regulations, a general statement describing
how the proposed district will be in compliance with §211.004 of the Tx.LGC in
that, the PD must be designed to:
1.Lessen congestion in the streets;
2.Secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers;
3.Promote health and the general welfare;
4.Provide adequate light and air;
5.Prevent the overcrowding of land;
6.Avoid undue concentration of population; and
7.Facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewers, schools,
parks, and other public requirements.
C.Conformance with City of Denton Criteria Manual.
General PD Design Standards
D.. The following general design standards should
be required of all PD Districts and should be adequately provided for in the PD
Zoning and Development Regulations:
1.Appropriateness.
2.Physical Characteristics of the Site; Relation to Surrounding Property.
3.Relation to Public Utilities, Facilities and Services.
4.lity Plan.
5.Compatibility.
6.Transitions.
7.Relationship to Adjacent Property.
8.Access Control.
a.Vehicular access.
b.Pedestrian access.
9.Streets, Drives, Parking and Service Areas.
Pedestrian Systems.
10.
Bike Lanes.
11.
Natural, Historic, Conservation and Preservation Areas.
12.
Density/Intensity.
13.
Architecture:
14.
Height.
15.
Buffer and Screening.
16.
Yards and Setbacks.
17.
Solid Waste and Utility Screens.
18.
Signs.
19.
Landscaping.
20.
Tree Preservation.
21.
Entranceways.
22.
Utility Standards.
23.
Storm Water Management.
24.
Open Space.
25.
Natural Surveillance.
26.
Natural Territorial Reinforcement.
27.
Gas Well Drilling and Production.
28.
VII.PD District-Specific Requirements
The following requirements are specific to each PD district by type and are in addition to
the general PD requirements.
Small Scale PD District
A.. All Small-Scale PDs should adhere to the following:
1.Designed, constructed and maintained in a single phase;
2.
approximate timeframe when construction or development is expected to
begin, and the duration of time required for completion of the
development; and
3.Should
Mobility Plan.
Mid-Scale PD District
B.. All Mid-Scale PDs shall provide the following:
1.When residential uses are proposed, the development must provide a range
of housing opportunities and choices;
2.The following will apply to all Mid-Scale PDs that are fifty (50) acres or
larger:
a.Designed as a mixed-use district designed and constructed in an
orderly and creative arrangement of all land-uses with respect to
each other and to the entire community.
b.Provide employment opportunities, and commercial services to
achieve a balanced community for families of all ages, sizes, and
levels of income.
c.Cost Impact Analysis. A Cost Impact Analysis of the proposed
public facilities and infrastructure should be submitted to the City
with the PD Development Plan. The purpose the analysis is to
provide the base line development data and costs that will assist
the City and the developer in discussions concerning the provision
and timing of all required utilities and municipal services. The
analysis should provide the specific detailed accounting of the
financing for the provision of the following municipal services:
i.Police protection;
ii.Fire protection;
iii.Emergency Medical Services;
iv.Solid waste collection;
v.Water and wastewater facilities;
vi.Roads, including road and street lighting;
vii.Parks, playgrounds, and swimming pools; and,
viii.Any other facility, building, or service that may be
dedicated to the City.
d.Abandonment. To protect the City of Denton taxpayers for the
potential negative financial consequences that may result from
abandoning a PD district, the applicant should provide a
development agreement acceptable to the City for the completion
of all required infrastructure, utilities and municipal services
according to the approved plans and any other documents of
record, and for the maintenance of such areas, functions, and
facilities not to be provided, operated, or maintained at public
expense, and should place covenants on the property to bind any
successors in title to any commitments made under this Code.
e.Job:Housing Balance. When a PD lacks appropriate job
regi
typically the area extending
as indicated on the approved PD Development Plan. When a PD
includes non-residential uses (e.g., offices, retail commercial, etc.);
however, it creates employment opportunities. As such, residents
in the PD are better able to find work within the PD if the types of
jobs that are available therein match the types of housing available
within the PD. If workers cannot find appropriate jobs and
affordable housing within the PD (or AOI), they will have to travel
longer distances between the PD and their residences. As a result,
regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will increase. Commuting
times will also increase across the City and region. To mitigate for
this potential negative regional impact, approval of PDs at a yet to
be determined threshold (either by size or population projection)
should be dependent on meeting one of the following criteria:
i.Designed, constructed and maintained to manifest a
job:housing ratio ranging from 1.3:1 to 1.7:1; or
ii.The PD should contain a mix of uses that are reasonably
anticipated to contribute to a balancing of land-uses such that it
would be affordable for at least twenty percent (20%) of the
persons who are reasonably anticipated to be employed within
the proposed PD may reasonably have an opportunity to reside
within the PD.
Large-Scale PD District
C. (AKA Master Planned Communities). MPCs require
special attention because of their size and ability to create their own environment.
A MPC district should not be approved unless the City Council finds the proposed
MPC district satisfies all of the following criteria:
1.Meet all the requirements of the Mid-Scale PD district; and,
2.Provide adequate educational, medical, and cultural facilities for all
segments of the community.
VIII.PD District Development Plan
The purpose of the PD District Development Plan is to provide a detailed set of
development regulations, criteria, and maps that will govern the PD district. The
approval of the Pd Development Plan will establish the PD district. The PD District
Development Plan will include: (1) the PD Zoning and Development Regulations; (2) the
PD Phasing Map; (3) the PD Development Plan Map; and (4) any other required studies,
reports or documents as determined by the Applicant or the City.
PD District Zoning and Development Regulations.
A. The PD District Zoning and
Development Regulations will establish the permitted uses, site design
specifications, general development requirements, and PD district-specific
requirements. In addition to all other applicable requirements, the PD District
Zoning and Development Regulations should:
1.Provide a general statement setting forth how the proposed PD district will
relate to the Denton Plan;
2.Describe the type of PD district proposed and how it will achieve the
established purpose and intent;
3.Provide a general statement setting forth how the proposed PD district will
meet the requirements of §211.004 of the Tx.LGC:
4.
5.Provide the district-specific requirements;
6.Include a master transportation, water, wastewater, and drainage studies
for the entire PD area that is of such detail that identify the major public
infrastructure facilities needed by each phase, the connection of these
facilities to the existing public infrastructure, and any off-site
improvements required; and,
7.Ensure conformance with all other applicable codes, regulations and
ordinances.
PD Development Plan Map.
B. The PD Development Plan Map should be drawn to
a legible scale, and must contain the following information:
1.Topography. Topographic contours of ten (10) feet or less;
2.Acreage. Total acreage of the project;
3.Survey. Survey boundaries of the project;
4.Land Use. Proposed land uses and the acreage of each use, including open
space;
5.Mobility. Proposed major street layout;
6.Environmental. 100-year floodplain, floodway, major drainage ways and
ESAs;
7.Jurisdiction. City limits and Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ)
boundaries;
8.Existing Conditions. Adjoining zoning districts and land uses; and
9.Infrastructure. Existing transportation, water, wastewater, and storm
sewer facilities.
PD Development Phasing Plan.
C. When a PD is to be developed over multiple
phases, staff is recommending that a PD Development Phasing Plan be submitted
with the PD District Zoning and Development Regulations. The PD Phasing Plan
should conform to the following:
1.When critical infrastructure improvements are tied to certain phases of a
PD, the City may enforce the development phasing sequencing to prevent
avoidances or delays in construction of vital infrastructure, amenities, or
public or private facilities.
2.Multi-family housing should not be the first land-use constructed or the
primary land-use constructed in any phase of the PD.
3.The PD should be phased so that the density of any phase, when combined
with previously constructed phases, does not exceed the approved overall
project density. When a PD will be developed over a period of years, a
greater concentration of density or intensity of land-use within a particular
phase of development (whether it is earlier or later) is permissible,
provided that the greater concentration of density or intensity of land-use
must be offset:
a.By a lower concentration in any completed prior phase, or
b.By an appropriate reservation of common open space on the
remaining land by a grant of easement or by covenant. The
reservation may, as far as practicable, defer the precise location of
the common open space until a PD Detailed Plan application is
filed so that flexibility of development, which is a principal
objective of the PD district, can be maintained.
4.The PD Development Phasing Plan should include a schedule indicating, to the
construction or development is expected to begin, and the duration of time
required for completion of the development.
5.Provide a table with the numerical phasing order of the PD, year ranges, uses and
proposed density and intensity of uses per phase.
6.Identify all existing and proposed transportation, water, waste water, and storm
sewer facilities.
7.Identify the master transportation, water, waste water, and drainage plan, and
major public infrastructure facilities needed by each phase, the connection of
these facilities to the existing public infrastructure, and any off-site improvements
required.
8.When submitted as a separate document, the Development Phasing Plan should
include the following information in addition to those required above;
a.Total Acreage of the project;
b.Survey boundaries of the project;
c.Proposed general land-uses and the acreage of each use including open space;
d.Proposed street layout (arterial and collector level);
e.Phasing lines with associated numbering sequence;
f.Sub-phase lines, if necessary; and
g.Year ranges for anticipated development by phase or sub-phase.
Regulations Applied; Omissions.
D. All conditions, regulations, and development
standards for the PD district should be contained in the PD Zoning and
Development Regulations for the PD district. If any regulation or restriction
applied in other zoning districts by the DDC is omitted in the approved PD
Zoning and Development Regulations or detailed plan, the regulation applicable
in the most comparable zoning district, as determined by the Director of Planning
and Development Department, will apply. Any person aggrieved by the
Director's decision may appeal the determination to the City Council after
recommendation by the P&Z.
Expiration of PD Development Plan
E.. The PD Development Plan (include the PD
District Zoning and Development Regulations, the PD Development Phasing
Plan, the PD Development Plan Map, and any other required studies, reports or
documents as determined by the Applicant or the City) should automatically
nd
expire on the second (2) anniversary of the date of its adoption without any
further action of the City or the applicant, unless a Final Plat has been recorded
for the PD district or a portion thereof. Staff is also recommending that prior to
expiration and for good cause shown, the PD Development Plan may be granted a
one-time six (6) month extension by the City Council.
PD District Development Plan Amendments
F.. An applicant or its successors may
request an amendment to the PD District Development Plan. All amendment
requests should be processed under the Zoning Amendment procedure outlined in
§35.3.4. All future development within the adopted PD district shall thereafter
conform to the PD District Development Plan, as amended.
IX.PD Detailed Plan
The purpose of the PD Detailed Plan is to provide the details of the proposed PD District,
either as a whole, by sections, or by phases to ensure realization of the purpose and intent
of the PD district that are established in §35.7.12.1.
A.After adoption of the PD Development Plan, application may then be submitted
for a PD Detailed Plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning
Commission (P&Z). The PD Detailed Plan must be in accordance with the
adopted PD Development Plan for the same project. The PD Detailed Plan Map
should contain all of the following information:
1.Acreage. Total acreage in the plan as shown by a survey, certified by a
registered surveyor;
in tabular format and
2.Land uses. Proposed specific land uses the
surveyed boundary acreage of each use including open space;
3.Off-site information. Adjacent or surrounding land uses, zoning, streets,
drainage facilities and other existing or proposed offsite improvements, as
specified by the department, sufficient to demonstrate the relationship and
compatibility of the district to the surrounding properties, uses, and
facilities;
4.Traffic and transportation. Proposed street layout (arterial and collector).
The location and size of all streets, alleys, parking lots and parking spaces,
loading areas or other areas to be used for vehicular traffic; the proposed
access and connection to existing or proposed streets adjacent to the
district; and the traffic generated by the proposed uses;
5.Residential development. The number, location, and dimensions of the
lots, the minimum setbacks, the number of dwelling units, and number of
units per acre (density);
6.Water and drainage. The location of all creeks, ponds, lakes, floodplains
or other water retention or major drainage facilities and improvements
including the preliminary size and location of any required detention
facilities;
7.Utilities. The location and route of all major sewer, water, or electrical
lines and facilities necessary to serve the district;
8.Trees and landscaping. The location of all protected trees and a landscape
plan;
9.Open space. The approximate location and size of greenbelt, open,
common, or recreation areas, the proposed use of such areas, and whether
they are to be used for public or private use;
10.Screening. The location, type, and size of all fences, berms, or screening
features proposed between different land uses or adjacent properties;
11.Signs. Elevations, location, type, and size of all signs;
12.Sidewalks and bike paths. Sidewalks, bike paths or other improved ways
for pedestrian or bicycle use;
13.Proposed Structures:
a.Location;
b.Setbacks;
c.Maximum height of buildings;
d.Maximum floor to area ratio;
14.Environmental. 100-year floodplain, ESAs, floodway and major drainage
ways.
15.Jurisdiction. City limits and Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ)
boundaries.
16.Existing Conditions. Adjoining zoning districts and land uses.
Expiration of PD Detailed Plan
B.. It is recommended that thePD Detailed Plan
nd
automatically expires on the second (2) anniversary of the date of its approval
unless construction begins pursuant to a building permit issued by the City prior
to expiration. The P&Z may, prior to expiration of the Detailed Plan, for good
cause shown, grant a one-time six (6) month extension.
Appeals from P&Z Action.
C. The applicant, or any property owner within two
PD project area as represented on
City Council by filing a written request with the Planning and Development
arly
state what action(s) of the P&Z is the subject of the appeal and how the action(s)
violated the PD Development Plan that were adopted for the project, applicable
section of the DDC, comprehensive plan or other City of Denton Code.
PD Detailed Plan Amendments.
D. An applicant or its successors may request
amendments to an approved PD Detailed Plan by submitting an application to the
Director of Planning and Development. Amendments to the approved PD
Detailed Plan should be delineated as major or minor amendments, according to
the criteria set forth herein. Amendments to the approved PD Detailed Plan will
not affect development units not included in the proposed amendment. Upon
receipt of an amendment application, the Director of Planning and Development
will determine if the proposed amendment constitutes a major or minor
amendment.
a.Minor Amendments to a PD Detailed Plan Administrative approval.
the boundary of the PD may appeal an action or decision by the Director
of Planning and Development to the Planning and Zoning Commission
within ten (10) business days from the date of the decision, pursuant to
§35.3.7.D. Appeals shall be in writing on a form provided by the Planning
and Development Department and shall include only the specific items
being appealed.
b.Major Amendments to a PD Detailed Plan P&Z approval.
The A
the boundary of the PD project area as represented on the approved PD
Council by filing a written request with the Planning and Development
clearly state what action(s) of the P&Z is the subject of the appeal and
how the action(s) violated the PD Zoning and Development Regulations
that were approved for the project, applicable section of the DDC,
comprehensive plan or other City of Denton Code.
Compliance with Approved Plans.
E. No development should begin and no
building permit should be issued for any land or structure within a PD district
until a PD Detailed Plan has been approved. All PD districts should be
developed, used and maintained in compliance with the approved PD Detailed
Plan for the district. All other plans, maps, drawings, pictures, written statements
or other representations on which the P&Z relied on approving a PD Detailed plan
shall be considered part of the approved PD Detailed Plan and shall be binding
upon the property.
X.PD Site Plan Submission, Review and Approval.
The purpose of the PD Site Plan requirement is to establish the administrative standards
to facilitate timely and comprehensive review of new PD Site Plans and major
amendments to existing PD Site Plans to ensure compliance with the PD District Zoning
and Development Regulations, the PD Detailed Plan, and all applicable codes and
regulations. The DRC Administrator will accept and authorize a submitted PD Site Plan
for review after determining that the application is complete.
Plan Application Submittal Requirements
A.
electronic plans submission process (ProjectDox), Submit fourteen (14) complete
copies of the application package and pay all requisite fees to the City. To be
considered complete, each PD Site Plan application should include the following:
1.Universal Application;
2.Disclosure and Consent statement listing all parties in control of the
property;
3.Completed Site Plan Submittal Checklist;
4.
5.One (1) Compact Disc (CD) containing a digital copy of the site plan
drawing in a JPEG, PDF, DWG or TIFF format;
6.If it is determined that a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is required, then
three (3) copies of a TIA shall be submitted by the applicant upon the
request of the DRC Administrator;
7.Three (3) copies of a conceptual Storm water Management Plan that
addresses storm water detention requirements shall be submitted by the
applicant at the time of final submittal; and
8.
jurisdiction, the applicant shall provide details of approvals required of the
other jurisdiction and the status of the approvals.
XI.Administrative Decision Appeals
may appeal an action or decision by the DRC Chair within ten (10) business days from the date of
of the DDC. Appeals will be in writing on a form
provided by the Planning and Development Department and shall include only the specific items
being appealed.
XII.Administration and Enforcement
A.While property ownership may subsequently be transferred (in whole or in part),
the adopted PD zoning and standards will continue to be implemented and
maintained on the total acreage of the PD. It will be the responsibility of the
owner to notify all prospective purchasers of the existence of the PD District and
the PD Development Plan.
B.In the event that the applicant has failed to comply with the conditions adopted by
the City Council in conjunction with the approved PD Zoning and Development
Regulations, the City may proceed in accordance with §35.1.10 of the DDC.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends drafting the new PD regulations for inclusion in the DDC, in accordance with
the aforementioned outline.
PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW
No prior Action or review.
OPTIONS
1.Direct staff to proceed with drafting the new PD regulations for inclusion in the DDC, in
accordance with the aforementioned outline.
2.Direct staff to take another direction.
EXHIBITS
1.Typical PD Process Flow Chart, proposed
Prepared by:
Mark A. Cunningham, AICP, CPM
Director of Planning and Development
Respectfully Submitted:
Fred G. Greene
Assistant City Manager
TYPICA PD PRCESSLOWHART
LLOOFFCC
tt5/--;¦·t
(Nonbiinding)
/Òz·äL¦Ò·aa;;·zm
t555;Ý;¦¦;·t
CCityCounciilApprovall
tt55;· z;7t
P&ZAppproval
{z·;t
DRCAppproval
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE: October 11, 2011
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Development
ACM: Jon Fortune
SUBJECT
Consider adoption of an ordinance amending a Service Plan adopted on August 16, 2011, for an
area of land to be annexed to the City of Denton, Texas, pursuant to an annexation plan,
generally identified as DH-12 consisting of approximately 1,167 acres located south of east
University Drive, east of north Mayhill Road, north and south of Blagg Road, north and south of
Mills Road and east and west of south Trinity Road, and more specifically identified and
depicted in EA
limits of the City of Denton, Texas; providing a savings clause; and providing an effective date.
BACKGROUND
In 2009, via several City Council work sessions, staff recommended the annexation of eighteen
(18) areas totaling approximately 9,035 acres of land within the City of Denton Extra
Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ). Of the 18 areas identified, all but three (3) areas were exempted
from the 3-year annexation plan requirement under Section 43.052 of the Texas Local
Government Code (Tx. LGC). The fifteen (15) areas that were exempted from the requirement
of the 3-year annexation plan were annexed on May 4, 2010, save and except all properties that
qualified for Non-Annexation Agreements (NAA) due to them being appraised for ad valorem
tax purposes as land for agricultural use, timber land or wildlife management.
The remaining three (3) areas that were identified for annexation were placed in a 3-Year
Annexation Plan on April 6, 2010, via the adoption of annexation ordinances by the Denton City
Council. These areas are identified as DH-7, DH-9, and DH-12.
DISCUSSION
Service Plan Requirement:
Tx.LGC § 43.056 sets forth the requirements relative to scheduling for the provision of
municipal services germane to annexing property. Per state law, the City must complete a
stth
Service Plan for the areas included in the Annexation Plan before the first (1) day of the 10
month after the month in which the Inventory of Services and Facilities (ISF) is completed. The
ISF was completed in November, 24, 2010, which means that the deadline to complete the
service plans for DH-7, DH-9, and DH-12 is August 26, 2011. Tx.LGC §43.056(c) defines "full
municipal services" as "services provided by the annexing municipality within its full-purpose
boundaries, including water and wastewater services and excluding gas or electrical service."
Negotiations for Services:
Per Tx.LGC Section 43.0562, the City and the property owners of an area proposed for
annexation are required to negotiate for the provision of services to the area after annexation. As
such, the Denton County appointed five (5) representatives (identified in
the table below) from each area to negotiate with the City.
Annexation Area DH-7 Annexation Area DH-9 Annexation Area DH-12
Oscar Blankemeyer Judith Grimes Wallace Batey
Aimee Kimberling Kevin McCormack Jeff Dulin
Mark Land Leo Miller Frank James
Charlie Parker Lisa Polster Ginger McCormick
Kevin Vance Wade Willis Randall Smith
Assistant City Manager; P.S.
Arora, DRC Engineer Administrator, and Chuck Russell, Interim Planning Manager. Also in
attendance for the negotiations from the City were Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and
Development; Johnna Matthews, Senior Planner; and Tim Fisher, Assistant Director of Water
Utilities.
State statute provides several guiding principles for establishing Service Plans. First, the Service
Plan may not provide for services in the annexed areas that would reduce the level of fire, police,
and emergency medical services within the city. Second, the Service plan must also, provide the
area with a level of services comparable to or superior to the level of services available in other
parts of the city with land-uses and population densities similar to those reasonably contemplated
or projected in the area; however, if the area had a level of service equal to the service provided
within the boundaries of the city, the Service Plan must maintain that same level of services.
Finally, if the annexed area had a level of services for maintaining infrastructure of the area
superior to the level of services provided within the city, the Service Plan must maintain the
infrastructure of the annexed area at a level of services that is equal or superior to the level of
services previously enjoyed in the annexed area.
In order to facilitate completion of the Service Plan, the City hosted several negotiation sessions
between the City and the County Representatives for each area. The City initiated the discussion
by reviewing the Inventory of Services and providing an initial Service Plan to each of the areas.
The initial Service Plan provided by the City represented a level of service that met the guiding
principles mentioned above, and represented a fair and equitable approach to the provision of
service that was consistent to the initial Service Plans adopted for the 15 areas annexed in May,
2010.
The negotiation meetings provided a good opportunity to have an open dialog on service issues
associated with annexations. Through the course of meeting, additional services beyond those
contemplated in the initial Service Plan were identified by the County Representatives. The City,
in an effort to negotiate a mutually acceptable Service Plan, offered additional services and
opportunities that exceed normal City policies, ordinances or practices currently applied inside
the City limits. While the City was not able to concede to the full extent of the items requested, it
is the opinion of the staff that the City negotiated in good faith and provided the County
Page - 2
Representatives options for services that exceed what otherwise would be provided under normal
conditions.
The city was successful in negotiating mutually acceptable service plans for DH-7 and DH-9 that
the City Council approved on August 16, 2011. As the deadline for approving the service plan
approached, representatives for DH-12 indicated a desire to continue negotiations with the City.
This required the City Council to approve the initial DH-12 service plan, which did not include
any negotiated provisions, so that we could continue discussions. The approval of this plan also
occurred on August 16, 2011.
Since then, staff has continued meeting with representatives from DH-12 to reach consensus on a
negotiated items for services. If accepted, the attached service plan could amend the one adopted
on August 16 to include the negotiated items.
DH-12 Service Plan:
The following is a summary of the Service Plan negotiations for DH-12. DH-12 meetings were
conducted on July 7, 21 & 8, August 8, September 1 & 8 and October 3. Following these
deliberations and pending City Council approval, the City provided multiple offers for additional
services greater than those provided in the initial Service Plan. These items include the
following:
1.Non-Annexation Agreements to eligible property owners for a term to last seven years.
2.Water lines along Mills and Cunningham roads based on a shared cost approach to
recover 50% of the cost of the line. Using a pro-rata methodology, the cost for property
owner connection is based on the number of single family equivalent connections to
recover 50% of the cost. The -
years from date of annexation.
3.Water line along Blagg and Geesling Roads based on a shared cost approach to recover
50% of the cost of the line. Using a pro-rata methodology, the cost for property owner
connection is based on the number of single family equivalent connections to recover
50% of the cost. -years
from date of annexation.
4.Waiving of zoning application fees for a period of one year from date of annexation.
5.Acceptance of supplemental information provided by the DH-12 representatives related
to the current condition of certain County roads in the annexation area.
On October 3, 2011, the DH-12 County Representatives asked staff to prepare a service
plan that included the items above for consideration by City Council on October 11. At the
time that this information was prepared, staff had not received confirmation that the DH-
12 Representatives have accepted and approved these terms. Should we receive
confirmation of their approval prior to the Council meeting on October 11, staff
recommends approval of this ordinance to amend the DH-12 service plan. If the DH-12
representatives do not approve this service plan, staff recommends no action and the
service plan approved on August 16, 2011 will stand.
Page - 3
PRIOR ACTIONS/REVIEWS
4/6/2010 The Denton City Council adopted an Annexation Ordinance to initiate the annexation
of the aforementioned three (3) areas that are not exempted from the 3-year annexation plan
requirement under Section 43.052 of the Tx. LGC.
6/30/2010 In accordance with Tx.LGC 43.052, staff sent Notice of Intent (NOI) to all property
owners, public/private entities, and railroad companies within the proposed annexation areas
website.
11/24/2010 In accordance with Tx.LGC 43.053.g and Tx.LGC 43.056j, staff completed an
Inventory of Services and Facilities (ISF). Subsequent to the completed ISF, staff posted the ISF
and an Initial Service Plan for the proposed annexation areas
1/14/2011 In accordance with Tx.LGC 43.0561.c, staff sent Notices to affected property
st
owners of the 1 Public Hearing.
2/1/2011 The Denton City Council held the first of two (2) required public hearings.
2/15/2011 The Denton City Council held the second of two (2) required public hearings.
2/17/2011 The Denton City Council held a third public hearing. The Denton City Council
made the decision to hold a third public hearing to give area residents another opportunity to
address the City Council due to inclement weather on 2/15/11. This public hearing was not
required by law; however, it was done as a courtesy.
7/7/2011 The City negotiating team met with the County Representative team to establish a
Service Plan.
7/21/2011 The City negotiating team met with the County Representative team to establish a
Service Plan.
7/28/2011 The City negotiating team met with the County Representative team to establish a
Service Plan.
8/8/2011 - The City negotiating team met with the County Representative team to establish a
Service Plan.
9/1/11 The City negotiating team met with the County Representative team to establish a
Service Plan.
9/8/11 The City negotiating team met with the County Representative team to establish a
Service Plan.
10/03/11 The City negotiating team met with the County Representative team to establish a
Service Plan.
Page - 4
EXHIBITS
1.Exhibit 1 Proposed Ordinance to Amend DH-12 Service Plan (Service Plan attached to
Ordinance as Exhibit A)
Prepared by:
Mark A. Cunningham, AICP
Director, Planning and Development Division
Respectfully submitted:
Jon Fortune
Assistant City Manager
Page - 5
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE:
October 11, 2011
DEPARTMENT:
Denton Municipal Electric (DME)
ACM:
Howard Martin, 349-8232
________________________________________________________________________
SUBJECT:
Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving and authorizing the
“stipulation and motion for approval thereon” regarding Public Utilities Commission of Texas
Docket No. 39066 that involves the wholesale transmission cost payments for the period
September 1, 1999 through December 31, 1999; authorizing the settlement of claims and
authorizing the city’s legal counsel of record to execute and deliver the stipulation; authorizing
the City Manager to receive payments and to pay out the applicable payments in such amounts as
provided in said stipulation; and providing an effective date. On September 26, 2011 the Public
Utilities Board considered this matter at its closed meeting.
BACKGROUND:
Public Utilities Commission of Texas (“PUCT”) Docket No. 20381 was initiated on
January 28, 1999 for purposes of establishing wholesale transmission charges within the
Electric Reliability Council of Texas (“ERCOT”) for the year 1999, and a final order was
issued by the PUCT on October 13, 1999.
The final order in PUCT Docket No. 20381 was appealed on various grounds to the
Travis County District Court by various entities, including TMPA, the Cities of Denton,
Garland and Greenville, Brazos, and CPS Energy. Although raising different issues,
plaintiffs in Cause No. 99-14787 challenged portions of the same wholesale transmission
pricing rules that were ultimately invalidated in part by the Texas Supreme Court in
Public Util. Comm’n of Texas v. City Public Service Board of San Antonio (“CPSB”),
53 S.W.3d 310 (Tex. 2001). Of particular relevance to this proceeding were challenges
by TMPA to the PUCT’s statutory authority to adopt the transition mechanism, then
PUCT Substantive Rule 23.67(g) (8), which had the effect of reducing payments by
certain utilities to other utilities, and requiring certain utilities to pay more to other
utilities, for wholesale transmission service than otherwise would have been due under
the Commission’s wholesale transmission pricing rules.
The State District Court issued a final judgment that, among other things, sustained
TMPA’s points of error, reversed the Commission’s final order in Docket No. 20381, and
remanded it to the PUCT to conduct further proceedings consistent with CPSB.
The judgment of the State District Court in Cause No. 99-14787 became final with
respect to the challenge by TMPA to the transition mechanism for determining wholesale
transmission rates. This judgment was appealed by TMPA and the Cities of Denton,
1
Garland and Greenville with respect to other issues relating to the Commission’s
jurisdiction (or lack thereof) over the TMPA/Bryan power sales contract.
The further appeals of the judgment in Cause No. 99-14787 resulted in a decision by the
Supreme Court of Texas, Texas Municipal Power Agency et al. v. Pub. Util. Comm’n of
Texas, 253 S.W.3d 184 (Tex. 2007). Thereafter, settlement negotiations between TMPA
and the Cities of Bryan, Denton, Garland and Greenville culminated in a settlement
agreement executed in December 2009, which resolved outstanding issues between the
parties to that agreement.
CURRENT STATUS:
All parties have worked to settle the issue and have agreed to a Stipulation, subject to the
approval of forty-three entities and municipal governing bodies.
The signatories to the Stipulation desire to completely and finally settle all remaining
issues that arise from or relate to wholesale transmission service and charges within
ERCOT for the period of September 1, 1999 through December 31, 1999, including the
remaining unresolved issues associated with the remand of the Commission’s order in
Docket No. 20381 as well as any other claims that could be asserted by any signatory
against another signatory for the relevant time period.
Each signatory agrees to make and receive payments for wholesale transmission service
for the period of September 1, 1999 through December 31, 1999 (the “Wholesale
Transmission Cost Payments”) in the amounts detailed in Exhibit “A” to the Stipulation,
(copy attached) which is a refund of the transition mechanism payments, plus interest
through October 9, 2003.
Denton is a payor under this settlement and will pay $750,930. TMPA is a payee and in
turn will receive $5,106,902. Denton will receive the benefit of its 21.3% share of the
payment to TMPA, which sum will be paid Denton in the amount of $1,087,770.13. This
results in a net payment as a result of this settlement of $336,840.13 to Denton.
OPTIONS:
Authorize acceptance of the settlement; or reject the settlement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City should accept and approve the settlement contained in the
“Stipulation.”
PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions):
This issue was presented to the Public Utilities Board at their September 26, 2011 meeting in its
Closed Meeting.
FISCAL INFORMATION:
N/A
2
EXHIBITS:
1. Proposed Ordinance with PUCT Docket No. 39066 “Stipulation” - Exhibit “A”
Respectfully submitted,
________________________________
Phil Williams
General Manager
Denton Municipal Electric
Prepared by:
________________________________
Michael S. Grim
Executive Manager – Power, Legislative &
Regulatory Affairs
Denton Municipal Electric
3
ORDINANCE NO. 2011-_______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE “STIPULATION AND MOTION FOR APPROVAL THEREON”
REGARDING PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF TEXAS DOCKET NO. 39066 THAT
INVOLVES THE WHOLESALE TRANSMISSION COST PAYMENTS FOR THE PERIOD
SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1999; AUTHORIZING THE
SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY’S LEGAL COUNSEL OF
RECORD TO EXECUTE AND DELIVER THE STIPULATION; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO RECEIVE PAYMENTS AND TO PAY OUT THE APPLICABLE
PAYMENTS IN SUCH AMOUNTS AS PROVIDED IN SAID STIPULATION; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ON SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 THE PUBLIC UTILITIES
BOARD CONSIDERED THIS MATTER AT ITS CLOSED MEETING.
WHEREAS, the Public Utilities Commission of Texas (“PUCT”) in Docket No. 20381
issued its decision for the purposes of establishing wholesale transmission charges within the
Electric Reliability Council of Texas for the year 1999, and it entered a final order on October
13, 1999; and
WHEREAS, this final order was appealed by a number of entities, including TMPA, CPS
Energy, Brazos, Denton, Garland and Greenville; the matter progressed and challenges to the
PUCT’s authority to adopt a transition mechanism were made by TMPA; the challenges were
largely related to the application of PUCT Substantive Rule 23.67(g)(8) which had the effect of
reducing payments by certain utilities to other utilities, but which required certain utilities to pay
more to other utilities than would have been due utilizing the PUCT’s wholesale transmission
pricing rules; and
WHEREAS, the appeals progressed through the courts, which ultimately resulted in the
decision by the Texas Supreme Court in the case of Texas Municipal Power Agency, et al v Pub.
Util. Comm’n. of Texas, 253 S.W. 3d 184 (Tex. 2007); which decision resulted in a remand to
the trial court to try the case; and
WHEREAS, the parties to this litigation have recognized that it is in their best interests to
settle the case and have agreed upon a “Stipulation and Motion for Approval Thereon”
(“Stipulation”) that fairly settles the differences by and between them, a copy of which
Stipulation is attached hereto as Exhibit “A;” and
WHEREAS, as a result of this settlement the City of Denton will pay in approximately
$750,930 to the parties to the litigation for transmission costs, but will receive in return the sum
of approximately $1,087,779.13 from TMPA, from the parties for transmission costs, resulting in
an approximate net financial benefit to Denton of $336,840.13; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that it is in the best interests of the City, and that
the City should accordingly settle and dispose of this pending litigation and it hereby approves
the signing and delivery of the Stipulation by its outside counsel of record. NOW THEREFORE
1
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. The preamble to this ordinance is hereby adopted and is incorporated by
reference herein for all purposes.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby approves the “Stipulation and Motion for
Approval Thereof” (the “Stipulation”) attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and made a part hereof by
reference; and authorizes Lambeth Townsend, Austin, Texas, the City’s outside legal counsel to
execute and deliver said Stipulation on behalf of the City of Denton, Texas.
SECTION 3. The City Manager and City Attorney are hereby authorized to act on the
City’s behalf in the event any other and further documents are necessary or appropriate to effect
the settlement of this matter.
SECTION 4. The City Manager is hereby authorized to expend funds and to receive
funds, which are necessary or incidental, in accordance with the Stipulation.
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and
approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the _____ day of October, 2011.
___________________________________
MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
By: __________________________________
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY
By: ___________________________________
2
DOCKET N0. 39066 STIPULATION -
EXHIBIT 'A"
TRANSITION MECHANISM AMOUNTS FOR SE0.DEC 1999
INCLUDING INTERESf 70 (lNPUT�==-=-=v> 10/9/2003
Line Syrtem Name Designation SWTE SEC TEIX TMPA TNMP TUEC NEC TXIA WEAT WTUC TOTAI
1 Austin Energy AENX $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($695537) $0 ($43,328) ($5,�98) $0 (52,735,065)
2 8ig Country Electric Coop BCEC 0 0 D 0 0
3 62zosElec[ricCoop BEPC 0 0 0 0 0 (1,520,544) 0 (94(099) (12,591) 0 �$'431)
(3,768,158)
4 82zosPowerMarketing BPMx 18 0 59 12,922 4,031 0 376 0 p q,Zgg 5g358
5 Bryan7e�osUtilities BRYN 0 0 0 0 0 (67,189) 0 (4,186J (560) 0 (367,607)
6 ColemanCountyElearicCoop CCEC 0 0 0 0 0 (6,226) 0 (388) (52) 0 (15,530)
7 Cherokee County FJeccric Coop Associatlon CCECA 0 0 0 0 0 (8,344) 0 (520) (70) 0 (20,816j
8 CityofCollege5tation COCS 203 0 653 143,784 44,857 0 4,186 Q 0 47,716 649,448
9 CityofDenton COD7C 235 0 755 166,251 51,866 0 4,840 D 0 55,173 750,930
10 ClryofFartnernille COFV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 CiryofGarland COGX 179 0 574 126,360 39,421 0 3,679 0 0 41,934 570,749
12 CentralPOwer&LightCompany CPLC 186 0 597 131,469 41,015 0 3,827 0 0 Q3,630 593,825
13 CityPUblicServiceSanAntonlo CPST 1,Z42 0 3,990 878,830 274,174 0 25,585 0 0 J91,651 3,969,540
14 Concho Valley �ectrio Coop NEC 0 0 0 0- 0 (12,839) 0 (800) (107) 0 (32,028)
15 Dewit County Elttnc Coop DCEC 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0
16 �eep Eas[Texas Elec[ric Coop QETEC 0 0 0 0 0 (6,232) 0 (3gg) (5z� p (y��qq)
17 Eart Texas Elecvit Coop ETEC 0 0 0 0 0 (355) (4» 0 14,208
(5,695) 0 ( �
18 farmers Electric Coop FECX 0 0 0 0 0 (57,931) 0 (3,b09) (483) 0 (144,512)
19 Floresvilfe Electric PowerSystem FEPS 0 0 0 0 0 (20,253) 0 [I,262) (169} 0 (50,522y
20 Gnyson Counry Elearlc Coop GCEC 0 0 0 U 0 (21,133) 0 (1,316) (176) D (SZ717)
21 Greenville Electric Utility System GEUS 40 0 127 27,963 8,724 0 814 0 0 9,280 126,303
22 CityofG2nbury GRBX 31 0 99 21,87b 6,825 0 637 0 0 7,260 98,812
23 Hourton County Elec[n� Coop HCEC 0 0 0 0 0 (79,269) 0 (1,200) (161) 0 (48,069)
24 CityofHeame HERN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
25 Houston Light & PowerCompany HIPC 1,743 0 5,600 I,233,442 384,805 0 35,909 0 0 409,334 5,571,269
26 CapRockHuntCOliin HUCO 26 0 82 18,150 5,663 0 528 0 D 6,023 81,983
27 KaufrnanCounty£lec[ricCooperative KGEC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 9
28 LamarCountyElecvicCoop LCEC 0 0 0 0 0
(s,sze) o �sso� pa) o �z�,oia�
zs lowerCobradoRiverAUthority �cap o o a o o �z,ssz,�zs) o �iaa,asz} �iy,s6i� o {s,eas,ssi)
30 Medina ElectrltCOOp MEIX 0 0 0 0 0 (158,808) 0 (9,893) (I,326) 0 (396,758)
31 Magic Valley ElectricCoop MVEC 0 0 0 0 0 (258,178} 0 (16,083) (2,152) 0 (694,042)
32 MidWestElectricCoopentive MwEC U 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p p
33 Publf� Utilfxles Board, Brownsvitle PUBX 167 0 536 328,006 36,815 0 3,436 0 0 39,162 533,016
34 RaybumCountyElectricCoop RCEC 51 0 164 36,047 11,246 0 1,049 0 0 11,963 162,818
35 RioGrande Eledric Coop RGEC 0 0 0 0 0
36 SouthwestemElectNtServiceComparry SESC 0 0 - 0 0 � (14,429) 0 (899) (120j 0 (35.994)
37 San Miguel ElectncCoop SMEC 0 0 0 � 0 (49,835) 0 (3,106) (415) 0 (llA,318)
38 SouthTexas Ekc[ric Coop STEC 0 0 0 O � �232�23Q� � (14,4 0) (1,936�) 0� (579,31�6�
39 SouthTexas/MedinadectricCooperative 57ECMEIX 0 0 0 0 0 (270,248) 0 (16,835) (2,Z53) 0 (674,353)
40 Sov[hwertTe�casElectricCoop SWTE 0 0 0 0 0
41 Stamford Electric Coope2tive SEC 0 0 0 0 0 'z $ 0� Q �10� (20� 0 �� Z10�
42 TaylorElectricCoop TEC% 0 0 0 0 0
43 TexasMunicipalPOwerAgency TMPA 0 D 0 0 0 �9�Z95j 0 (579) (77) 0 (23,188)
44 TexasNewMexicoPowerCompany TNMP 0 p p 0 O �z'��'��� o (127,530) (17,064) 0 (5,106,902)
(638,681) 0 (39,786) {5,324) Q (1,593,233)
45 TU Etectric TUEC 2,893 D 9,295 2,047,207 638,681 0 59,601 0 0 679,393 9,246,923
46 TnaityValleyElectricCoop NEC 0 D Q 0 0 (59,603) 0 j3,713) (497) 0 (148,678)
47 TexW Elec[ricCoop TXIA 180 D 579 127,530 39,786 0 3,713 0 0 42,323 576,035
48 CityofWeatherford WEAT 24 0 77 17,064 5,324 0 497 0 0 5,663 77,077
49 WestTexasUtilities WNC 0 0 0 0 0 (679,393) 0 (42,323) (5,663) 0 �1,694,793)
50
51 TOTAI _$7,217 $0 $23,188 $5,106,902 $1,593,233 ($9,246,923) $148,578 {$576,035� �$77,OT/) $1,694793 $0
52
53 N07E: Pasitive amounts are amounu to be PAID bythe row entlty
54 to the column entiry. Negafive amounts are amounts to be
55 RECEIVED by the row eMiry from the column entity.
�/zi/zou
Page 4 of 4