Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 18, 2011 Agenda AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL October 18, 2011 After determining that a quorum is present, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas will 3:30 p.m. convene in a Work Session on Tuesday, October 18, 2011 at in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: WORK SESSION 1. Citizen Comments on Consent Agenda Items This section of the agenda allows citizens to speak on Consent Agenda Items only. Each speaker will be given a total of three (3) minutes to address any items he/she wishes that are listed on the Consent Agenda. A Request to Speak Card should be completed and returned to the City Secretary before Council considers this item. 2. Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for October 18, 2011. 3. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the draft Update to the City of Denton Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Mobility Plan. 4. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the execution of a contract for Professional Services for Wallace Roberts and Todd to serve as the consultant on the update to the City of Denton Comprehensive Plan. 5. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the alignment of the Denton Municipal Electric Northeast Denton Transmission Line Upgrade Rebuild Project. Following the completion of the Work 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. When items for consideration are not listed under the Closed Meeting section of the agenda, the City Council will not conduct a Closed Meeting and will convene at the time listed below for its regular or special called meeting. 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. CLOSED MEETING 1.Closed Meeting: A.Deliberations regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters – Under Texas Government Code Sec. 551.086; and Consultation with Attorneys – Under Texas Government Code, Sec. 551.071. 1.Discuss, deliberate, and receive a report and presentation from Staff regarding public power competitive and financial matters regarding Denton Municipal Electric’s electric transmission operations, its transmission system needs, and the current regulatory requirements for DME; further discuss, deliberate and provide Staff with direction City of Denton City Council Agenda October 18, 2011 Page 2 regarding the proposed “Transmission Operator Consulting Services Agreement” by and between the City of Denton, Texas and the City of Garland, Texas, who is a “Transmission Operator,” which agreement provides for Garland’s cooperation, supervision and assistance regarding Denton’s qualification and certification as a “Transmission Operator,” being a mandatory Federal regulatory requirement for utilities attaining the level of transmission assets owned and to be operated by DME. Receive a consultation from the City’s attorneys regarding possible legal issues involved in retaining services for assistance from third-party transmission operators, where a public discussion of this legal matter would conflict with the duty of the City’s attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. 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. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: REGULAR MEETING 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. U.S. Flag B. Texas Flag “Honor the Texas Flag – I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible.” 2. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A.Proclamations/Awards 3. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. B. Receive citizen reports from the following: 1. Rochelle Cummings regarding green initiative projects. City of Denton City Council Agenda October 18, 2011 Page 3 4. CONSENT AGENDA Each of these items is recommended by the Staff and approval thereof will be strictly on the basis of the Staff recommendations. Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the City Manager or his designee to implement each item in accordance with the Staff recommendations. The City Council has received background information and has had an opportunity to raise questions regarding these items prior to consideration. Listed below are bids, purchase orders, contracts, and other items to be approved under the Consent Agenda (Agenda Items A – L). This listing is provided on the Consent Agenda to allow Council Members to discuss or withdraw an item prior to approval of the Consent Agenda. If no items are pulled, Consent Agenda Items A – L below will be approved with one motion. If items are pulled for separate discussion, they may be considered as the first items following approval of the Consent Agenda. A.Consider adoption of an ordinance adopting a schedule of fees for use of certain park facilities; superseding all prior fees in conflict with such schedule and providing for severability and an effective date. The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommends approval (6-0). B.Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute contracts through the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network for the acquisition of two trucks, two Backhoe Loaders, and one Skid Steer Loader for the City of Denton Street and Traffic Departments; and providing an effective date (File 4839–Trucks and Heavy Equipment for Street and Traffic Departments awarded to Southwest International Trucks in the amount of $190,034.31, Holt-Cat in the amount of $173,016, and Bobcat Co. in the amount of $47,766.04 for a total award amount of $410,816.35). C.Consider adoption of a an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with CP&Y, Inc. of Dallas, Texas for Engineering Services, Design and Development, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Interface, and other consulting services associated with the City of Denton’s Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Facility and providing an effective date (File 4840–in an amount not to exceed $135,000). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (7-0). D.Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas providing for, authorizing, and approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Retaining Wall Materials utilized in the construction of a screening wall at the City of Denton Landfill. The requested materials are from only one source and in accordance with Chapter 252.022 of the Texas Local Government Code and City of Denton Purchasing Policy Chapter 2, Section III. Such purchases are exempt from the requirements of competitive bidding; and providing an effective date (File 4834–Three Year contract for the Purchase of Retaining Wall Materials for City of Denton Landfill awarded to Stone Strong, LLC in the estimated amount of $150,000 annually). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). City of Denton City Council Agenda October 18, 2011 Page 4 E.Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. for transportation services as set forth in the contract; and providing an effective date (File 4848–Professional Service Agreement for Transportation Consultant Services to Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. for a total amount of $126,000). F.Consider approval of a resolution allowing the Denton Community Theatre to be the sole participant allowed to sell alcoholic beverages at the Beaujolais on November 17, 2011, upon certain conditions; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an agreement in conformity with this resolution; and providing for an effective date.Staff recommends approval of Denton Community Theatre’s request to allow alcohol to be sold in the Civic Center for the Beaujolais event. G.Consider a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance for the purpose of the first Denton Day of the Dead, sponsored by the Industrial Street Guild. The event will be held on Industrial Street on Saturday, October 29, 2011, from 11:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. The exception is specifically requested to increase hours of operation for amplified sound on Saturday from 10:00 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. The amplified sound will not go above the allowable 70 decibels for an outdoor concert. Staff recommends approval of the request. H.Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas to declare the intent to reimburse expenditures from the Wastewater Fund with Certificates of Obligation with an aggregate maximum principal amount equal to $350,000 to allow the Wastewater Department to purchase and acquire a piece of equipment for the beneficial reuse division, and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). I.Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas to declare the intent to reimburse expenditures from the Solid Waste Fund with Certificates of Obligation with an aggregate maximum principal amount equal to $2,261,655 to allow the Solid Waste Department to purchase and acquire refuse and recycling vehicles and equipment in order to continue providing solid waste refuse and recycling collection operations; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). J.Consider adoption of an ordinance on second reading of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, granting to Denton County Electric Cooperative, Inc., D/B/A CoServ Electric, its successors and assigns, the non-exclusive right to use and occupy rights-of-way within the City of Denton for the construction and operation of an electric transmission and distribution system; prescribing conditions governing the use of the public rights-of-way; providing for compensation therefor, providing for a term of said franchise; providing for written acceptance of this franchise; finding that the meeting at which this ordinance is passed is open to the public; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date. City of Denton City Council Agenda October 18, 2011 Page 5 K.Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council approving a “Transmission Operator Consulting Services Agreement” by and between the City of Denton, Texas and the City of Garland, Texas in the amount not-to-exceed $350,000; directing the City Attorney or her designee to seal Exhibit “C” to the Agreement and deliver said Exhibit “C” to the City Secretary for deposit; as the said Exhibit “C” contains information that is confidential, competitive, sensitive and deals with the security of the DME system; which Exhibit “C” constitutes a Public Power Competitive and Financial Matter in accordance with Section 552.133 of the Texas Government Code; authorizing the City Manager to execute and deliver said agreement; providing for the expenditure of funds; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board has considered this agreement. L.Consider approval of the minutes of: September 6, 2011 September 13, 2011 September 20, 2011 5.PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Hold a public hearing and consider recommendations regarding the preferred alignment of the Denton Municipal Electric Northeast Denton Transmission Line Upgrade Rebuild Project. 6. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. B. Receive citizen reports from the following: 1. Donna Woodfork regarding Code Enforcement unfairness. 7. CONCLUDING ITEMS A. Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting AND Under Section 551.0415 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, provide reports about items of community interest regarding which no action will be taken, to include: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen; a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality; or an announcement involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda. City of Denton City Council Agenda October 18, 2011 Page 6 B.Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. C. Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 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 ___________________, 2011 at ________o'clock (a.m.) (p.m.) __________________________________________ CITYSECRETARY NOTE: THECITYOFDENTONCITYCOUNCILCHAMBERSISACCESSIBLEIN ACCORDANCEWITHTHEAMERICANSWITHDISABILITIESACT.THECITYWILL PROVIDESIGNLANGUAGEINTERPRETERSFORTHEHEARINGIMPAIREDIF REQUESTEDATLEAST48HOURSINADVANCEOFTHESCHEDULEDMEETING. PLEASECALLTHECITYSECRETARY'SOFFICEAT349-8309ORUSE TELECOMMUNICATIONSDEVICESFORTHEDEAF(TDD)BYCALLING1-800-RELAY- TXSOTHATASIGNLANGUAGEINTERPRETERCANBESCHEDULEDTHROUGHTHE CITYSECRETARY’SOFFICE. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Utility Administration ACM: Howard Martin, 349-8232 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the draft Update to the City of Denton Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Mobility Plan. BACKGROUND With spiking gasoline prices in 2008, an increased interest in alternative modes of transportation was evidenced at the time. Engineering staff assembled a committee to look at options of connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists throughout the city. This staff committee identified a number of potential origins and destinations in the city and various issues that would need to be considered as the process moved forward. The focus shifted to the downtown DCTA train station and facilitation of pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between it and the downtown area, UNT, TWU and various other origins and destinations throughout the city. The possibility of hiring a consultant was discussed with the Traffic Safety Commission and received positive public feedback. It was decided that in anticipation of hiring a consultant and updating the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component to the Mobility Plan that a staff facilitated public meeting would be useful to garner public feedback. Engineering staff facilitated a public meeting on March 22, 2010. The target audience for the meeting was primarily the Denton area cycling community. The meeting was well attended with a total of 58 people listed on the sign-in sheet. The meeting began with attendees picking up questionnaires on how often they cycle, what limits them from cycling, and what would encourage them to cycle more. They were asked to fill out and return the questionnaires before leaving the Public Meeting. A presentation from City staff outlining current codes and plans (Denton Development Code; Denton Mobility Plan; Parks, Recreation & Trail Master Plan; UNT Campus Bicycle Plan, NCTCOG Veloweb;) from the City as well as from other planning organizations, bicycle design and guidance manuals, existing facilities and possible future projects. The next part of the meeting divided the attendees into groups and each group was charged with marking origins, destinations, and routes they would like to see in Denton on street maps. A few attendees expressed their appreciation of staff for seeking their input and were very favorable to the city creating a plan to address bicycle facilities. Attendees were also appreciative of staff’s research into other community bike plans. The questionnaire and maps were provided to the consultant hired by the City. The City Engineer prepared a white paper entitled “Bicycle Connectivity in Denton, Texas – Overview, Options and Opportunities” and presented it to City Council on April 13, 2010. The white paper outlined the background and origins of the current state of bicycle connectivity and accommodation in the city; presented legal, design, and economic considerations for various forms of accommodation; provided information with regard to ongoing projects that are beneficial to bicycle connectivity; and presented information and opportunities available to the City as it moves forward. The white paper recommended cataloging the City’s existing assets, moving forward with contract negotiations with the consultant, establishing a focus group to consider and contribute to matters involving bicycle accommodation, and meeting with UNT research personnel to discuss possible involvement and contributions of graduate students. Freese and Nichols, Inc (FNI) was hired as the consultant to assist in the identification of origins and destinations, assessment of the current roadway network and to prepare, with guidance from City Staff, an update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Component of the Mobility Plan. The scope of services for FNI is briefly outlined below: Phase 1 1.1Phase Initiation Meeting 1.2Origins and Destinations for Bicycling 1.3Collector and Arterial Network and Greenway Corridors to Accommodate Bicycling 1.4Typical Section Hierarchy 1.5Phase 1 Documentation Phase 2 2.1Phase Initiation Meeting 2.2Suitability/Adaptability of Collector and Arterial Roadways for Bicycling and Walking 2.3Documentation of Recommended Network and Facility Improvements 2.4Bicycle Plan Update Draft Report 2.5Bicycle Plan Update Final Report Currently, staff and the consultant are at task 2.4 – Bicycle Plan Draft Report As recommended in the April 13, 2010 City Council Meeting and in the white paper, a focus group was created. The focus group is comprised of various residents and selected stakeholder groups including: DCTA TxDOT Parks and Recreation Denton Municipal Electric Denton Police Department University of North Texas Denton ISD Bike Denton Querencia Community Bike Shop (Non-profit) Intelligent Transportation Solutions (ITS) Members of the group also represent a wide range of bicycle user types, from occasional users to casual riders to commuters to experienced long distance recreational riders. The focus group has met four times to date with City staff and the consultant. The group has provided valuable feedback, recommendations, and insight on the preparation of an update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Mobility PlanUpdate. On April 13, 2011, City staff and FNI facilitated a Public Meeting at the Denton Civic Center. Members of the focus group attended and helped explain maps and answer questions from the attendees. The meeting began with maps of current plans, typical roadway sections, and alternative sections that incorporate other types of bicycle facilities than those shown on the typical sections. Maps were also set out on tables for attendees to mark on: On one map attendees identified origins and destinations and on other maps attendees marked routes. Focus group members were stationed at these tables to explain the maps’ purpose and to attempt to answer any questions that the attendees might have had. A “dot board” was set up near the entrance that listed ways that the City could spend money on infrastructure with the assumption that funding was available and could be used in any conceivable way. Attendees were given dot stickers that represented money and asked to place the dot stickers on the board to represent how they would like to have money spent. The two most frequently selected infrastructure spending areas were: 1) Designate more lanes on streets and 2) Provide bike-friendly crossings of major streets. After the initial interaction between the attendees and the focus group with the maps, the focus group members were formally introduced to the audience and then the consultant made a presentation on aspects of the draft plan. After the presentation, attendees broke out into groups with maps focused on specific areas of the city in which they could more clearly mark preferences for bicycle routes. Attendees were also given cards and asked to write down and prioritize their top three places that they would like to see a bicycle facility: The top three projects so noted were Oak, Hickory, and Elm Street. Specific types of facilities and the limits (from where to where) were not given. The Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component to the Denton Mobility Plan is currently in draft form. The draft plan identifies different types of users, suggests a range of facilities (on street and off street), contains clearly defined goals, and recommends education and enforcement components, and incorporated public input. All of these aspects are needed to create a well developed plan. The draft is broken into seven sections: 1.Purpose and Need This section describes the need for the plan and how public involvement was garnered during the draft process. 2.Goals and Objectives This section clearly defines the two main goals of the plan and sets forth objectives as a means to achieve those goals. The objectives are categorized into five areas: accessibility, safety, interagency coordination, education, and funding. 3.Existing Conditions There are plans and codes from different agencies that address pedestrian and cyclist facilities from the City of Denton to North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). This section briefly describes these plans and codes. The section also, identifies origins and destinations, barriers to travel, and discusses the different types of cyclists. Understanding the current plans and codes, where users want to go, the significant barriers they face, and the different type of users is necessary to create a well developed plan. 4.Bicycle Facility Design This section focuses on design standards and the different types of facilities used to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists. It also includes construction cost ranges for the facilities. 5.Bicycle Facility In this section the plan map can be found as well as development criteria, traffic calming techniques, bicycle amenities, and roadway sections. Public input as to the prioritization of roadways can be found on the last page of this section. 6.Implementation Plan The final component to the plan is how to implement it. This section creates action items and a time line in which the action items should be implemented. The action items are categorized into five areas: 1.Organize a bicycle program 2.Plan and construct needed facilities 3.Promote bicycling and walking 4.Educate bicyclists and the public 5.Enforce laws and regulations The time line is organized into immediate, ongoing, short term, and long term time frames. 7.Appendices The appendices include cost ranges (does not include right-of-way, needed rehabilitation, or and design costs) for each roadway identified on the plan map, possible funding sources and City roadway standards. The next step in this process will be to present the update to the Planning and Zoning Commission during a Work Session meeting, and then Public Hearings at both Planning and Zoning and City Council meetings. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW 1.March 22, 2010 - Staff facilitated Public Meeting 2.April 5, 2010 - Traffic Safety Commission 3.April 13, 2010 – City Council 4. July 20, 2011 - Planning and Zoning Commission 5. August 1, 2011 – Parks, Recreation, and Beautification Board 6.September 12, 2011 – Traffic Safety Commission 7.September 13, 2011 – Mobility Committee OPTIONS 1.Recommend that staff proceed to Planning and Zoning Work Session with the draft to the Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Mobility Plan as presented. 2.Direct staff to proceed to the Planning and Zoning Work Session after reviewing and possibly incorporating comments into the draft plan. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends proceeding to the Planning and Zoning Work Session with the draft update as written. EXHIBITS 1.City of Denton Draft Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Denton Mobility Plan 2.Map – Draft Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Mobility Plan Prepared and Respectfully Submitted by: Jim Coulter Director of Water Utilities EXHIBIT 1 Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Denton Mobility Plan September, 2011 With Contributions by: Bicycle Plan Focus Group City of Denton Staff City of Denton Residents DRAFT 10/05/11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS City of Denton staff members, elected and appointed officials, key stakeholders and the Bicycle Plan Focus Group provided knowledge assistance and insight throughout the process of developing this Bicycle Plan. The contributions and efforts of the following are appreciated and helped to make this Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Denton Mobility Plan possible. Denton City Council City of Denton Staff Bicycle Plan Focus Group Mark Burroughs, Mayor Noreen Housewright, P.E. Kati Trice, Querencia Community Bike Pete Kamp, At Large Place 5, Mayor Pro Tem Clay Riggs, E.I.T. Shop Kevin Roden, District 1 Jim Coulter, Director of Utilities Amber Briggle, Bike Denton Dalton Gregory, District 2 Donald L. McLaughlin, City of Denton DME Jim Engelbrecht, District 3 Chris Watts, District 4 Jim Mays, City of Denton Parks and James King, At Large Place 6 Recreation Department Jennifer Murray, UNT Student Joe Richmond, UNT Administration Freese and Nichols, Inc. Bill Knight, Denton ISD Kevin St. Jacques, P.E., Project Manager Chris Behnke, Corinth Cycling Brandon Gonzalez, Project Planner Praveen Meghelal, UNT Faculty John Polster, Intelligent Transportation Solutions Tom Woods, Denton Police Department PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 1 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN CONTENTS Traffic Calming................................................................. 39 Table of Contents Bicycle Amenities .............................................. Purpose and Need ............................................... Possible Roadway Design .................................................... 41 Public Input ................................................... Typical Facility Development Costs ..................................... 43 Goals and Objectives ........................................... System Development Criteria ............................................. 44 Goal Statement ................................................. Bicycle Plan Map ............................................... Objectives...................................................... Proposed Facilities ........................................................ Existing Conditions ............................................ Prioritization ............................................................. Past Planning Efforts ....................................................... Implementation Plan ............................................ Conditions in Denton ........................................... Action Area 1: Organize a Bicycle Program ......................... 50 Existing Conditions for Bicyclists and Pedestrians .............. 19 Action Area 2: Plan and Construct Needed Facilities .......... 52 Existing Barriers ............................................................ Action Area 3: Promote Bicycling ........................................ 53 Origins and Destinations ....................................... Action Area 4: Educate Bicyclists and the Public ............... Bicycle and Pedestrian Crashes .......................................... 23 Action Area 5: Enforce Laws and Regulations ..................... 55 The Design BicyclistŽ ......................................................... Appendicies .................................................... Current Facility Design Practice .......................................... 27 Appendix A: Immediate and Short-Range On-Street Facility Bicycle Facilities Design ...................................... Projects ....................................................... Design Standards ............................................... Appendix B: Funding ............................................ Bicycle Facility Types .......................................................... Appendix C: City of Denton Roadway Design Standards .... 76 Roadway Intersection Design ............................................. 37 Signage and Striping ........................................... PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 2 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND NEED States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations across the country are completing plans to address bicycle and pedestrian issues, in part to respond to the requirements of the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and its successors, the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA21) and the Safe, Accountable, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy of Users (SAFETEA-LU). Many of these plans are echoing the overall goal targets set by the U.S. Department of Transportation in 1994: (1) To double the percentage of trips made by foot and bicycle in the United States, (2) To simultaneously reduce the number of injuries and fatalities suffered by bicyclists and pedestrians by ten percent. As the City of Denton continues to experience population increases in the coming decades, it will be important to address the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians as alternative modes of transportation, focusing on connectivity between education cente entertainment, recreation and neighborhoods. With supportive land use and transportation policies, walking and The Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Denton Mobility Plan bicycling can be practical alternatives to builds upon nationwide experience and advancements in bicycling planning and design. The driving (especially for short trips), intention of this update is to guide the development of a network within Denton where contribute greatly to the quality and residents can choose to bicycle or walk to their destinations and to provide recreational vitality of the street scene, and help opportunities for walking and bicycling to encourage a healthy and active lifestyle. This update achieve environmental goals. Pedestrian seeks to coordinate past and on-going planning efforts, facilitate public involvement and and bike improvements to intersections, create guidance for the development and implementation of an interconnected network of sidewalks and other facilities can improve designated on-street bicycle facilities as well as off-roadway trails and sidepaths. access and safety, and are particularly important for children, senior citizens, The ultimate outcome of this planning effort will be to create consensus, to identify bicycle and people with disabilities, low to moderate pedestrian corridors, to classify types of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, to prioritize initial income residents, and people who choose to use this mode of transportation.  efforts and to ultimately guide decision making by City staff and other community decision makers. This update will be a key component of previous citywide planning efforts which seek - The Denton Plan. The Comprehensive to make Denton a unique, attractive, diverse and sustainable community for current and Planning Section of the Planning & future residents who will call the City home Development Department. P 145. Adopted th December 7, 1999. Ordinance 99-439 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 3 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN INTRODUCTION Health Quality of Life Mobility Provides alternative and connected Encourages exercise through Creates opportunities for forms of transportation to give recreation or by means of daily residents to access recreation, residents options for performing transportation, providing parks, open spaces, public their daily needs. numerous personal and societal facilities and schools. health benefits. Sustainability Economy Environment Allows community roadway Enhances a communitys livability Reduces consumption of fossil network to accommodate more fuels and provides a non- and its ability to attract and retain intense development. motorized, clean mode of business and commerce. transportation. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 4 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN INTRODUCTION Public Input Public input is perhaps the most essential component of creating this bicycle and pedestrian update. This is a plan for the community of Denton which ultimately will contribute to the overall quality of life and community vision for its residents. A Focus Group comprised of various residents of the City of Denton was created to guide input and derive feasible and opportunistic locations for bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the community. The Bicycle Focus Group was comprised of representatives from selected stakeholder groups including: Bicycling Advocates Public Transportation Agency Officials (DCTA, TxDOT) Parks and Recreation Officials Focus Group Public Meeting Public Safety University of North Texas Denton County (ITS) City Staff Two Public Meetings were held during the Input Bike Plan Update process: March 22, 2010 April 13, 2011 City Universities Representatives PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 5 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN DRAFT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Goal Statement GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Based on guidance from the Focus Group, GOAL local agencies, staff, suggestions from user The first step toward advancing bicycle and groups, and incorporating the goals of the pedestrian mobility and safety in the City National Bicycling and Walking Study, the of Denton is to establish a common vision following goals were established for the or goal statement for bicyclist and City of Denton to make it a better and pedestrian mobility, and to define a set of safer place to walk and ride bicycles. objectives by which progress in achieving desired outcomes can be measured. These Goal #1: Increase the awareness and goals and objectives guide not only the acceptance by local policy makers, development of the Update to the planners, engineers and motorists in Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component Denton of bicycling and walking as viable of the Denton Mobility Plan, but also its modes of transportation and legitimate implementation. users of the publically-financed transportation infrastructure. OBJECTIVE Goal #2: Promote the increased use and safety of bicycling and walking in Denton through the development of a comprehensive yet financially feasible system of bicyclist and pedestrian facilities, support facilities and programs. Action PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 6 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN DRAFT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Accessibility Safety Objectives Accessibility through alternative modes of Important safety considerations must be To achieve these goals, objectives have transportation is an important an integral part of the development of a been established to set targets and consideration. Access should be provided bicycle and pedestrian plan. The provision provide measures of the success of the at the neighborhood, area, and regional of safer routes for cyclists and pedestrians plan towards meeting the stated goals. levels to accommodate bicycling and is of prime importance. The objectives are grouped into the walking to major employment centers and following categories: activity centers; recreational facilities; community facilities; transit facilities; and Accessibility other major destinations. Safety Interagency Coordination Objective 3: Promote adherence with Objective 1: Consider implementing portions Education traffic laws by bicyclists and pedestrians of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkages Plan Funding in Denton. each year as opportunities arise and as budget allows. Step up ticketing of unsafe bicyclist The following sections outline each area of and pedestrian behaviors. Designate bike routes as soon as they form a functional element of the network. emphasis and specific objectives related to Encourage lights and helmets for Restripe roadways to provide bike facilities as bicyclists, in accordance with state the development and implementation of connectivity, resurfacing projects occur and law. this plan. traffic volumes allow. Incorporate bicycle facilities into new Objective 4: Attempt to Reduce the improvement and maintenance projects. Todays emphasis on bicycle number of bicyclist and pedestrian Construct trails as bond and grant money facilities focuses on providing a traffic accidents. become available. Objective 2: Encourage establishing Denton Establish baseline measures and combination of ample road as a bicycle activity and sport destination methodology for assessment. space to safely accommodate within the next 10 years. Develop a City bicycling website bicyclists and motorists side-by- Promote the DCTA connection to Downtown and document the bicycling and side as well as separate multi-Denton, UNT, TWU and ease of access to pedestrian safety education destinations by bicycle and walking. programs initiated since the use trials exclusively for non- Collaborate with local bicycling advocates and baseline year. motorized use.  clubs to establish a regional annual bicycling Prepare the accident reduction event in Denton. estimate for the target years. Implement a bicyclist and pedestrian way - The National Bicycling and Walking Study: Identify and address high volume, finding system of signs, maps and other Transportation Choices for a Changing unavoidable interchanges. information. . United States Department of America Identify and address high crash Connect parks, trails and community Transportation. Page XIII. locations and types. destinations with bicycle and pedestrian facilities. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 7 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN DRAFT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Interagency coordination Education Funding There are numerous governmental Bicyclists and pedestrians must be The ability to fund the implementation of jurisdictions and public service entities provided information and guidance in the plan elements is often the largest that have control of public rights-of-way, regard to proper and safe use of the obstacle towards creation of a bicycle and which may potentially be used to provide roadway and trail corridors. Motorists pedestrian community. bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Public must understand and respect the presence entities as well as organizations in the of bicyclists/pedestrians when traveling private sector, such as Bike Denton, can along roadways, on or off the designated and should become partners in the network. Developing and disseminating development and implementation of the information is a key component of a bikeway and walkway system. successful education and safety program. Objective 5: Promote Coordination among Objective 8: Strategically Pursue funding Objective 6: Provide a regular program of implementing agencies in regards to the bicycling proficiency and safety each year. for facilities and program assistance. Continue to encourage Denton ISD to Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component. Identify City funding and resources for conduct its Bike RodeosŽ to educate implementation of the Plan. Establish clear roles and responsibilities students on bicycle safety. Identify non-City sources of funding for for Key Staff of all participating agencies Encourage UNT and TWU to provide bicycle and pedestrian facilities and in development, operations and information as part of the student programs. maintenance of the Pedestrian and orientation program. Develop strategies which prioritize Bicycle Linkage Component. Parks and Recreation Department should objectives and set strategies for pursuing Designate personnel to serve as liaison collaborate with the Police Department to funding each year. between City staff and community offer Smart Cycling Program.Ž bicycling and pedestrian groups. Objective 9: Promote public/private Designate City staff to coordinate the City Objective 7: Provide a regular program of partnerships in development, bicycle and pedestrian program with that bicycle and pedestrian safety information to implementation, operation and of adjacent cities and NCTCOG. motorists and the general public in Denton maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian Ensure project coordination between City each year. projects and Denton ISD Safe Routes to facilities. Compile and evaluate the available motorist School projects. Provide on-line resources on the City of and public information materials and best practices each year. Denton Website. Prepare and execute an annual public information program on proper response to pedestrians and bicyclists on roadways. Develop and execute a public awareness campaign for bicycling and walking each year. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 8 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES EXISTING CONDITIONS It is important in any planning effort to understand the context E which options are being developed. An examination of existing xisting Conditions conditions helps to paint the baseline picture of where bicycle and pedestrian planning currently stands in the City of Denton. For purposes of this Plan, an examination of past planning efforts will be Past Planning Efforts crucial in order to understand what has been accomplished thus far as well as to coordinate and build upon past planning efforts. Existing Conditions in Denton Examining regulatory controls, such as current design standards within the Denton Development Code, will guide the formulation o Existing Barriers for Bicyclists policies, programs and improvements. In addition to past planning and Pedestrians efforts, it is helpful to examine factors which may impact bicycle and pedestrian usage within the City. These include population growth, Origins and Destinations land use, transit oriented development, existing bicycle and pedestrian conditions, barriers and origins and destinations within Bicycle and Pedestrian the community. Crashes The Design BicyclistŽ Current Facility Design Some of the planning and design focus on Practice transportation systems based primarily on motor vehicle movements has begun to shift in the past few years in Denton. With spiking gas prices in 2008, an increased sensitivity and interest in multi-modal and alternative transportation was evidenced.Ž Payne, Frank G. Bicycle Connectivity in Denton, Texas, Overview, Options and Opportunities. City of Denton Water Utilities, 2010, Pg 4 (View full document on City of Denton Website) PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 9 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES and build upon preliminary bicycle and classification standards is an extremely Past Planning Efforts pedestrian efforts outlined within The useful tool for City staff as well as for A number of notable planning efforts have Denton Plan. developers and citizens. taken place prior to the creation of this This information is particularly important City of Denton Mobility Plan update. In order to ensure that when discussing where future bicycle and recommendations within this document The City of Denton Mobility Plan is pedestrian facilities may be located. Due both consider and build upon past comprised of four separate maps: to the fact that many of the Citys current planning efforts, a crucial component of Roadway Component, Connectivity roadway facilities are not built to capacity, analysis consisted of analyzing Component, Pedestrian and Bicycle significant opportunities exist to include recommendations and goals within past Linkages Component and Rail and Trucking bicycle and pedestrian facilities in planning efforts related to transportation Component. Together, all of these maps conjunction with roadway expansion or and mobility conducted at both the local help to provide for transportation planning improvement projects. and regional levels. throughout the City of Denton. Out of the four maps, the Roadway Component and The Denton Plan the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkages In December of 1999, the City Council Component most heavily influence bicycle adopted The Denton Plan 1999-2000 as and pedestrian facilities in Denton. the Citys guiding Comprehensive Plan. The roadway component of the City of The Comprehensive Plan sets forth goals Denton Mobility Plan is a map that and recommendations to guide the City identifies the classification and schematic forward, both in terms of land use and routing or location of existing and future development decisions, but also in regards roadways in the City. Denton roads are to aesthetics, quality of life and mobility. classified as residential, collector, Chapter seven of the Comprehensive Plan secondary arterial, primary arterial or specifically addresses Dentons freeway. The map also identifies whether transportation goals for the year 2020, or not existing streets are built to including pedestrian and bicycle classification standards. Many of Denton recommendations. roadways are not built to full classification standards, meaning that they currently The intention of the Comprehensive Plan is exist at a capacity or condition less than to guide decisions and set the framework that designated per Code, as highlighted for growth and public policy within the on the map. Knowing where these existing community. This update will seek to build and future roadways are, their upon key existing and future destinations classifications, and whether they meet defined within the Plan and will consider PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 10 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES motorist traffic on these streets allow for Denton Development Code the bicyclists and motorists to avoid and Example Sidewalk/Sidepath accommodate each other. The adoption of The Denton Plan required a comprehensive rewrite of the City of On Road Bicycle facilities are to be Dentons zoning and development provided on arterial roadways for those regulations leading to the adoption of a designed and constructed under the new development code for the City, The current Roadway Design Criteria Manual. Denton Development Code (DDC). Specific This type of facility is a shared wider mandates for Pedestrian/Bicycle Facility outside lane. The wider lane is intended to Standards within the DDC include: provide enough operating space for advanced bicyclists (See page 26 for All Developments shall provide for the bicycle user type definitions) and motorists pedestrian and bicycle facilities necessary Example On Road Bicycle Facility to navigate the lane. Basic and child to serve pedestrian/bicycle traffic to, from bicycle riders are discouraged from using or across the development in accordance these arterial roadways due to less with the Transportation Criteria Manual experienced skillsets. AASHTO states that and the Bicycle/Pedestrian component of advanced or experienced bicycle riders are typically more comfortable riding with the Mobility Plan. If a development is motor vehicle traffic; however, they need proposed within a 1/2 mile of public sufficient operating space on the traveled elementary or secondary school, a way or shoulder to eliminate the need for pedestrian TIA will be required to either themselves or a passing motor determine the appropriate size and vehicle to shift position. location of sidewalks and bicycle facilities Off Road Shared Use Pedestrian and to serve those uses.Ž (Section 35.20.4) Example Off Road Shared Use Bicycle Paths are slated to be located Pedestrian and Bicycle Path alongside collectors. These paths are Specific facilities discussed within the DDC intended to be eight feet in width and are include: intended for use by bicycle and pedestrian Sidewalks are used on residential and traffic to primarily move from residential arterial roadways and are intended to local activity centers. Currently the City primarily for pedestrian traffic. On has not placed any of these paths along residential streets, traffic volume is low freeways or arterials. and bicyclists can use the roadways to get around. The low volume and speed of PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 11 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Parks, Recreation & Trail System Connect Major Recreational Centers Master Plan In 2009, the City drafted the Parks, Recreation & Trail System Master Plan coordinating specific recommendations for park expansions, trail linkages and park development to serve the growing population and needs of Denton. Extensive public outreach was conducted to determine top needs within the community. During public outreach, an overwhelming number of respondents indicated that the most needed facility within the City was an increase in connected walking and bicycling trails. Page 121 of the Master Plan identifies More Hike/Bike/Walk/Jog/Run TrailsŽ as a High Priority.Ž Bicycle and pedestrian trips to current and future parks and recreational facilities will be important to consider to help further the development of a cohesive system for bicyclists and pedestrians within the community and to assure that major recreation destination points identified within the Parks Plan can be adequately served and accessible by Denton residents. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 12 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES University of North Texas Campus Bicycle Master Plan Campus Core of the University of North Texas The University of North Texas is a major activity center within the City of Denton, providing educational and employment opportunities to the citizens of Denton and North Texas. UNT developed the University of North Texas Campus Bicycle Master Plan in 2006 in order to develop a comprehensive system of bicycle infrastructure that encourages bicycle use at UNT, provides good connections to the surrounding area, and meets the needs of students, faculty, staff, and visitors of UNT.Ž Major components of the Plan focused upon the Campus Core, the Eagle Point Connection, and the Route to Discovery Park. The Plan created by the University of North Texas will be incorporated into the broader goals of the Citys Bicycle Network, particularly due to Campus Core Eagle Point Connection Discovery Park the significant number of bicycle and pedestrian trips generated by the The campus core or the Eagle Point is located to Discovery Park is located University. Linkages to surrounding central area of campus is the southwest of the in north Denton along US neighborhoods, Downtown Denton and directly adjacent to campus core and is the 77. A major goal of the DCTA transit facilities will vastly improve neighborhoods and sits in site of the new stadium. Campus Bicycle Master the overall use and efficiency of the Citys close proximity to the Interstate 35 serves as a Plan was to connect UNT bicycle network. downtown square. The physical barrier; however, with Discovery Park. Campus Core can be a pedestrian bridge and expected to generate the roadway improvements most bicycle trips. will enhance accessibility. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 13 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES North Central Texas Council of Governments Veloweb Mobility 2030 is a regional plan produced by North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). It includes ideals for various modes of transportation for the North Central Texas region and sets goals and strategies for the year 2030, none of which are mandates. Chapter 15 of the Plan addresses pedestrian/bicycle systems for the region, stating that NCTCOG has a regional goal of eight percent combined alternate transportation mode share. The Veloweb is a 644 mile, designated off- street trail network for the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, primarily intended for use by fast-moving bicyclists. Trails in the Veloweb tend to follow rail lines and other non-road corridors (such as major drainage and easement corridors. Within Denton, the VELOWEB includes: The Greenbelt Trail Rail-with-Trails along DCTA The Trail connecting the Greenbelt and DCTA trails will utilize Mayhill and US 380 Corridors. US 377 BNSF Rail-with-Trail from the end of DCTA trail towards Fort Worth. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 14 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Downtown Implementation Plan Downtown Denton is the most characteristically urban area of the (DTIP) community. Bicycle facilities which meet the needs of downtown residents, Historic downtown Denton provides a businesses and visitors must be carefully chosen to blend in with the urban major identity and sense of place for the fabric of the downtown square. It will be important to connect bicycle community. Restaurants, cafes, shops facilities to the DCTA Downtown Denton Commuter Rail Stop. offices and residences provide for an increased level of activity within the central core of the community. The DTIP calls for increased density of mixed-use development in the core of downtown east of Carroll and North of Sycamore. The Downtown Implementation Plan included potential cross sections in Chapter 5 which incorporate complete streets, or a variety of modes of transportation within downtown including vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian traffic. The DTIP recommends bike lanes on Elm and Hickory Streets and bike lanes along Sycamore to connect the DCTA Station with UNT. This Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Component of the Denton Mobility Plan will build upon the recommendations established through the Downtown Implementation Plan to ensure consistency and cohesion, ultimately allowing for a coordinated effort. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 15 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES TxDOT Roadways A recent federal policy statement on Bicycle and Pedestrian Much of the arterial street network in Accommodations Regulations and many communities throughout Texas is Recommendations by USDOT signed built and maintained by the Texas on March 11, 2010, emphasizes an Department of Transportation (TxDOT). increased commitment to, and Historically, TxDOTs primary focus has investment in, bicycle facilitiesƒto been on the movement of vehicles, which help meet goals for cleaner, healthier fed the development of cities for many air; less congested roadways; and decades. Since the inception of ISTEA and more livable, safe, cost-efficient ensuing legislation and funding programs, communities.Ž the focus of TxDOT has expanded to include consideration of bicyclists and For construction projects within pedestrians. Recently, TxDOT issued existing right-of-way, but when the directives to all of its local districts to scope of work involves pavement incorporate sidewalks and bicycle facilities widening, the project plans should into all of its new roads and improvements accommodate bicyclists by widening to existing roadways. This memorandum, the pavement to either provide a 14- dated March 23, 2011, sets forth certain foot wide curb lane for shared use or design parameters for state maintained a 5-foot wide bicycle lane.  arterial street networks. Highlights of the memorandum are listed to the right. For full reconstruction or new construction projects, where new right-of-way is acquired, the project plans should provide the desired roadway, bicycle and sidewalk geometric values shown in the RDM, AASHTO Bike Guide and TAS/ADAAG for each facility type.Ž These guidelines apply to all projects which are currently in the planning and design stages and projects whose environmental documents are approved after August 31, 2011.Ž PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 16 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Conditions in Denton 120,000 Population City of Denton Population Growth 100,000 The City of Denton has experienced rapid 113,383 population growth, in conjunction with the 80,000 greater metropolitan area as a whole. The 82,976 Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area is the 60,000 fastest growing metropolitan region in the 66,270 United States and is expected to add 40,000 48,063 nearly 3 million new residents by 2030. 39,874 20,000 This increase in population will ultimately lead to an increase in overall congestion, 0 indicated by many NCTCOG forecasts. This 19701980199020002010 highlights the need for transportation options, enabling North Texans to have choices in determining how to perform NCTCOG projects an their daily transportation needs. increase in congestion between Land Use 2007 and 2030. This graphic highlights Land use, particularly density, often plays the dramatic an important role in determining the increase in effectiveness of bicycle and pedestrian congestion in facilities. The City of Denton, like most Denton and Collin communities in North Texas, is Counties even with predominately shaped by single-family highway expansions residential housing and automobile travel. and improvements. There are, however, opportunities for Multi-modal options will give residents increasing density in the future, choices in particularly around the downtown area, performing their Rayzor Ranch development and transit daily commuting and oriented development facilities. transportation needs. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 17 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Universities Bike and Pedestrian Connections at Michigan A significant factor impacting bicycle usage State University Campus within the City is the location of two significant universities near the central core of the community. The University of North Texas and Texas Womans University each contain thousands of students, many of which live in and around their respective campuses. Many of these students use bicycles to travel to and from their daily studies, leading to the City of Denton having a larger number of non-motorized commuters (7.6% locally compared to 3.7% in Texas, according to the 2000 U.S. Census). Providing safe facilities that connect the universities to neighborhoods, Fry Street downtown, recreational facilities and to Transit Oriented Development transit oriented developments will be The Fry Street area currently serves as The Denton County Transit Authority is essential. The location of these two an entertainment district within the currently constructing its A-Train universities will contribute a base of City of Denton with shops, restaurants, commuter rail line which will connect ridership for the City of Denton bicycle nightlife and music venues. This area is downtown Denton to the DART system. facilities and, in many ways, can help a popular destination point for Potential Transit Oriented Developments support the feasibility and need for bicycle students at UNT and TWU and serves (TOD) around DCTA transit stops may facilities within the City. as a gathering location for many locals. provide additional development The Focus Group indicated that bicycle opportunities for residential, retail and Downtown access to Fry Street should be an office uses. Transit stations should be important consideration. Downtown is the most urban area of the linked to the overall bicycle and pedestrian community. Its compact form provides network, providing safe and convenient many opportunities for working, living and routes for those who desire to bicycle or entertainment. Bicycle and pedestrian walk to and from community destination connectivity may add to the synergy and points. Additionally, commuter rail will revitalization efforts of downtown by increase accessibility to Denton from other connecting various neighborhoods and portions of the metroplex, particularly districts with downtown Denton. beneficial for University students. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 18 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES However, by definition, all of these Existing Conditions for FM 428 roadways are already open to bicycle Bicyclists and Pedestrians travel now. A bicycle is legally recognized by the State Prior bicycle planning efforts are being of Texas (and many other states) as a realized through implementation of vehicle, with all the rights and dedicated on-street bicycle lanes and responsibilities for roadway use that are provision of non-designated lanes and also provided to motor vehicles. As such, shoulders on several city and TxDOT street bicyclists can legally ride on any of the improvement projects. A few notable streets in Denton (except controlled access roadway facilities that include bicycle lanes highways such as the IH 35 main lanes). or shoulders are: However, certain roadways are more attractive to riders than others. Basically, FM 428 north of Loop 288 is a two- Hickory Street local and collector streets are suitable for lane rural arterial with 8-foot use by most adult bicycle riders, as long as shoulders and new pavement. It traffic volumes are not high and speeds are attracts many cyclists for rides, using less than 35 miles per hour. Arterial streets the Sports Complex as a gathering typically carry higher traffic volumes with place. speeds of 35 to 45 miles per hour, and are Hickory Street (one-way eastbound) more suitable for the more skilled and has a bike lane from Welch Street to assertive bicyclists. Rural arterials with Carroll Street; however, the couplet shoulders and/or very low traffic volumes twin on Oak Street does not have a attract sports cyclists interested in longer- bicycle Lane. distance travel with fewer interruptions Some isolated residential streets have (stops). bicycle lanes including Stuart Road. Stuart Road Safe Passing Separation Many of the rural arterials, primarily those with shoulders greater than four feet in Recently, the Denton City Council passed a width could be designated as bike routes Safe PassingŽ ordinance. Motorists in after careful consideration of safe bicycle Denton are required to either change lanes accommodations at intersections. Many or provide a safe passingŽ distance (3 feet existing local and collector streets could for cars, 6 feet for trucks) when passing also be designated as bike routes after vulnerable roadway users, including review of traffic volumes, speeds and pedestrians and bicyclists. parking conditions on those roadways. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 19 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Additionally, bike-n-rideŽ is a Existing Barriers collaborative use of the two modes and Interstate 35-E Crossing The crossing of barriers is one of the most extends the range of a bicycle trip. important features of a bicycle and Heavily Traveled Arterials … In general, pedestrian plan for a community. arterial streets carrying high volumes of Freeways, major arterials, railroads, water traffic at high speeds are a safety concern features, and topography can all impose for pedestrians and bicyclist traveling significant barriers to bicycle and along the roadway and for those pedestrian access and mobility. The attempting to cross the roadway. Some Denton urbanized area poses several type of traffic control (stop signs or traffic significant barriers to safe and convenient signals at intersections) is typically needed bicycle and pedestrian travel. Examples for the safe crossing of such roadways. At include: Existing Heavy Rail uncontrolled locations, a pedestrian refuge Interstate 35 area such as a raised median of the Railroads roadway, can enhance the safety of the crossing. There is a trade-off that must be Railroads … The railroad companies have considered between the needs of bicyclists allowed a limited number of street and pedestrians, e.g. lane conversions to crossings of their tracks to minimize the bike lanes) and the delays imposed to exposure to railroad crossing accidents significant volumes of motor vehicle with motor vehicles. Though crossing traffic. points tend to be more frequent for the Arterial roadways in Denton that pose railroads than Interstate 35, the effect on significant barriers for crossing by bicyclists concentrating traffic at crossings is similar include the following examples: Rails with Trails to that of the freeways. University Drive (Highway 380) Although rail can often serve as a barrier, Fort Worth Drive commuter or light rail facilities have the Teasley/Lillian Millar/Loop 288 opportunity to incorporate adjacent N. Elm Street bicycle and pedestrian facilities. This is US 377/Carroll Blvd Corridor typically referred to as Rails with Trails. These same roadways provide motorists The Denton County Transit Authoritys A- access throughout Denton, but are a Train commuter rail line is an example. challenge for bicyclists to use for the same purpose. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 20 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Origins and Destinations Major Origins and Destinations within Denton Historical focus on mobility by the personal automobile and motorized transport has Universities and Transit resulted in roadbeds being the University of North Texas, Texas predominant feature in the rights-of-way Womans University and DCTA established for the transport of goods and commuter rail stations serve as people. However, anywhere a roadway primary origin and destination points goes is a potential destination for cyclists within the community. and in many instances pedestrians. High areas of interest for access by walking and bicycle include schools, libraries, and parks. Pedestrian access should be Neighborhoods & Districts provided to all destinations that are within walking distance (about one-quarter mile) Downtown Denton, Fry Street, Rayzor of where people live and/or work. Ranch, Denia Neighborhood, and other distinct neighborhood areas within the In addition, cycling as a form of non- central core of the community must be polluting recreation and sport can make linked and connected. advantageous use of the shoulders of many roadways and highways. The development of loop routes in the area can facilitate the activities of the longer- Parks & Recreation distance cycling activities. Community parks and trails connecting Figure 1 on the following page depicts to open spaces and greenbelts provide some of the most significant origins and recreational opportunities for Denton destinations within the City of Denton as residents. identified by the Focus Group and public meeting attendees. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 21 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Origins and Destinations Map PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 22 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES If bicycling and walking are to be promoted Bicycle and Pedestrian Types of Crashes and Percent of in the community, it is imperative that Crashes Total Crashes (National appropriate facilities that are designed to accepted standards be provided and Average): One of the national goals of the U.S. properly located. To establish a baseline Department of Transportation (DOT) is to and gauge for future assessment of reduce the number of bicycle and Turning, Merging or Crossing success of the bicycle and pedestrian pedestrian accidents, which the DOT Paths: program, accident reports for motor describes as crashesŽ. The National vehicle accidents involving bicyclists or Motorist failed to yield to bicyclist 22.3% Bicycling and Walking Study- pedestrians should be summarized Bicyclist failed to yield to motorist at Transportation choices for a Changing Intersection 16.0% according to a prescribed methodology presents a plan of action for America Motorist turned or merged into the each year. activities at the Federal, State and local path of bicyclist 12.1% levels for meeting two concurrent goals: Bicyclist failed to yield to motorist, Depending on the details of each accident, Midblock 11.8% facility design, unsafe driver behavior, or To double the current percentage Bicyclist turned or merged into the bicyclist or pedestrian error may be the of total trips made by bicycling and path of the motorist 7.6% primary causing factor. A nationwide walking; and, Crash occurred at intersection 2.7% study on bicycle accidents provides insight Bicyclist did not clear intersection before into the causal factors of accidents To simultaneously reduce by ten signal turned green for cross traffic 1.4% involving bicyclists (see table at right). percent the number of bicyclist Insufficient Information 1.2% Bicyclist turning hits crossing motorists 0.8% and pedestrians killed or injured in In order to address specific localized safety Motorist turning hits crossing bicyclist 0.6% traffic crashes. issues, it would be necessary to closely study local crash reports to determine the Nationally, approximately 630 bicyclists Parallel Paths: major crash causes, the involved age were killed and 51,000 were injured in Motorist overtaking vehicle 8.5% groups, and other important factors. The 2009 as a result of collisions with motor Operator on wrong side of street 2.8% factors would be very useful in developing vehicles. Similarly, approximately 4,100 Bicyclist overtaking a motor vehicle 2.8% specific localized design treatments and to pedestrians were killed and 59,000 Operator lost control and swerved prepare targeted education and pedestrians were injured by motor vehicle into the path of the vehicle 1.7% awareness-building programs Unknown if parallel or crossing 0.5% collisions in 2009. As a group, bicyclists comprise about two percent of all roadway fatalities each year. Fortunately, Denton has experienced no bicyclist fatalities in Hunter, Bill Pedestrian and Bicyclist Crash Types in the past two years as a result of collisions the 1990s,Ž Pro Bike/Pro Walk 94 Resource Book with motor vehicles. (1994) PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 23 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES The Design BicyclistŽ Nearly 100 million people in the United States own bicycles. Fewer than five percent would likely qualify as experienced or highly skilled cyclists. Since the federal policy goal is to accommodate existing cyclists and encourage increased bicycle U use, there will be more novice riders than advanced cyclists usi nderstanding the roadway system. Ideally, roadway treatments intended to accommodate bicycle use should try to address the needs of both the types of experienced and less experienced riders. Practicality and funding must be considered. As appropriate facilities within Denton are bicyclists will help examined, it is important to understand the types of riders using each type of facility. to understand the types and whereabouts of One of the most frequently cited reasons for O desired bicycle not bicycling or walking is fear for safety in facilities. traffic. Given the prevailing traffic conditions found in many urban and suburban areas„ narrow travel lanes, high motor vehicle speeds, congestion, lack of sidewalks, pollution, etc„ many individuals who could meet their transportation needs by bicycling or walking do not, simply because they perceive too great a ceve erceive itot risk to their safety or health.. h The National Bicycling and Walking Study: Transportation Choices for Transport y:Transportat America. United States Department of Transportation PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 24 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES EXPERIENCE LEVEL EXPERIENCE LEVEL Bicycling Experience Continuum PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 25 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Advanced Bicyclists: These are Basic Bicyclists: These are casual or new Children: These are pre-teen riders whose experienced riders who can operate under adult and teenage riders who are less roadway use is initially monitored by most traffic conditions. They comprise the confident of their ability to operate in parents. Eventually they are accorded majority of the current users of collector traffic without special provisions for independent access to the system. They and arterial streets, and are best served by bicycles. Some will develop greater skills and their parents prefer the following: the following: and progress to the advanced level, but there will always be many millions of basic bicyclists. They prefer: Direct access to destinations usually Comfortable access to destinations Access to key destinations via the existing street and highway preferably by a direct route, using surrounding residential areas, system; either low-speed, low traffic volume including schools, recreation streets or designated bicycle and facilities, shopping, or other The opportunity to operate at pedestrian facilities; and residential areas; maximum speed with minimum delays; and Well-defined separation of bicycles, Residential streets with low motor pedestrians and motor vehicles on vehicle speed limits and volumes; Sufficient operating space on the arterial and collector streets (bike and roadway or shoulder to reduce the lanes shoulders) or separate bike need for either the bicyclist or the Hike and bike trails or other off- and pedestrian paths. motor vehicle operator to change street pedestrian and bicycle position when passing. facilities. As illustrated in the Bicycling Experience Continuum diagram, there are a wide variety of individual bicyclists that span the definitions of advanced and basic bicyclists and the facilities they prefer. A bicyclist that would ride the shoulder of FM 428 on the weekend may prefer a different type of facility on the weekday when riding solo or when riding with his/her children. Further, some children mature physically at slower or faster rates than others, or may receive more or less exposure or training than others. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 26 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES pedestrian accommodations on its existing include the consideration of a striped Current Facility Design facilities and new projects, and has shoulder along arterial roadways. Practice recently taken a proactive stand towards Current Trends in Bicycle When investing in multi-modal accessible this end by including 14 wide curb lanes. public infrastructure for transportation, and Pedestrian Facility The City of Denton has taken progressive consideration should be given to all Design Practice steps towards including bicycle facilities in modes, not just cars, trucks, and buses. future roadway expansions or roadway Current quality of life considerations in The need for sidewalks on each side of a rehabilitation plans. The City of Denton communities today have expanded the roadway and accommodations for range of planning for our roadway Transportation Design Criteria Manual, a bicyclists should be considered. This corridors to consider all potential users of component of the Denton Development consideration is the national policy as the corridor and to make the built roadway Code, specifies appropriate cross-sections envisioned under ISTEA, and reinforced consistent with the land use surroundings to which roadways must be constructed. under TEA 21 and SAFTEA-LU, and is as well and the functional classification of Currently all new streets are required to promoted by the National Complete the roadway. Context Sensitive Solutions have a sidewalk and new collector to the planning and design of roadways Streets Coalition. roadways are encouraged to incorporate allow a street to transition in its cross section and edge treatment to respond to Historically, the Texas Department of an 8 foot shared pedestrian and bicycle its surroundings. Complete Streets Transportation (TxDOT) has not required sidepath. Arterial roadway cross sections consider the various users of the roadway participated financially in the construction include a 16 foot wide outside lane which corridor - cars, trucks/deliveries, transit of sidewalks along roadways that are part ideally is sufficient width to accommodate vehicles and riders, bicyclists and of the State Highway System and use of vehicular and advanced bicyclists in a safe pedestrians - in allocation of space within these roads by cyclists has not previously manner. Residential streets are generally the public right of way and adjacent been considered a serious design factor. easements. designed for motorists to operate at lower ISTEA mandated that a bicycle coordinator volumes and slower speeds, typically be designated by each state DOT. TxDOT, allowing for safe accommodation of in turn, established a bicycle/pedestrian bicyclists within traffic lanes, though young coordinator at the State level and has, in children are encouraged to ride on addition, designated a person with bicycle sidewalks. coordinator responsibilities at each of its The standard design sections are currently district offices as well. TxDOT is under review. Pending modifications increasingly considering bicycle and PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 27 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE FACILITIES DESIGN There is a wide range of facility improvements which can be considered to enhance bicycle transportation. Improvements can be simple and involve minimal design consideration (such as changing drainage grate inlets) or they can involve a detailed design (such as constructing a hike and bike trail). The major design feature for a bicycle or pedestrian facility is its location (i.e., whether it roadway or follows its own independent alignment). Roadway improvements for on-street facilities depend on the roadways design and the amount of available right-of-way. On the other hand, bicycle paths are located on independent alignments; consequently, their design depends on many factors, including dedication of ROW and the interaction of the user groups. With proper planning and design, roadway improvements for motor vehicles can also enhance bicycle and pedestrian travel, and, in any Local zoning ordinances that separate business event, should avoid causing adverse impacts on bicycling and and shopping areas from living areas and the walking. A communitys overall goals for transportation urban sprawl that characterizes many American improvements should, whenever possible, include the needs for cities strongly favor automobile travel over pedestrian movement and considering enhancements for bicycling bicycling or walking. Increasing the density of in order to advance these alternative modes of transportation. development of existing areas by providing a more compact mixture of residential, commercial and employment centers can attract more use of bicycling and walking transportation.Ž The National Bicycling and Walking Study, U.S. Department of Transportation. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT PEDESTRIANANDBICYCLELINKAGECOMPONENT 28 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Design Standards All bicycle and pedestrian facilities should meet the minimum standards required by the Denton Development Code and Transportation Criteria Manual, as well as the recommendations of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in their two publications publication Guide for the Planning, Design and , or its most current Operation of Bicycle (Pedestrian)Facilities edition. Pavement striping, signage, and signals should be in accordance with the Denton Development Code and the most current Texas version of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control (MUTCD). Hike and bike trails and sidepaths should be Devices accessible and traversable by physically disabled persons and should comply with the guidelines set forth by the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), as enforced in Texas by the Architectural Barriers Section of the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations. The City of Denton design standards are in accord with national and state guidelines, but should be enhanced to consider a wider range of bicycle facility types. The current design standards call for bicyclist accommodations along collector streets by providing an 8-foot wide sidepath and on arterial streets by providing a 16-foot wide curb lane. Pedestrians are accommodated by either a sidewalk on local and arterial streets or a sidepath on collector streets. These sections are presented in Appendix C, along with notations on possible alternative configurations of the sections to accommodate PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT PEDESTRIANANDBICYCLELINKAGECOMPONENT 29 29 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Bicycle Facility Types There are many different bicycle facility types which must be understood from the Commuting/Utilitarian perspective of those whom they serve. Differing bicycle experience levels and usage purposes require different facility types to accommodate and enc as well as to ensure the safety of bicyclists. In addition to considering bicycle experience levels, the existing environment may provide physical barriers with rega bicycle facilities used or desired. This section is intended to provide an introduction into the types of bicycle facilities that may be considered for general design characteristics associated with each facility. Recreational/Sport The types of facilities that may be provided for bicycle mobility include: Shared Roadways Wide Curb Lanes Shoulder Bikeways or Urban Shoulders Bicycle Lanes Paths, Sidepaths and Trails These facilities are described in detail in the AASHTO Guide for Development of Bicycle Facilities, and are briefly described on the following p PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 30 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Shared Roadway Because a bicycle is a vehicle, any roadway (except limited access highways, freeways and others specifically prohibiting bicycle traffic) may be considered part of the on-road bicycle network. Because existing roads typically offer the most direct route to many destinations, they tend to be favored by cyclists. The network of local streets, by their nature, do not extend long distances or across arterials. A bicycle boulevard is a series of local and collector streets that provide for longer connectivity for bicycling but discontinuous conveyance for motor vehicles, providing a larger local street atmosphere for bicycling. Collector streets often provide longer continuity and signalized crossings of arterial streets. But continuity and signalized crossings attract higher traffic volumes and often higher speeds than local streets. Though lanes can be shared, wide lanes allow better coexistence of bicyclists and vehicles. Arterial roadways can be shared but should be considered for additional accommodations, such as shoulder lanes, bike lanes or wide curb lanes, as described in the following sections. On-street parking along local streets in residential areas is compatible with bicycle use, although parking may be a conflict with bicyclist provisions along streets in commercial areas. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 31 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Wide Outside Lane The national standard width considered desirable for an outside traffic lane to safely accommodate bicycle and motor vehicle traffic is 14 feet. This distance is measured from the edge of the gutter (or if no gutter from the curb face) to the lane stripe, but the lane should be wide enough to allow safe passage for cyclists around obstacles such as drainage grates, parked cars and longitudinal ridges between the pavement and curb and gutter. Lanes wider than 15 feet may encourage use by two motor vehicles and are not conduci Denton has chosen to go with a 16 standard with a 4Ž white striped urban shoulder and a minimum 3 clear (gutter seam) to edgeline. Urban Shoulder The draft 2010 AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Bicycle Facilities contains guidance that when retrofitting roads for bicycle facilities on constrained roadways, where the width guidelines for bike lanes and paved shoulders are not possible, undesignated paved shoulders can improve conditions for bicyclists more so than providing no designated shoulder at all. In these situations, a minimum of 3 feet (0.9 m) of operating space should be provided between the edge line and the edge of pavement (where there is no curb), the gutter joint (where curb and gutter is used), or the curb face (where curb is used without a gutter). For example, in a retrofit situation where the total width of the outside lane is 14 feet, it would be preferable to instead provide a 10-11 foot wide travel lane and a 3-4 foot wide shoulder. Shoulder Bikeway Advanced and recreational/intermediate bicycle riders who commute long distances or ride for sport or recreation can safely make use of smooth, paved roadway shoulders, where available. Shoulders should be a minimum of 4 feet wide in constrained situations and pereferably wider, up to 10 feet adding one foot of width for every 5 MPH for speed limits over 35 miles per hour. Shoulders should be paved, all-weather surfaces with no ridges, seams or other obstructions, and should be generally smooth as opposed to rough in surface texture. Rumble strips, if provided on the shoulder, should occur within the first two feet from the edge line, in keeping with guidelines prepared by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Rumble stripes, an edgeline strip with raised bumps, have been used on Texas roads and provides the desired rumbleŽ effect without reducing the usable shoulder width. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT PED E 32 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Bicycle Lanes Bike lanes are marked portions of the roadway that are designated for exclusive use by bicycles. Typically, bike lanes may be established on arterials and other major streets where a bike lane would enhance the safety and encouragement of bicycl The standard width for a bike lane is 5 feet and the minimum is 4 feet. If the curb and gutter is separate from the roadway, the 4 to 5 standard is measured out from the joint between the roadway and the curb and gutter. A bike lane between on-street parking and a motor vehicle travel lane should be 5 feet wide, minimum. Bike lanes encourage parking or other inappropriate uses. Bike lanes should be signed and marked with a 6-inch wide stripe and appropriate bike symbols and arrow markings in accordance with the Texas MUTCD and AASHTO standards. As vehicles, bicycles must ride with the flow of traffic. Bike lanes, therefore, should be one- way and should be clearly marked as such. Two-way bike lanes are discouraged. Bike lanes on one-way streets can be either left side or right side oriented to be parking and turning movements, but are typically located on the right-side. Curbs, raised pavement, or raised buttons are generally not recommended for use as bike lane markings since they are a safety hazard to cyclists and interfere with the natural and mechanical sweeping of the bike lane. A bike lane may be established adjacent to a parking lane, with bicyclists positioned between the travel lane and the parking lane. However, this location requires that motorists entering and leaving the parking lane will need to be mindful of the bike lane operation. The opening of car doors into the bike lane is also of concern to bicyclists, as the dooringŽ of a bicyclist can happen very quickly and without advance indication. A special bike lane that is positioned between the parking lane and sidewalk zone is called a cycle track. This special design has been employed in Portland and elsewhere, and is being considered for use in the Dallas Bike Plan. Careful consideration of operational safety, especially driveway density, and maintenance is required, as well as practical considerations on available space and funding. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 33 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Bicycle Routes Standard MUTCD Signage Shared roadways designated as bike routes should be signed using standard MUTCD signage. Many cities, such as Dallas, have developed special designed signs with logos and/or route numbers. Such designations are used to denote streets that can see significant bicycle usage or are a link in the bikeway network. Designation and improvement as a bike route may warrant a higher level of street maintenance (debris, potholes) than a shared roadway. Localized Bicycle Route Signage PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT PEDETRIAN AD BCYCLE LINKAE CMPNE SNNIIGOONT 34 34 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Paths, Sidepaths and Trails A bike path is an off-road bikeway/pedway that is physically separated from roadways by open space or a barrier. It may be within the roadway right-of-way, a utility right-of-way (only if allowed by easement) or an independent easement. These facilities are sometimes referred to as bike trails or hike and bike trails. Bike paths should be 10 to 12 feet wide, as a desirable standard depending upon activity levels, with a minimum width of 8 feet. Maintenance vehicles driving on 8 …foot wide paths tend to damage the edges. Therefore, 8-foot wide paths should be avoided unless physical limitations cannot accommodate a greater width. Bike paths with high traffic volumes should be 12 feet wide or more, but should narrow to ten feet in the vicinity of a street intersection. One-way bike paths are difficult to police and should be avoided, if possible. Where they are used, they should be clearly signed as one-way, with a standard width of 6 feet and a minimum width of 5 fe Bike paths should have an additional 2 feet of smoothly graded area on either side of the pavement. In addition, there should be 3 feet of horizontal and 10 feet (8 feet minimum) of overhead clearance on either side of the pavement. Bike paths should be constructed of smooth, hard, all-weather paving such as concrete or asphalt. Although more expensive, concrete paths require less maintenance than asphalt paths, which can buckle, crack and erode quickly. Good maintenance, with associated higher operation and maintenance costs, is essential for bike paths to eliminate and avoid hazardous conditions. It should be noted that bike paths that pass in close proximity to neighborhoods or provide high levels of recreational activity can be expected to be multiple use trails. Conflicts between cyclists and skaters, joggers, pedestrians, animals and less experienced cyclists should be anticipated and considered in appropriate design. Curb cuts and ramps for access to bike paths should be provided at all street intersections with the bike path. Slopes should comply with current requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Curb cuts should be a minimum of 8 feet wide. Bike paths located immediately adjacent to a roadway are called side paths. In addition to all the prescribed bike path design guidelines, a side path should be 5 feet from a traffic lane, where possible. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 35 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Retrofit Roadway Designs Much of the existing roadway network in Denton was built before the current design Before standards were adopted. Wide curb lanes on arterial streets and 8-foot sidepaths on collectors are now required by ordinance, but will need to be retrofit, to the extent possible, into existing roadways that do not have the pavement width or right of way to accommodate them. When traffic conditions allow, road dietŽ treatments can be employed to reduce the number of travel lane(s) in order to add bike lanes or wide curb lanes. Existing four lane roadways with 12-foot wide travel lanes can be re-striped to provide 10-foot inside lanes and 14-foot outside lanes, creating a Wide Curb Lane. In some instances, design provisions may need to use minimum widths but should not extend below minimum standards of roadway classification without careful considerations of the traffic operations and safety implications of doing so. All variances Before from established City guidelines and standards need to be approved by the City Engineer. Design variances on TxDOT facilities need to be approved through their design review process. Courtesy: Complete Streets Coalition www.completestreets.org PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 36 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Green and clearance timings of each Special pavement markings and signs can Roadway Intersection Design signalized intersection should be evaluated give bicyclists guidance on where to stop Statistical studies of bicycle-motor vehicle for accommodation of bicyclists and to be detected at the traffic signals. and pedestrian-motor vehicle accidents pedestrians. have indicated that a majority of these Signal Approach Detection accidents occur at or near roadway intersections. Proper design of Most traffic signals in urbanized Denton intersections to better accommodate have been equipped with pedestrian push bicyclists and buttons to actuate pedestrians A primary need is to get the roadway the signal to allow must be designer to include consideration of the pedestrians to introduced cross the street. bicyclist and pedestrian in the design of along with Signal detection of a new roadway; whether a designated education of bicyclists on the bikeway is planned or not.Ž bicyclists on how roadway often to properly relies on position equipment designed to detect large metal themselves and behave to proceed safely objects, and thus may require modification through the intersection. A primary need or replacement to detect bicyclists on the is to get the roadway designer to include approaches. The ability of the detectors at consideration of the bicyclist and each signalized intersection should be pedestrian in the design of a new roadway; evaluated for adequate detection of whether a designated bikeway is planned bicyclists and pedestrians. or not. Pavement Markings Minimum Green Time for Bicyclists Channelization of motor vehicles, and Crossing Time for Pedestrians pedestrians and bicyclists at and through In addition to the minimum time for motor the intersections help to make movements vehicles, the minimum crossing times for predictable and best positioned to pedestrians and bicyclists should be optimize safety and capacity. Bike lanes at considered, especially for lower volume the approach to the stop bar may be cross streets. Guidance for signal timing to provided even if not provided along the accommodate bicyclist and pedestrians is length of the street. Short dashed lines contained in Chapter 18 of the Highway through the intersection can provide Capacity Manual 2010. The minimum guidance through larger intersections. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 37 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES State of Texas color scheme and capital Signage and Striping building silhouette. The regional Veloweb Striping Signs and pavement markings for bicycle bike route signs would also be good facilities on roadways encourage bicycling candidates for a specially designed sign. use and advertise the bicycle as a vehicle Striping on the road. They help legitimize the presence of bicycles in the eyes of Striping of bike lanes should be in motorists and potential bicyclists. All conformance to the MUTCD. All multi-use signage and lane striping should be in paths which are 10 feet in width or greater general accordance with the current should receive a yellow center line stripe. edition of the Texas Manual of Uniform The sharrow symbol can be placed in the (MUTCD). Traffic Control Devices travel lane of a shared street to further draw the attention of motorists to the Signage Sharrow potential presence of bicyclists. The The basic bike route sign should be used sharrow is placed in the travel lane, not on all designated bike routes. For the indicative of the path of the bicyclists. longer regional routes, a numbered Speed Humps bikeway sign could be utilized. One scheme used in some cities is to number Speed humps are sometimes used on local bike routes sequentially east to west (odd) streets and some collector streets to slow and north to south (even) to facilitate traffic or reduce cut-through traffic. Speed wayfinding. humps are not a problem for bicyclists, and The Share the RoadŽ warning sign for on- in fact the calmer street operation is better Speed Humps street facilities, has been adopted within for bicyclists as a result. the National Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NMUTCD) as has the sharrowsŽ pavement symbol. Some communities, such as Dallas, have even placed a special logo or shape on their route designation signage. Some communities have numbered their regional bicycle routes, as states have done for regional highways. Austin has developed a share the roadŽ sign using a PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 38 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Traffic Calming Roundabouts Traffic calming is a term referring to Speed Hump, Speed Table roadway design techniques that are used to slow vehicular traffic in order to improve safety for bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists. These techniques typically involve vertical or horizontal deflection of traffic or reduced sight lines on long streets to lower the speed of traffic. A variety of traffic calming techniques exist and their flexibility in design and usage allow them to be tailored to fit Bump/Bulb Outs Chicane individualized circumstances and conditions. Examples of the various traffic calming techniques that are available include, but are not limited to: Bulb Outs (Curb Extensions) Roundabouts Speed Humps/Speed Table Medians Chicanes Diverters Chokers Medians Choker Channelization Many of these alternatives are already being proactively applied in Denton through existing design criteria and Engineering staff. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 39 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Bicycle Amenities Bicycle Parking Signage Transit Bicycle parking should be provided Signage delineating bicycle routes Bicycles are one component of the at all public buildings that are should be visible for both bicyclists greater transportation network. potential cyclist destinations and at and vehicular traffic. Caution and Bicycle parking and privately owned facilities that are notice signs should also be accommodation should be potential bicyclists destinations. included to provide a safe bicycling provided on public transit to Bike lockers and sheltered parking environment. encourage the convenient and may also be considered. connected use of transit. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 40 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Possible Roadway Design yg Shared Lane Shared Lane with Parking Wide Curb Lane/Urban Shoulder 10 to 13 Wide 16 to 20 Wide, including 14 to 16 Wide, plus gutter parking area width, max of 18 Speed Limit 35 MPH or less Speed Limit 35 MPH or less Speed Limit 35 MPH or less Local or Collector Street Local or Collector Street Collector or Arterial Street Use SharrowŽ as Needed Use SharrowŽ as Needed Use SharrowŽ as Needed Bike Route signs Bike Route signs Bicycle Warning and Share Bikes May Use Full Lane signs, the Road signs as needed Both directions, typical Both directions, typical Both directions, typical PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 41 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Bike Lane Shoulder Bike Lane 10 to 12 Wide 4 to 10 Wide, increasing with Speed Limit 35 MPH or less speed limit Local or Collector Street Speed Limit 40 MPH or more Bike Lane signs and striping Rural Arterial section Both directions, typical unless Bicycle Warning and Share the one-way Road signs Both directions, typical PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 42 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES included in each projects individual cost The following cost estimates for bicycle Typical Facility Development facilities were developed using average estimate. Costs unit costs for specific improvement types. Engineering design fees can be expected to This list represents basic cost units for The following costs are provided for use in be 8 to 15 percent of the total project cost, various facility types, and do not include preparing an order of magnitude estimate depending on a variety of factors including bridges or other special structures nor of the construction cost for bicycle and overall construction cost and design extensive landscaping or other amenities, pedestrian facility improvements. This complexity. Each construction project ROW costs, design fees, etc. data will help to facilitate initial planning should also include a minimum 10 percent decisions. A cost range is provided on a contingency fund (conceptual level cost per mile basis, recognizing that there are estimates typically include a 20% many variables which affect final cost (i.e. contingency allowance). site conditions, utilities, drainage, availability of right-of-way, fluctuations in construction market). For this reason, the costs presented here reflect only those costs related to materials and labor for construction based on minimum facility Improvements Typical Unit Cost requirements. Costs for facility improvements associated with larger Roadway restriping (remove existing $20,000 to 50,000 per mile roadway projects will usually attain lower stripes and add new stripes and signs) unit construction prices than separate improvement projects. In addition, other 6' wide paving of existing gravel shoulder $300,000 to $500,000 per mile resultant costs, such as higher Operation along roadway in both directions and Maintenance costs, are not reflected herein. 10' wide paving of separated trail facility $150,000 to $400,000 per mile Each facility project will typically require an engineering study to determine all the 5'-8 wide sidewalk/sidepath $80,000 to $150,000 per mile design issues and estimated cost. Factors such as right-of-way acquisition, bridges Signing of bicycle facilities (5 signs per $3,000 to $5,000 per mile and other grade separated crossings, utility mile each way) relocation, clearing and grubbing of $100,000 to $300,000 per existing conditions, landscape plantings, Traffic Signal Installation intersection lighting benches, retaining walls, property fencing and other amenities need to be PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 43 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES BICYCLE FACILITIES System Development Criteria The factors to be considered in selecting the proper type and location of bicycle facilities are reflected in the goals and objectives. The syste considered herein can be summarized into the following three categories: In communities across the world, Increase Accessibility there is a growing need and Potential use can be maximized responsibility to provide options that Access points to and from the facility give people the opportunity to bike„ Directness of route, minimize delay Cross physical barriers to provide opportunities for bicycling a to bike more often, to bike to more places and to feel safe while doing so. Promote Safe Use of Bicycles The benefits of riding a bicycle- Minimize conflicts whether for utilitarian or recreational Minimize potential for number and severity of accidents Provide good quality pavement surface purposes-can be expressed in terms of Allow proper security of facility improved environmental and personal Encourage Use of Bicycle Modes of Transportation health, reduced traffic congestion, Connect residential areas with major activity centers and recreational areas; enhanced quality of life, economic Provide adequate coverage with proper facilities rewards, as well as others.Ž Provide continuity of designated facilities Provide connections to major transit facilities to promote inter -bicyclinginfo.org Any one of these factors may be the dominant consideration depending on the individual situations such as location of activity centers, available street network and off-road corridors, and physical barriers. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 44 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Bicycle Plan Map For Full Size Map, Please Visit: http://www.cityofdenton.com/index.aspx?page=3 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 45 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Short Range Facilities Proposed Facilities Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle There are many more city streets and greenway corridors that will take a longer Linkage Component of the Denton time to either assemble the funding or Mobility Plan Summary of Facilities Proposed within right-of-way to develop the on-street and this Update off-street networks. On-street and The various on-street and off-street sidepath projects that appear to be able to routes, lanes, sidepaths and trails Shared Routes 27 miles be developed within a Short Range time recommended in this document form a frame of 3 to 5 years are listed in Appendix network of facilities that comprise the Wide Curb Lanes 68 miles A. The hike and bike trail network will take Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle significant funding as well, and a few of Linkage Component of the Denton Bike Lanes 20 miles those projects could be accomplished in Mobility Plan. This plan is officially a the short range as funding becomes component of the Denton Mobility Plan, Side Paths 48 miles available. together with the Roadway Component and the Rail and Trucking Component, Trails & Veloway 59 miles Long Range Facilities Connectivity Component and guide the future development of the citys public A significant portion of the hike and bike Immediate Range On-Street Facilities right-of-way and infrastructure. trail system will be developed over a period of time beyond the 10 year time Immediate Range Facilities frame. Much of the on-street network is 35 miles @ $0.6 million to $1.2 million on roadways that are yet to be developed There are many existing city streets that to their full section and once they do will may be able to be adapted by striping, Short Range On-Street Facilities be developed with current design restriping or simply erecting signage to standards that should accommodate create several miles of on-street bicycle bicyclists and pedestrians. facilities. A reasonable time frame for 48 miles @0.7 Million to 1.7 Million development of these readily developed facilities is within the next one to three years, but depends totally on the availability of funding. The streets that appear to be the best candidates and were indicated in surveys during the public input sessions are listed in Appendix A. Many of these facilities are in the UNT, TWU and downtown areas of Denton. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 46 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Prioritization Connectivity of Demand The comprehensive network of bicycle Provides a connection between significant bicycle activity centers (e.g. neighborhoods, facilities should be implemented in stages, town centers, public facilities, transit facilities, parks, trai simply due to fiscal, physical and other constraints. In order to achieve an orderly Public Support/Commitment implementation, a prioritization of projects Includes general public and political support for the individual project. is needed. Levels and resources of funding can change during the implementation Cost Effectiveness period; therefore, the prioritization plan Can the project be accomplished in conjunction with another planned improvement must be flexible. The prioritization project that is currently funded? Does the project improve overall road safety, etc. for the program allows bike routes, bike lanes, least cost? side paths and multi-use trails to be evaluated based on a set of criteria that is Funding Commitments open to review and clearly understandable. The list of bicycle project Has commitment been made to fund the construction and ongoing maintenance of the prioritization criteria is provided in the box facility? to the right. Right-of-Way Is sufficient existing right-of-way available or unencumbered so that the project may proceed immediately? Network Development Does this particular segment of bikeway connect other bikeways and provide an important linkage to facilitate regional bicycle travel? Barriers Does this particular project eliminate a potential barrier to bi existing barrier which would make completion of this bicycle facility difficult? Reduction in Accidents Is there data that indicates bicycle facility development along or within this corridor will improve bicyclist safety? PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 47 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN BICYCLE FACILITIES Public Input for Prioritization During the Public Meeting conducted on April 13, 2011 several exercises were conducted with the attendees to gauge community priorities for implementation. The information gathered is intended to aid City decision makers as they assess and prioritize which portions of the Plan to implement first. Respondents showed a preference for more designated lanes on streets and bike/pedestrian-friendly street crossings. Respondents also indicated that Oak, Hickory, Elm, and Locust Streets were among their top priorities. It should be noted that these results are not characterized as being indicative of the priorities of the community as a whole, only those of the attendees. Prioritization of Roadways from Public Meeting Oak 8* UNT 1* Hickory 5* Bell 1* Elm 5* Windsor 1* If I had a Million DollarsŽ Locust 4* Nottingham 1* Attendants of the Public Meeting were given ten dots, representing $100,000 each, and University 3* Old North 1* were asked to spend their money according to which facilities they would give first priority Loop 288 2* S. Denton 1* towards constructing. The top two facility priorities indicated by participants were to 1) Designate More Lanes on Streets and 2) Provide Bike-Friendly Crossings of Major Streets. Airport Road 2* Alice 1* Bonnie Brae 1* Square to Golden Green Belt 1* Triangle 1* McKinney 1* *Number of Votes Received PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 48 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Bike Plan Coordinator PLAN Some communities make use of a bicycle The National Bicycling and Walking Study, Coordinator or Bicycle Plan Coordinator. A developed by the Federal Highway Bicycle Plan coordinator works with Administration, recommended the action advocates, local elected officials, business plan shown below for state, regional and leaders, media, law enforcement, transit local governments to work towards providers and the general public to build creating bicycling compatible partnerships providing leadership and environments in their community. vision so these groups may embrace and Following this basic framework, a plan for implement facilities and programs that implementation of the City of Denton increase the number of residents safely Bicycle Plan is described in the following bicycling. Coordinator may: paragraphs. All action items listed under each action area are directly coordinated Review development proposals to with the objectives listed on page 6 of Chapter 2: Goals and Objectives. ensure that local bicycle requirements are incorporated; Develop and implement educational Action Area 1: Act Organize a Bicycle Program and promotional programs, such as Bike to Work Day; Action Area 2: Plan and Construct Needed Facilities Write grant proposals; Serve as public contact for bicycling Action Area 3: Promote Bicycling and Walking inquiries and complaints; Action Area 4: Educate Bicyclists and the Public Staff the local bicycle advisory committee; and Action Area 5: Enforce Laws and Regulations Coordinate with neighboring communities, transit agencies and public health staff to implement policies and projects. -www.bicyclinginfo.org PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 49 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Action Area 1: Organize a Bicycle Program Monitor, maintain and update the Update to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Linkage Action Item 1.1 Component of the Denton Mobility Plan. Establish the roles and responsibilities for City staff within Planning, Engineering, and Parks and Recreation Task 1.1.1 Departments to monitor the implementation of immediate and ongoing task items. Maintain a list of all public infrastructure projects in the Cit of Denton and whether and how they are incorporating Task 1.1.2 bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. Task 1.1.3 Prepare an annual report summarizing the progress implementatio Task 1.1.4 Make changes to the update as needed as concepts change and opportunities arise. Task 1.1.5 Dedicate budget for updates as they become necessary. Action Item 1.2 Maintain liaison between City Departments and local bicycling advocacy groups. Formalize the roles and responsibilities of a designated employee(s) within the Planning, Engineering, Parks and Task 1.2.1 Recreation, and Police Departments for interface with bicycling advocates. Provide on-line resources for informing bicycling advocates and other interested parties on City bicycling programs Task 1.2.2 and policies and facilities planning, design and implementation. Conduct bicycle program coordination meetings with department liaisons and local bicycling advocates to discuss Task 1.2.3 ongoing city activities related to implementation of the update. Action Item 1.3 Promote Coordination among the responsible agencies. Formalize the roles and responsibilities of City staff for interface with the NCTCOG Pedestrian and Bicyclist Committee Task 1.3.1 and other committees to provide input into the regional veloweb and promotion of bicycling and to assess the potential for regional funding of update recommendations. Formalize the roles and responsibilities of city staff for interface with the TxDOT Dallas District/North Region Bicycle Task 1.3.2 and Pedestrian Coordinator to facilitate the incorporation of bicyclist and pedestrian accommodations on local TxDOT facilities and design projects. Formalize the roles and responsibilities of City staff for interface with Denton County and the other cities within Task 1.3.3 Denton County to implement the updates recommendations and regional veloweb. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 50 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Implement a program of signs, maps and other bicycling and pedestrian facility and Action Item 1.4 program information. Task 1.4.1 Hold a local contest to develop a bicycle network logo. Task 1.4.2 Prepare designs for route numbering and other specialty signs and information kiosks. Task 1.4.3 Prepare a strategic plan for bikeway network information signage and kiosk placement. Task 1.4.4 Identify funding for creation and placement of signs, maps and kiosks. Task 1.4.5 Prepare and distribute a Bike Facilities map for Denton. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 51 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Action Area 2: Plan and Construct Needed Facilities Action Item 2.1 Incorporate bicyclist accommodations in ongoing project design and facilities maintenance Work with TxDOT to on the design of the reconstruction of IH 35E to incorporate new crossings of IH 35E for at least Pennsylvania/San Jacinto and at Wind River Lane; incorporate bicyclist accommodations at the IH 35E crossings of Task 2.1.1 North Texas Blvd, McCormick Street, Mayhill Road, and Post Oak D; and to provide grade separated crossings for the veloway trail at the BNSF railroad near US 377 and at the creek crossing west of Post Oak. Assess all street improvement projects for the ability to accommdate bicyclists and document the decision on how or Task 2.1.2 whether to accommodate them. Annually assess the opportunities to expand the existing trail network in Denton and focus resources on attaining Task 2.1.3 funding and implementing those priority projects. Annually assess the opportunities to upgrade and expand the sidewalk and sidepath network in Denton and focus Task 2.1.4 resources on attaining funding and implementing those priority projects. Task 2.1.5 Review the ability of all signalized intersections in Denton to detect bicycles and develop a plan for needed actions. Action Item 2.2Identify and pursue sources of funds for implementation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities Parks and Recreation Department may identify available non-city funding sources for trail and sidepath projects for Task 2.2.1 funding of projects to incrementally complete the trails master plan portion of update recommendations. City budgetary discussions should consider the amount that can be dedicated each year from city-controlled funds to Task 2.2.3 implement portions of the update recommendations. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT PEDETRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAE CMPNEN SGOOT 52 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Action Area 3: Promote Bicycling Action Item 3.1 Develop and execute a bicycling public awareness campaign annually Regularly compile and evaluate the available motorist and public information materials and best practices in Texas and Task 3.1.1 throughout the US. Task 3.1.2 Prioritize the objectives and set funding levels for promotion of bicycling annually. Task 3.1.3 Develop and execute an annual event during National Bicycle Month (May) annually. Task 3.1.4 Regularly identify sources of funding and partnerships for the public awareness campaign. Collaborate with local bicycling advocates and businesses to establish a regional annual Action Item 3.2 bicycling event in Denton Task 3.2.1 Establish a committee charged with creating and promoting a bicycling event in Denton. Task 3.2.2 Coordinate with regional bicycling interests and organizations for promotion of Denton bicycling event. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 53 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Action Area 4: Educate Bicyclists and the Public Action Area 4.1 Encourage Denton ISD to incorporate bicycling education as part of their curriculum and activities Continue to encourage and support the use of Bike RodeosŽ in order to educate DISD students on safe bicycling Task 4.1.1 techniques. Task 4.1.2 Promote bicycle awareness to school children, including the benefits of bicycling. Task 4.1.3 Encourage creating a certificate for completion of bicycling education. Encourage UNT and TWU to conduct bicycling proficiency training as part of the student Action Item 4.2 orientation program Task 4.2.1 Educate new students on the benefits and advantages of bicycling to and from class. Educate new students on proper bicycling etiquette and safety, including the required local safety devices and fines Task 4.2.2 for unsafe bicycling behavior. Task 4.2.3 Provide new students with the locations of bicycle facilities in Denton. Parks and Recreation and Police Department collaborate to offer a Smart Cycling program of Action Item 4.3 training for the general public Conduct the Smart Cycling program semi-annually with one session conducted during May in conjunction with Task 4.3.1 National Bike Month. Educate the public on proper bicycling etiquette and safety, including required local safety devices and fines for Task 4.3.2 unsafe bicycling behavior. Advertise the Smart Cycling program in bicycle literature and give adequate public notice and registration information Task 4.3.3 to the public prior to conducting bicycle training session. Prepare and execute an annual public information program on the proper response of motorists Action Item 4.4 when encountering bicyclists on roadways Utilize National Bicycle Month as an opportunity to create and distribute information on bicycle awareness and Task 4.4.1 proper motorist etiquette when encountering bicyclists. Work with Denton ISD to incorporate information on the proper response of motorists to bicyclists in driver education Task 4.4.2 courses. Coordinate with UNT and TWU to distribute information on proper response of motorists to bicyclists during National Task 4.4.3 Bicycle Month. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT PEDETRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAE CMPNE SGOONT 54 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN CITY OF DENTONMOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Action Area 5: Enforce Laws and Regulations Action Item 5.1 Encourage helmets and other safety devices for bicyclists Task 5.1.1 Develop a list of required safety devices that should be encouraged while bicycling in Denton. Task 5.1.2 Educate the public on the required safety devices and their importance. Action Item 5.2 Establish an annual Safe Denton BicyclistsŽ award Task 5.2.1 Establish criteria for evaluating candidates for the Safe Denton Bicyclist award. Task 5.2.2 Announce the award recipient each year during Bike-to-Work week during National Bike Month. Task 5.2.3 Work with local bicycle organizations to establish a potential reward for Safe Denton Bicyclist award recipient. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 55 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Possible Action Timeline Immediate Ongoing Short Term Long Term Task 1.1.1 Task 1.1.2 Task 4.4.1 Task 1.1.4 Task 1.2.1 Task 1.1.3 Task 1.1.5 Task 4.4.2 Task 1.3.1 Task 1.2.2 Task 1.4.5 Task 4.4.3 Task 1.3.2 Task 1.2.3 Task 3.2.1 Task 5.1.2 Task 1.3.3 Task 2.1.1 Task 3.2.2 Task 1.4.1 Task 2.1.2 Task 4.1.3 Task 1.4.2 Task 2.1.3 Task 5.2.1 Task 1.4.3 Task 2.1.4 Task 5.2.2 Task 1.4.4 Task 2.2.1 Task 5.2.3 Task 2.1.5 Task 2.2.3 Task 5.1.1 Task 3.1.1 Task 3.1.2 Task 3.1.3 Task 3.1.4 Task 4.1.1 Task 4.1.2 Tasks 4.2.1 Task 4.2.2 Task 4.2.3 Task 4.3.1 Task 4.1.2 Task 4.3.3 are typically Ongoing Actions are are are Short Term ActionsLong Term Actions Immediate Actions action items of a policy typically those targeted for typically those targeted for typically those targeted for nature, those which require completion within the first completion within ten to completion within the first one constant consideration by three to ten years after Plan twenty years after Plan to three years of the Plan. City Staff. adoption. adoption. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 56 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN APPENDICIES Appendix A: Immediate and Short-Range On-Street Facility Project These costs are for budgetary purposes only and do not include ROW, Street Repair, Immediate Range On-Street Facility Projects (Goal: 1 to 3 years, pending funding) Reconfiguration, or Reconstruction, Design, Survey or Signals. Length, $/mi $/mi Cost Cost Street Name From To Facility Type ft Low High Low High Alice St Crescent St W University Dr Shared_Roadway 1,758 3000 5000 999 1,665 Alice St Panhandle St Crescent St Shared_Roadway 1,508 3000 5000 857 1,428 Alice St W Congress St Panhandle St Shared_Roadway 722 3000 5000 410 683 Amherst Dr Malone St Hinkle Dr Shared_Roadway 1,503 3000 5000 854 1,423 Anna St Crescent St W University W to SP Shared_Roadway 2,252 3000 5000 1,279 2,132 Anna St Panhandle St Crescent St Shared_Roadway 1,476 3000 5000 839 1,398 Audra Ln Paisley St Audra Ln Wide_Curb_Lane 2,998 20000 50000 11,357 28,393 Bernard St W Highland St W Sycamore St Shared_Roadway 1,201 3000 5000 682 1,137 Bernard St W Collins St W Eagle Dr Shared_Roadway 883 3000 5000 502 837 Bernard St Maple St W Highland St Shared_Roadway 405 3000 5000 230 384 Bernard St W Eagle Dr Maple St Shared_Roadway 588 3000 5000 334 557 Blagg/Trinity Lakeview Blvd E University Dr Shared_Roadway 5,872 3000 5000 3,337 5,561 Coit St W Congress St Panhandle St Shared_Roadway 748 3000 5000 425 709 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 57 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Coit St Panhandle St Crescent St Shared_Roadway 1,482 3000 5000 842 1,404 Coit/Westway Crescent St Alice St Shared_Roadway 1,850 3000 5000 1,051 1,752 Congress-Oakland- Withers N Locust St N Bell Ave Shared_Roadway 2,223 3000 5000 1,263 2,105 Crescent St Bryan St Fulton St Shared_Roadway 1,269 3000 5000 721 1,202 Crescent St Fulton St Alice St Shared_Roadway 948 3000 5000 538 897 Crescent St Alice St Anna St Shared_Roadway 1,096 3000 5000 623 1,038 Crescent St Malone St Bryan St Bike_Lane 827 20000 50000 3,131 7,827 Crescent-Bolivar Anna St W Congress St Shared_Roadway 2,725 3000 5000 1,548 2,580 E Hickory St Locust St Veloway Shared_Roadway 1,865 3000 5000 1,059 1,766 E Hickory St Elm St Locust St Shared_Roadway 370 3000 5000 210 350 E Oak St N Elm St N Bell Ave Shared_Roadway 1,662 3000 5000 944 1,574 E Sycamore St W Veloway E Veloway Bike_Lane 431 20000 50000 1,634 4,085 E Sycamore St S Locust St W Veloway Bike_Lane 1,444 20000 50000 5,469 13,673 E Sycamore St S Elm St S Locust St Bike_Lane 382 20000 50000 1,448 3,619 E Windsor St Nottingham Dr Old North Rd Wide_Curb_Lane 2,690 20000 50000 10,191 25,476 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 58 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN E Windsor St N Bell Ave Stuart Rd Bike_Lane 1,296 20000 50000 4,907 12,268 E Windsor St Stuart Rd E Sherman Dr Bike_Lane 1,126 20000 50000 4,267 10,667 Fulton St Crescent St W University Dr Bike_Lane 1,451 20000 50000 5,496 13,739 Fulton St W Congress St Crescent St Bike_Lane 2,221 20000 50000 8,413 21,033 Fulton St W Oak St W Congress St Shared_Roadway 1,368 3000 5000 777 1,295 Hercules Ln Stuart Rd E Sherman Dr Bike_Lane 2,955 20000 50000 11,193 27,982 Hercules Ln N Locust St Stuart Rd Bike_Lane 2,924 20000 50000 11,077 27,694 Hinkle Dr Fairground Trail W Windsor St Bike_Lane 2,555 20000 50000 9,678 24,196 Hinkle Dr W University Dr Amherst Dr Bike_Lane 639 20000 50000 2,420 6,051 Hinkle Dr Amherst Dr Fairground Trail Bike_Lane 1,365 20000 50000 5,170 12,924 Jagoe St W Oak St Scripture St Shared_Roadway 1,118 3000 5000 635 1,058 Locust St W Eagle Dr E Sycamore St Bike_Lane 2,186 20000 50000 8,278 20,696 Locust St E Mulberry St E Hickory St Bike_Lane 370 20000 50000 1,401 3,503 Malone St Scripture St Crescent St Bike_Lane 2,996 20000 50000 11,348 28,371 Malone St Crescent St W University Dr Bike_Lane 996 20000 50000 3,772 9,430 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 59 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Malone St W University Dr Amherst Dr Bike_Lane 682 20000 50000 2,584 6,459 Malone-Auburn- Parkside Malone St W Windsor St Shared_Roadway 4,357 20000 50000 16,505 41,263 McCormick St Willowwood St I35E Shared_Roadway 1,987 3000 5000 1,129 1,881 McCormick St Maple St W Highland St Bike_Lane 395 20000 50000 1,497 3,743 McCormick St W Collins St W Eagle Dr Bike_Lane 953 20000 50000 3,610 9,025 McCormick St W Eagle Dr Maple St Bike_Lane 586 20000 50000 2,221 5,552 McCormick St I35E W Collins St Bike_Lane 1,011 20000 50000 3,830 9,576 Mockingbird Ln E McKinney St Paisley St Shared_Roadway 2,616 3000 5000 1,486 2,477 Mockingbird Ln Paisley St Audra Ln Shared_Roadway 2,909 3000 5000 1,653 2,754 Mockingbird Ln Paisley St Mingo Rd Shared_Roadway 1,896 3000 5000 1,077 1,795 N Ave C W Hickory St W Oak St Shared_Roadway 377 3000 5000 214 357 N Bell Ave Mingo Rd Withers St Bike_Lane 1,074 20000 50000 4,068 10,169 N Bell Ave Withers St E College St Bike_Lane 1,250 20000 50000 4,735 11,837 N Bell Ave College St E Sherman Dr Shared_Roadway 3,479 3000 5000 1,977 3,294 N Elm St W Congress St W Sherman DR Wide_Curb_Lane 4,657 20000 50000 17,640 44,099 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 60 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN N Elm St W Oak St W Congress St Wide_Curb_Lane 1,357 20000 50000 5,139 12,846 N Elm St W Hickory St W Oak St Bike_Lane 380 20000 50000 1,439 3,597 N Locust St E Congress St W Sherman Dr Wide_Curb_Lane 4,670 20000 50000 17,689 44,224 N Locust St E Oak St E Congress St Wide_Curb_Lane 1,366 20000 50000 5,173 12,931 N Locust St E Hickory St W Oak St Bike_Lane 373 20000 50000 1,413 3,534 N Texas Blvd W Highland St W Hickory St Wide_Curb_Lane 1,947 20000 50000 7,375 18,438 N Texas Blvd I35E W Eagle Dr Wide_Curb_Lane 719 20000 50000 2,723 6,807 NE of Eagle at side N Texas Blvd W Eagle Dr path Wide_Curb_Lane 415 20000 50000 1,572 3,930 NE of Eagle at side N Texas Blvd path W Highland St Wide_Curb_Lane 864 20000 50000 3,273 8,182 N Texas Blvd W Hickory St W Oak St Shared_Roadway 359 3000 5000 204 340 N Welch St W Hickory St W Oak St Shared_Roadway 368 3000 5000 209 349 Oakland St Withers St NLocust St Shared_Roadway 2,777 3000 5000 1,578 2,630 Paisley St Audra Ln Mockingbird Ln Shared_Roadway 3,734 3000 5000 2,122 3,536 Paisley St N Wood St Audra Ln Shared_Roadway 3,223 3000 5000 1,831 3,052 Paisley St N Bell Ave N Wood St Shared_Roadway 2,715 3000 5000 1,542 2,571 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 61 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Panhandle St N Bonnie Brae St Malone St Shared_Roadway 3,482 3000 5000 1,978 3,297 Panhandle St Malone St Fulton St Shared_Roadway 1,985 3000 5000 1,128 1,879 Panhandle St Fulton St Alice St Shared_Roadway 959 3000 5000 545 908 Panhandle St Coit St Bolivar St Shared_Roadway 920 3000 5000 523 871 Panhandle St Alice St Coit St Shared_Roadway 676 3000 5000 384 640 Ponder Ave W Oak St Scripture St Shared_Roadway 1,077 3000 5000 612 1,020 Ponder-Congress Scripture St Fulton St Shared_Roadway 662 3000 5000 376 627 Riney-Donna N Elm St Del Rd Bike_Lane 615 20000 50000 2,328 5,819 S Ave C W Eagle St Maple St Shared_Roadway 543 3000 5000 309 514 S Ave C W Highland St W Hickory St Shared_Roadway 1,928 3000 5000 1,096 1,826 S Ave C Maple St W Highland St Shared_Roadway 402 3000 5000 228 381 S Elm St W Eagle Dr Sycamore St Bike_Lane 2,208 20000 50000 8,365 20,912 S Elm St W Sycamore St W Mulberry St Bike_Lane 359 20000 50000 1,361 3,402 S Elm St W Mulberry St W Hickory St Bike_Lane 371 20000 50000 1,404 3,511 S Locust St E Sycamore St E Mulberry St Bike_Lane 364 20000 50000 1,380 3,451 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 62 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN S Welch St W Highland St W Sycamore St Bike_Lane 1,204 20000 50000 4,561 11,402 S Welch St W Eagle Dr Maple St Bike_Lane 584 20000 50000 2,213 5,532 S Welch St Maple St W Highland St Bike_Lane 391 20000 50000 1,481 3,702 S Welch St W Mulberry St W Hickory St Bike_Lane 390 20000 50000 1,479 3,697 S Welch St W Sycamore St WMulberry St Bike_Lane 353 20000 50000 1,336 3,340 Scripture St I35 Jagoe St Bike_Lane 3,459 20000 50000 13,102 32,754 Scripture St Jagoe St Ponder Ave Shared_Roadway 1,748 3000 5000 993 1,655 Scripture St I35 Jagoe St Shared_Roadway 2,502 3000 5000 1,422 2,369 Stuart Rd Hercules Ln Just S of Loop 288 Bike_Lane 2,059 20000 50000 7,798 19,495 Stuart Rd Coronado Dr Windsor St Bike_Lane 1,843 20000 50000 6,982 17,454 Stuart Rd Sherman Dr Coronado Dr Shared_Roadway 231 3000 5000 131 219 W Collins St Benard St Fort Wort Dr Shared_Roadway 1,994 3000 5000 1,133 1,888 W Collins St Ave A Bernard St Shared_Roadway 1,380 3000 5000 784 1,307 W Congress St Fulton St Bolivar St Shared_Roadway 2,562 3000 5000 1,456 2,426 W Congress St Bolivar St N Elm St Shared_Roadway 447 3000 5000 254 423 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 63 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN W Congress St N Elm St N Locust St Shared_Roadway 388 3000 5000 220 367 W Eagle Dr S Ave C Ave A Bike_Lane 1,445 20000 50000 5,472 13,679 W Eagle Dr N Texas Blvd S Ave C Bike_Lane 921 20000 50000 3,490 8,725 W Eagle Dr S Welch St Bernard St Bike_Lane 875 20000 50000 3,316 8,290 W Eagle Dr Ave A S Welch St Bike_Lane 498 20000 50000 1,885 4,713 W Eagle Dr Bernard St S Elm St Bike_Lane 2,221 20000 50000 8,415 21,037 W Hickory St Welch St N Carroll Blvd Bike_Lane 2,132 20000 50000 8,077 20,192 W Hickory St N Texas Blvd Ave C Bike_Lane 1,337 20000 50000 5,066 12,665 W Hickory St Ave C Welch St Bike_Lane 1,966 20000 50000 7,447 18,616 W Hickory St I35 N Texas Blvd Bike_Lane 1,943 20000 50000 7,361 18,402 W Hickory St N Carroll Blvd Elm St Shared_Roadway 1,100 3000 5000 625 1,042 W Oak St Fulton St N Carroll Blvd Bike_Lane 1,917 20000 50000 7,262 18,155 W Oak St Jagoe St Ponder Ave Bike_Lane 1,780 20000 50000 6,744 16,861 W Oak St N Texas Blvd N Ave C Bike_Lane 1,338 20000 50000 5,068 12,670 W Oak St Ponder Ave Fulton St Bike_Lane 405 20000 50000 1,536 3,840 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 64 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN W Oak St I35 N Texas Blvd Bike_Lane 1,950 20000 50000 7,385 18,462 W Oak St N Carroll Blvd N Elm St Shared_Roadway 1,078 3000 5000 613 1,021 W Sycamore St S Welch St Benard St Shared_Roadway 875 3000 5000 497 828 W Sycamore St Bernard St S Carroll St Shared_Roadway 1,291 3000 5000 734 1,223 Bike_Lane + signal W Sycamore St S Carroll St S Elm St on Carroll Street 1,072 20000 50000 229,061 235,153 Total Immediate Facilities 35.3 Miles $636,531 $1,210,474 These costs are for budgetary purposes only and do not include ROW, Street Repair, Reconfiguration, or Reconstruction, Design, Survey Short Range On-Street Facility Projects (Goal: 3 to 10 years, pending funding) or Signals. Length, $/mi $/mi Street Name From To Facility Type ft Low High Cost Low Cost High Acme-Bernard Fort Worth Dr Willowwood St Shared_Roadway 1,019 3000 5000 579 965 Alegra Vista Dr Sombre Vista Dr Dallas Dr Shared_Roadway 562 3000 5000 319 532 Bell Pl E McKinney St Mingo Rd Bike_Lane 650 20000 50000 2,461 6,152 Hickory Creek Bonnie Brae St Trail Corbin Rd Shared_Roadway 2,838 3000 5000 1,612 2,687 Hickory Creek Bonnie Brae St 450' N of Riesling Trail Shared_Roadway 2,766 3000 5000 1,572 2,620 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 65 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Brinker Rd Veloway Loop 288 Wide_Curb_Lane 2,778 20000 50000 10,524 26,311 Brinker Rd Colorado Blvd Veloway Wide_Curb_Lane 1,304 20000 50000 4,941 12,352 Brinker Rd Loop 28 Spencer Rd Wide_Curb_Lane 1,077 20000 50000 4,081 10,203 Bushey-Bradshaw Morse St E Sycamore St Shared_Roadway 2,387 3000 5000 1,356 2,261 Centre Place Dr I35E Sombre Vista Dr Bike_Lane 2,196 20000 50000 8,319 20,797 Colorado Blvd San Jacinto Blvd Spencer Rd Wide_Curb_Lane 3,250 20000 50000 12,311 30,778 Colorado Blvd Medpark Dr Brinker Rd Wide_Curb_Lane 2,131 20000 50000 8,073 20,182 Colorado Blvd Loop 288 San Jacinto Blvd Wide_Curb_Lane 1,911 20000 50000 7,239 18,096 Colorado Blvd Brinker Rd Loop 288 Wide_Curb_Lane 2,792 20000 50000 10,574 26,435 Colorado Blvd S Mayhill Rd Medpark Dr Wide_Curb_Lane 1,487 20000 50000 5,631 14,078 Colorado Blvd S Mayhill Veloway Wide_Curb_Lane 430 20000 50000 1,627 4,068 Corbin Rd 900 feet East of I35 S Bonnie Brae St Shared_Roadway 2,300 3000 5000 1,307 2,178 Corbin Rd Spring Side Rd On Corbin at FP Shared_Roadway 3,081 3000 5000 1,751 2,918 Daugherty/Myrtle S Locust St Collins St Shared_Roadway 1,460 3000 5000 829 1,382 Daugherty-Smith Locust St Dallas St Shared_Roadway 2,431 3000 5000 1,381 2,302 Del Rd Donna Rd Nicosia St Shared_Roadway 1,667 3000 5000 947 1,579 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 66 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Cooper Creek Trail Donna Rd Del Dr Ext Bike_Lane 189 20000 50000 714 1,786 E Sherman Dr Long Rd North City Limits Shoulder_Lane 23,037 20000 50000 87,260 218,149 E Sherman Dr Greenwood Dr E Windsor St Wide_Curb_Lane 3,808 20000 50000 14,423 36,057 E Sherman Dr E Windsor St Cooper Creek Trail Wide_Curb_Lane 685 20000 50000 2,594 6,484 E Sherman Dr Cooper Creek Trail Hercules Ln Wide_Curb_Lane 3,256 20000 50000 12,334 30,835 E Sherman Dr Hercules Ln Loop 288 Shoulder_Lane 1,704 20000 50000 6,453 16,132 E Sherman Dr N Locust St N Bell Ave Shared_Roadway 1,717 3000 5000 975 1,626 E Sherman Dr N Bell Ave Greenwood Dr Shared_Roadway 823 3000 5000 468 780 E Sycamore St S Bradshaw St Pecan Creek Trail Shared_Roadway 349 3000 5000 199 331 E Sycamore St Veloway S Bradshaw St Shared_Roadway 1,496 3000 5000 850 1,417 E Windsor St E Sherman Dr Cooper Creek Trail Wide_Curb_Lane 2,410 20000 50000 9,129 22,822 E Windsor St Cooper Creek Trail Nottingham Dr Wide_Curb_Lane 2,081 20000 50000 7,883 19,709 E Windsor St Old North Rd Loop 288 Wide_Curb_Lane 598 20000 50000 2,263 5,658 Forest Ridge Dr E Ryan Rd Hobson Ln Bike_Lane 5,345 20000 50000 20,248 50,619 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 67 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Fort Worth Dr W Collins St W Eagle St Bike_Lane 774 20000 50000 2,933 7,332 Lillian B Miller Pkwy Teasley Ln I35E Wide_Curb_Lane 4,057 20000 50000 15,369 38,422 Locust-Collins W Daugherty St Fort Worth Dr Shared_Roadway 1,999 3000 5000 1,136 1,893 Maple St S Ave C Ave A Bike_Lane 1,401 3000 5000 796 1,327 Maple St Ave A S Welch St Bike_Lane 567 20000 50000 2,149 5,371 Maple St S Welch St Bernard St Bike_Lane 882 20000 50000 3,340 8,349 Medpark Dr Brinker Rd Colorado Blvd Wide_Curb_Lane 2,116 20000 50000 8,016 20,040 Montecito Rd E Ryan Rd E Hobson Ln Bike_Lane 6,017 20000 50000 22,792 56,981 Morse St Bushey St S Woodrow Ln Shared_Roadway 2,752 3000 5000 1,564 2,606 Morse St Veloway Bushey St Shared_Roadway 1,352 3000 5000 768 1,280 Brinker Rd Morse St Extension S Loop 288 Wide_Curb_Lane 1,873 20000 50000 7,094 17,735 Mulberry St S Elm St S Locust St Bike_Lane 379 20000 50000 1,437 3,592 N Bell Ave E Windsor St N Locust St Wide_Curb_Lane 2,326 20000 50000 8,812 22,031 N Bell Ave E Sherman Dr Windsor St Wide_Curb_Lane 3,696 20000 50000 14,001 35,002 N Elm St W Sherman Dr N Locust St Wide_Curb_Lane 3,542 20000 50000 13,416 33,539 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 68 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN N Locust St W Sherman Dr N Elm St Wide_Curb_Lane 3,092 20000 50000 11,712 29,280 N Wood St E McKinney St Paisley St Shared_Roadway 1,589 3000 5000 903 1,505 Nottingham Dr E University Dr Cooper Creek Trail Wide_Curb_Lane 2,986 20000 50000 11,312 28,281 Nottingham Dr Cooper Creek Trail E Windsor St Wide_Curb_Lane 860 20000 50000 3,258 8,146 Nottingham Dr Audra Ln Mingo Rd Wide_Curb_Lane 1,064 20000 50000 4,032 10,080 Nottingham Dr Mingo Rd E University Dr Bike_Lane 1,808 20000 50000 6,847 17,119 Oak Valley Paisley St Whispering Oaks Shared_Roadway 1,624 3000 5000 923 1,538 Old North Rd Mingo Rd Cooper Creek Trail Shared_Roadway 2,907 3000 5000 1,652 2,753 Old North Rd Cooper Creek Trail E Windsor St Shared_Roadway 989 3000 5000 562 937 Pennsylvania Dr Teasley Ln I 35E Wide_Curb_Lane 5,960 20000 50000 22,575 56,437 Robinson Rd State School Rd Veloway Wide_Curb_Lane 2,000 20000 50000 7,577 18,942 Robinson Rd Teasley Ln State School Rd Wide_Curb_Lane 3,764 20000 50000 14,259 35,647 S of Highland Park S Bonnie Brae St Corbin Rd Rd Shared_Roadway 1,327 3000 5000 754 1,257 300' S of E S Locust St Daugherty St E Daugherty St Shared_Roadway 357 3000 5000 203 338 S Mayhill Rd I35E Colorado Blvd Wide_Curb_Lane 2,367 20000 50000 8,967 22,417 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 69 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN S Woodrow Ln Pecan Creek Trail Paisley St Wide_Curb_Lane 4,638 20000 50000 17,568 43,920 S Woodrow Ln Shady Oaks Dr Morse St Wide_Curb_Lane 1,290 20000 50000 4,887 12,217 S Woodrow Ln Morse St Pecan Creek Trail Wide_Curb_Lane 1,452 20000 50000 5,501 13,752 S Woodrow Ln Spencer Rd Shady Oaks Rd Wide_Curb_Lane 428 20000 50000 1,621 4,052 San Jacinto Blvd I 35E Colorado Blvd Wide_Curb_Lane 2,236 20000 50000 8,469 21,172 Shady Oaks Dr S Woodrow Ln Morse Rd Extension Wide_Curb_Lane 1,647 20000 50000 6,239 15,597 Morse Rd Brinker Rd Shady Oaks Dr Extension Extension Wide_Curb_Lane 3,698 20000 50000 14,006 35,015 Shelby Ln Corbin Rd Dakota Ln Wide_Curb_Lane 1,333 3000 5000 758 1,263 Smith-Hill Dallas St Veloway Shared_Roadway 2,421 3000 5000 1,376 2,293 Spencer Rd S Woodrow Ln Brinker Rd Wide_Curb_Lane 5,355 20000 50000 20,285 50,713 Spencer Rd Loop 288 S Mayhill Rd Wide_Curb_Lane 2,476 20000 50000 9,378 23,445 Spencer Rd Brinker Rd Loop 288 Wide_Curb_Lane 1,193 20000 50000 4,520 11,301 Stuart Dr Cooper Creek Trail Hercules Ln Bike_Lane 2,602 20000 50000 9,858 24,645 Stuart Dr W Windsor St Cooper Creek Trail Bike_Lane 819 20000 50000 3,101 7,753 Sycamore-Crawford-On Oak East of Oak Pecan Creek Trail Crawford Shared_Roadway 1,645 3000 5000 935 1,558 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 70 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Teasley Ln E Hobson Ln I35E Wide_Curb_Lane 6,436 20000 50000 24,378 60,945 Teasley Ln E Hobson Ln Pennsylvania Dr Wide_Curb_Lane 1,063 20000 50000 4,025 10,063 Lillian B Miller Teasley Ln Pennsylvania Dr Pkwy Wide_Curb_Lane 1,849 20000 50000 7,002 17,506 Unicorn Lake Blvd State School Rd Wind River Ln Wide_Curb_Lane 3,259 20000 50000 12,346 30,865 W Highland St S Welch St Bernard St Bike_Lane 875 20000 50000 3,315 8,287 W Highland St N Texas Blvd S Ave C Bike_Lane 1,321 20000 50000 5,002 12,505 W Highland St S Ave C Ave A Bike_Lane 1,385 20000 50000 5,246 13,115 W Highland St Ave A S Welch St Bike_Lane 578 20000 50000 2,189 5,474 W Sherman Dr N Elm St N Locust St Shared_Roadway 406 3000 5000 230 384 W Windsor St Hinkle Dr N Elm St Bike_Lane 2,392 20000 50000 9,062 22,656 W Windsor St N Elm St N Locust St Bike_Lane 2,033 20000 50000 7,701 19,254 W Windsor St N Locust St N Bell Ave Bike_Lane 1,605 20000 50000 6,081 15,202 Walt Parker Dr S Bonnie Brae St I35E Wide_Curb_Lane 1,981 20000 50000 7,502 18,756 Wind River Ln Unicorn Lake Blvd I35E Wide_Curb_Lane 5,082 20000 50000 19,250 48,125 Lillian B Miller Wind River Ln Pkwy I35E Wide_Curb_Lane 838 20000 50000 3,176 7,939 Total Short Range Facilities 47.7 Miles $677,394 $1,671,232 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 71 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) Safe Routes to School Program Appendix B: Funding Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA) must be Funds for bicycle and pedestrian projects, submitted to NCTCOG for approval prior to Safe Routes to School programs create programs and activities may be funded the submission to TxDOT. A letter of practical projects to make school routes through many different sources, of which support for eligible projects is provided by safer for children to walk and bicycle, such the Federal-aid program is only one. Each NCTCOG to local governments to include in as sidewalks, crosswalks and bicycle funding source may have specific criteria their completed applications to their local facilities. Community leaders, parents and for eligibility of project or program types, schools also use education programs to TxDOT District Office. physical locations in which they may be help children travel safely to and from On January 29, 2010, the Regional implemented or other constraints on how school. Read more in the flyer from the Transportation Council received the the funds are used. National Center for Safe Routes to School. following project submittals from cities in Some upcoming funding opportunities for the region that have been provided to The 2009 SRTS Program Call applications bicycle and pedestrian improvements in local TxDOT districts: were due November 30, 2009. The Denton may include: program call for projects is anticipated to Dallas District Bike/Ped Projects = be on an annual basis, pending funding The 2005 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 20 projects totaling $65,536,651 authorizations. The 2009 program did not Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A include funding for preparation of plans, as Fort Worth District Bike/Ped , which is Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) it had in the past, but rather focused on Projects = 19 projects totaling the most recent funding authorization implementation of facilities. $29,742,774 legislation for Federal-aid programs, requires each state DOT to set aside Only a small number of these projects are federal funds from eligible categories for expected to be funded. This is typically an Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality the construction of bicycle and pedestrian annual program that is always very transportation facilities. Program competitive. Typically, a project must be part of an overall master plan and the In 2004, the U.S. Environmental Protection benefits to the community must be well Agency (EPA) designated nine counties in Transportation Enhancement Program documented. North Central Texas as nonattainment for the pollutant ozone in accordance with the Much of the funds for the STEP program The Texas Department of Transportation National Ambient Air Quality Standards for the remainder of the current SAFTEA- (TxDOT) issued the 2009 Statewide (NAAQS). These standards are designed to LU authorization have already been Transportation Enhancement Program protect human and environmental health, allocated by the TRC to projects for the (STEP) Call for Projects on October 9, 2009. and ground-level ozone is monitored and region. As stipulated in the Texas Transportation targeted for reductions due to its Enhancement Program Guide 2009,Ž potentially harmful effects. Four main projects that fall within the North Central PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 72 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN sources of ozone-causing emissions Hazard Elimination Program Other Agency Funding include On-road Mobile Sources like cars and trucks, Non-road Mobile Sources like The Hazard Elimination (HES) Program is Texas Recreational Trails Program construction equipment, Point Sources like part of the Highway Safety Improvement Texas Parks and Wildlife Department electric generating utilities and industrial Program (HSIP). The basic objective of the (TPWD) administers the National boilers, and Area Sources like solvent use HES Program is to reduce the number and Recreational Trails Fund in Texas under the severity of crashes. The program and agriculture. approval of the Federal Highway objectives are accomplished through Development of an air quality plan, known Administration (FHWA). This federally highway safety projects.Ž HES projects as the State Implementation Plan (SIP), is funded program receives its funding from may be for locations both on and off the required for all nonattainment areas in a portion of federal gas taxes paid on fuel state highway system. HES projects may order to demonstrate how ozone will be used in non-highway recreational vehicles. accomplish any of the following: reduced to levels compliant with the The grants can be up to 80% of project NAAQS. The SIP for the Dallas-Fort Worth Correct or improve high-hazard cost with a maximum of $200,000 for non- nonattainment area includes programs to locations motorized trail grants and currently there get older cars off the road, technologies to is not a maximum amount for motorized Eliminate roadside obstacles clean up vehicles already on the road, and trail grants (call 512-389-8224 for education programs so that citizens can do motorized trail grant funding availability). Treat roadside obstacles their part in improving air quality in North Funds can be spent on both motorized and Texas. non-motorized recreational trail projects Improve highway signing and such as the construction of new pavement marking In the past, projects to encourage walking recreational trails, to improve existing and bicycling in north Texas have been trails, to develop trailheads or trailside Install traffic control or warning funded under the CMAQ program. Recent facilities, and to acquire trail corridors. devices at locations with a high funding constraints and requirements to Application deadline is May 1st each year. number of crashes. prove air quality benefits have made these funds more restrictive and yet still very These projects may range from spot-safety competitive. Much of the funds for the improvements and upgrading of existing Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission CMAQ program for the remainder of the conditions to new roadway construction current SAFTEA-LU have already been Regional Grants (such as grade separations). Highway allocated by the TRC to projects for the safety projects should be small in scope, This grant program was created to assist region. low in cost, and can be let to contract local governments with the acquisition and within three years. The TxDOT Districts will development of multi-jurisdictional public advise local communities of an upcoming recreation areas in the metropolitan areas call for projects. of the state. It allows cities, counties, PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 73 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN water districts, and other units of local partnerships and identified priority risks. construction and research are not eligible government to acquire and develop Note: this is a highly competitive fund and activities. parkland. The program provides 50% not directly applicable to bike/ped On September 29, 2009 the Department of matching fund, reimbursement grants to initiatives. Health and Human Services (HHS) eligible local governments for both active announced the release of $120 million in recreation and conservation opportunities. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Master plans submission deadline is 60 Texas Department of State Health (ARRA) funds for prevention and wellness days prior to application deadline. Grants Services programs for U.S. states and territories, are awarded yearly by TPW Commission building on the recent announcement of when funds are available. This program is TDSHS may be a resource for educational the $373 million funding opportunity for currently inactive, but may be reinstated in and safety programs that increase physical communities and tribes around the 2010. activity, fight obesity, and improve health. country. In all, the comprehensive On September 17, 2009, the Centers for Communities Putting Prevention to Work Disease Control and Prevention announced initiative will make $650 million available Environmental Protection Agency - a new program: Communities Putting for public health efforts to address obesity, Prevention to Work. Thirty to forty Community Action for a Renewed increase physical activity, improve communities will receive a total of $373 nutrition, and decrease smoking. Environment (CARE) million in American Recovery and Lead Applicant needs to be either a local or Reinvestment Act (stimulus) dollars [Deadline: March 9, 2010] state health department. The deadline for through this competitive grant program to http://www.epa.gov/air/grants/care_rfp_1 2009 Awards was December 1, 2009. It is support interventions that reduce obesity _10.pdf uncertain whether additional funds will be (through improved physical activity and The Environmental Protection Agency is made available in the future, but to be nutrition) and/or reduce tobacco use. making $2 million available to reduce ready it is in the citys interest to work with Communities can apply for either focus pollution at the local level through the health department to demonstrate area or both. This landmark opportunity is community-based programs. Two types of how the city and local advocates can be a aimed at mobilizing community resources awards are available: Level 1 awards resource to them. toward broad-based policy, systems, ($75,000-$100,000) are designed to help organizational and environmental changes. The key to the success of Communities establish partnerships on the community The application places an emphasis on Putting Prevention to Work will be to level to develop local environmental communities demonstrating effective implement community-wide policies, priorities; Level 2 awards ($150,000- coalitions, and notes that special systems, and environmental changes that $300,000) are designed to help with consideration should be given to the reach across all levels of the socio- implementation of risk reduction activities inclusion of populations disproportionately ecological model and include the full and measure results for communities affected by chronic diseases. Note that engagement of the leadership in city which have already established PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 74 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN government, boards of health, schools, community sectors working together to businesses, community and faith-based promote health and prevent chronic organizations, community developers, diseases. Funded programs need to build transportation and land use planners, on, but not duplicate current Federal parks and recreation officials, health care programs as well as state, local, or purchasers, health plans, health care community programs and coordinate fully providers, academic institutions, with existing programs and resources in foundations, other Recovery Act-funded the community." community activities, and many other PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 75 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Appendix C: City of Denton Roadway Design Standards PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 76 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 77 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 78 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 79 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 80 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 81 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGE COMPONENT 82 CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN Freese and Nichols, Inc. 1701 N. Market Street Suite 500 Dallas, TX 75201 (214) 217- 2200 www.freese.com EXHIBIT 2 Legend CRYSTAL LAKE AVE Short Range Improvements MEADOW LN 423 GREGG RD MOUNTAIN VIEW DR Bike Lane Shoulder Lane § ¨¦ Wide Curb Lane/Urban Shoulder PLAINVIEW RD 35 UV (<16' outside lane)(>16' outside lane) 288 Shared Roadway BEALL ST WITHERS WAY £ ¤ Sidepath TOTEM POLE WAY 77 Long Range Improvements TxDOT Arterial/Highway Sidewalk & WCL/BL MILLER RD Future Collector Roadway GABLE CT Sidepath & WCL/BL FISHTRAP RD JOHN DR STEPHEN DR Future Arterial Roadway Sidepath & Urban Shoulder£ ¤ 77 Trails MOHICAN AVE Existing Regional Veloway£ ¤ £ ¤ 380 WICKER WAY 380 Existing Multi-Use Path AUDRA LN Texas Womans Future Regional Veloway Rayzor University £ ¤ Ranch Future Multi-Use Path MEADOW OAK DR DANA LN PAISLEY ST Existing Greenbelt Trail RUSSELL NEWMAN BLVD QUAIL MEADOWS LN Existng Parks Central Downtown Business Transit W HICKORY ST Floodplain District Center TROY H LAGRONE DR W SYCAMORE STE SYCAMORE ST University of CHESTNUT ST DCTA Train Statons North Texas Library Existng Schools n Annex MORSE ST FANNIN ST 1515 UV 288 I35 E RAMP HIGHLAND PARK RD MATADOR DR Medpark TORERO TRL RICH ST ROSELAWN CIR Staton GATEWOOD DR ABBOT'S LN 1830 Pedestrian and Bicycle 2181 §¦¨ 2499 Linkages Component 35W YALE §¦¨ Denton Mobility Plan 35E Z WALTON DR £ ¤ SAN LORENZO DR 377 DRAFTDRAFT ALLRED RD MORNING GLORY DR DOBBS RD LIGHTHOUSE DR Miles LAKE SHARON DR MONTECITO DR 010.5 October, 2011 GREENMEADOW DR MEADOWGLEN DR GRAYSON LN ROBSON RANCH RD AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Development ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECTCA11-0004 (Comprehensive Plan Update) Receive a report, hold a discussion, and given staff direction on the execution of a contract for Professional Services for Wallace Roberts and Todd to serve as the consultant on the update to the City of Denton Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND On August 16, 2011 staff updated City Council on the selection of Wallace Roberts and Todd (WRT) to serve as the lead consultant on the update to the City of Denton Comprehensive Plan. In this effort, WRT has partnered with Gresham Smith and Partners, the Wolf Group, and Insight Research Corporation to address specific aspects of the plan. Staff has commenced contract negotiations with WRT to identify phasing, project tasks, and project costs. WRT has submitted their latest fee proposal for their project team that consists of a five phased approach from project organization to plan adoption. Each project phase includes the amount of hours each project team member will complete on the project task along with the total hours and cost for that phase. This provides an itemization of tasks, hours, and cost per phase. Each phase builds on the previous with the majority of the responsibilities being performed in phases 2 through 4. It is anticipated that this effort will take 18 to 24 months for completion, at a total cost of $628,500. This figure includes all travel, incidental, and associated project costs for the entire project team, WRT and their partnered sub consultants. Although the contract for professional services has not been finalized, staff expects that the final cost associated with the update to the comprehensive plan will be in the range provided by WRT. Before finalization of the contract, staff wanted to present to City Council the contract status along with the latest fee proposal. WRT is an interdisciplinary planning and design firm based in Philadelphia. WRT is a leader in community visioning, comprehensive planning, and sustainable development. Their approach acts upon the values and aspirations of each community, engaging citizens and community leaders to take ure. This approach is especially well-suited for Denton, which seeks to update the existing comprehensive plan in innovative ways to deal with municipal challenges and consider the integrated nature of municipal decision making. To date, WRT has completed 30 comprehensive plans that have been successfully adopted and implemented nationally and locally by the respective municipality. These plans have been developed utilizing the latest techniques in consensus building, and includes guidelines for fluid responsiveness to upcoming changes both anticipated and unforeseen. Agenda Information Sheet October 18, 2011 Page 2 National Plans Cornerstone 2025 Plan for Louisville/Jefferson County, KY Forging Our Comprehensive Urban Strategy (FOCUS) Kansas City, MO Comprehensive Plan Connections 2025 Comprehensive Plan for Greensboro, NC Comprehensive plans currently underway: Imagine Austin, Austin, TX Albany 2030, Albany, NY Comprehensive plans completed throughout Texas: City of Celina Comprehensive Plan Update Town of Flower Mound Comprehensive Plan City of Georgetown Comprehensive Plan. As well, WRT has incorporated interactive planning initiatives and schemes to guide, reinvigorate, and ized state-of-the- art techniques to engage all citizens and to develop and test future scenarios for measures of sustainability and quality of life. CONCLUSION Staff requests direction on the proposed fee amount and final execution of a contract for professional services for WRT to serve as the consultant on the update to the city of Denton Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council direct staff to finalize negotiations with WRT. Upon completion of the final contract terms and conditions, staff will return for contract approval. OPTIONS 1.Direct staff to finalize negotiations. 2.Direct staff to take another direction. ATTACHMENTS 1.Wallace Roberts and Todd Fee Proposal 2.Wallace Roberts and Todd Sub-consultant Fee Proposal Respectfully prepared and submitted by: Brian Lockley, AICP Project Manager John Silvia Nancy Andrew Support FernslerVargasTempletonDobshinskyStaff $200$135$115$100$65 Hourly RateSub-Totals PHASE 1: Project Organization & Mobilization Task 1.1Kick-Off Meeting / Community Tour3232328 104$14,440 Task 1.2Informational Sessions88 16$2,680 Task 1.3Public Outreach Plan44 8$1,340 Coordination Meetings / Trips (1)0$0 44440328 128 Phase 1 Total Hours $8,800$5,940$0$3,200$520$18,460 Phase 1 Total Fee PHASE 2: Issues, Existing Conditions, & Trends Task 2.1Stakeholder Engagement3636 72$12,060 Task 2.2Website Development816 24$2,680 Task 2.3Community Survey244$1,400 Task 2.4Denton Plan Assessment161624 56$8,120 Task 2.5Review of Existing Plans, Initiatives 61624 46$6,120 Task 2.6Data Assessment4882416 60$6,240 Task 2.7Comprehensive Plan Data Book824244040 136$14,200 Task 2.8Growth Scenario Model8162440 88$10,520 Task 2.9Community Forum 1363636 108$16,200 Coordination Meetings / Trips (3)424216160 116$17,510 0$0 15820616013656 716 Phase 2 Total Hours $31,600$27,810$18,400$13,600$3,640$95,050 Phase 2 Total Fee PHASE 3: Framing the Vision Task 3.1Vision and Goals82424 56$7,600 Task 3.2Strategic Policy Directions and 8404060 148$17,600 Task 3.3Community Forum 23636368 116$16,720 Task 3.4Preferred Growth Concept1636244016 132$15,860 Coordination Meetings / Trips (3)565616 128$20,600 12419214010024 580 Phase 3 Total Hours $24,800$25,920$16,100$10,000$1,560$78,380 Phase 3 Total Fee PHASE 4: Comprehensive Plan Task 4.1Plan Elements, Strategies and Actions481401408060 468$56,500 Task 4.2Implementation Strategy24402416 104$14,000 Task 4.3Plan Monitoring and Evaluation1640328 96$12,800 Task 4.4Internal Draft Plan Review162424 64$9,200 Task 4.5Community Forum 336363624 132$17,760 Task 4.6Follow Up Meetings and Data 4848241024 154$21,400 Coordination Meetings / Trips (4)56562416 152$23,120 244384304106132 1170 Phase 4 Total Hours $48,800$51,840$34,960$10,600$8,580$154,780 Phase 4 Total Fee PHASE 5: Final Comprehensive Plan and Adoption Task 5.1Final Plan Preparation 1624242440 128$14,200 Task 5.2Plan Adoption1616 32$5,360 Coordination Meetings / Trips (3)363616 88$13,900 6876402440 248 Phase 5 Total Hours $13,600$10,260$4,600$2,400$2,600$33,460 Phase5 Total Fee 638902644398260 2,842 Total Project Hours * Estimated WRT Expenses380,100 WRT Labor Fee Travel *$32,400$38,400 Estimated Expenses Reproduction$4,000$418,500 Total Miscellaneous$2,000 $38,400 Total Team Composite Estimate WRT$418,500 GSP$65,000 The Wolf Group$60,000 Insight Research Corp.$85,000 \\CODAD\Global\Agendas\Neighborhood Svcs\2011 Agenda Items\October 2011\October 18 - 2011\WS - Comp Plan Total Basic Scope of Work$628,500 Update\Updated WRT Fee Proposal.xlsx DENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FEE PROPOSAL The Wolf Insight GSP SUBCONSULTANT FEES GroupResearch PHASE 1: Project Organization & Total Task 1.1Kick-Off Meeting / Community Tour$4,000$4,000$4,000$12,000 $4,000 Task 1.2Informational Sessions$2,000$2,000 Task 1.3Public Outreach Plan$3,000$3,000 Coordination Meetings / Trips $0 PHASE 2: Issues, Existing Conditions, & Trends $5,500 Task 2.1Stakeholder Engagement$4,000$1,500 Task 2.2Website Development$10,000$10,000 $10,000 Task 2.3Community Survey$10,000 Task 2.4Denton Plan Assessment$2,000$1,000$3,000 Review of Existing Plans, Initiatives and Task 2.5$2,000$1,000$3,000 Policies $3,000 Task 2.6Data Assessment$2,000$1,000 $12,000 Task 2.7Comprehensive Plan Data Book$8,000$4,000 $16,000 Task 2.8Growth Scenario Model$16,000 $14,000 Task 2.9Community Forum 1$2,000$10,000$2,000 $5,000 Coordination Meetings / Trips $2,000$2,000$1,000 PHASE 3: Framing the Vision Task 3.1Vision and Goals$1,000$500$1,500 Strategic Policy Directions and Growth Task 3.2$2,000$16,000$18,000 Scenarios Task 3.3Community Forum 2$2,000$10,000$2,000$14,000 Task 3.4Preferred Growth Concept$16,000$16,000 Coordination Meetings / Trips $2,000$1,000$1,000$4,000 PHASE 4: Comprehensive Plan Development $22,000 Task 4.1Plan Elements, Strategies and Actions$16,000$6,000 Task 4.2Implementation Strategy$5,000$3,000$8,000 $0 Task 4.3Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Task 4.4Internal Draft Plan Review$0 $14,000 Task 4.5Community Forum 3$2,000$10,000$2,000 Task 4.6Follow Up Meetings and Data Collection$2,000$2,000$4,000 $4,000 Coordination Meetings / Trips$2,000$2,000 PHASE 5: Final Comprehensive Plan and Task 5.1Final Plan Preparation $3,000$1,000$4,000 $0 Task 5.2Plan Adoption Coordination Meetings / Trips$0 $65,000$60,000$85,000$210,000 Total AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Denton Municipal Electric ACM: Howard Martin, Utilities 349-8232 SUBJECT Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the alignment of the Denton Municipal Electric Northeast Denton Transmission Line Upgrade Rebuild Project. The Public Utilities Board recommended approval of the Purple Route by a vote of (5-0). BACKGROUND Denton Municipal Electric has a project underway consisting of the rebuild of two existing 69kV electric transmission lines, in the northeast quadrant of the city. The existing electric transmission lines occupy an approximately thirty-foot wide easement corridor that begins at the Spencer Substation, goes north to the Kings Row Substation, then westerly to the Denton North Interchange (on the west side North Locust Street at Hercules Street). Reconstruction is required to replace the aging facilities and to increase the electric transmission capacity to 138kV in the future to meet Denton’s steady and increasing growth needs.Also, the existing wooden poles which support the transmission lines, have ostensibly reached the end of their useful service lives. As a part of the project, these wooden poles will be replaced with steel poles, of similar class to those of recent DME system upgrade projects. The original easement footprint, was established in the early 1960’s, and conformed to the then rural nature of the affected land tracts of that period. Presently, the proliferation of urbanized development activities and encroachments, along and within the easement corridor has made it increasingly difficult for DME to operate and maintain the existing electric facilities. Current electric utility practice and the National Electrical Safety Code, which Denton has adopted in the past, indicates that an easement width of approximately seventy-five feet (75’) is the optimal minimum width for clearance in order to accommodate electric power transmission infrastructure, operations, and maintenance. To determine a final alignment for the rebuild of the transmission line, DME has held three public neighborhood meetings with citizens, especially those living within 500 feet of the existing transmission line as well as any of the other alternative routes. Three routes were eventually presented in the meetings as alternatives to the original transmission line alignment. Those alternate routes were commonly referred to in the meetings and in information provided on the City’s DME website as the “red”, “purple” and “green” routes. Cost estimates were formulated by DME staff who evaluated all routes. The factors employed to evaluate each of the alternate routes were: Impact on homeowners 1 Cost of easements Cost of work in existing substations Transmission line construction cost Distribution line construction cost PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) October 10, 2011 - Presented to the Public Utility Board in Open Meeting OPTIONS 1. Recommend consideration and possibly approval for a future ordinance, for one of the following alignments for the transmission line rebuild project: Option A: Red route Option B: Green route Option C: Purple route RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends Option C. EXHIBITS 1. Exhibit “A” – Purple Route Map – Preferred Route by Staff 2. PUB Minutes Respectfully prepared and submitted by, Phil Williams General Manager, Denton Municipal Electric 2 ExhibitA. DRAFT MINUTES 1 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 2 3October 10, 2011 4 5After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas is 6present, the Chair of the Public Utilities Board will thereafter convene into an open meeting on 7Monday, October 10, 2011 at 9:01 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton 8Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. 9 10Present: Chair Dick Smith, John Baines, Phil Gallivan, Barbara Russell and Leonard 11Herring 12 13Ex Officio Members: Howard Martin, ACM Utilities 14 15Absent excused: Vice Chair Bill Cheek, Randy Robinson 16George Campbell, City Manager 17 OPEN MEETING: 18 19 ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION: 20 21 228) Receive a report, hold a discussion and consider a recommendation for approval for the 23alignment of the Denton Municipal Electric 69kV Kings Row to Spencer Transmission Line 24Upgrade Project. 25 26Phil Williams, General Manager DME, made the presentation regarding the north east Denton 27transmission line projects. Williams showed a map of the current Denton area transmission 28lines. Williams then showed a picture of the transmission line on Bonnie Brae and the wooden 29poles with the transmission lines that were built in 1962. 30 31Williams reminded the board why these projects are important. When the line was built in 1962 32the load was 34 MW, this summer the load hit 350 MW. There has been steady growth 33increasing of 5-6% over the past years. That growth means DME needs to keep expanding the 34transmission system and the distribution system. 35 36Williams then listed the significant activities that have happened and those that are up coming. 37The North East Denton transmission projects were approved in CIP budget. Staff has identified 38the need for property acquisition assistance. Staff has held neighborhood meetings on July 18, 39August 8, and October 3. City Council was updated on September 13, PUB the meeting on 40October 10. City Council Public Hearings will be held on October 18 and November 15. 41 42Williams then talked about the different factors that have been taken into consideration on 43evaluating the different routes. Those factors are; the impact on homeowners, cost of easements, 44the cost of work in existing substations, transmission line construction cost and the distribution 45line construction cost. 46 Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board Meeting October 10, 2011 Page 2 of 3 1Williams then showed a map with the existing transmission line. To rebuild the line in that area 2is cost prohibitive. In 1962 when the line was first constructed it was built to the standards of 3that time. The standards then only required a thirty foot right of way; today it requires a seventy 4to seventy five foot right of way. Approximately 60 homes would be impacted. The direct 5transmission cost for this route would be $23.1 million with a total system impact of $24.4 6million. 7 8Williams then talked about the ‘red route’. The direct transmission cost for this route would be Chair Smith asked if DME would 9$18.2 million with a total system impact of $23.3 million. use the rail road right of way for this route, or if we would have to acquire additional right 10 of way 11. Williams answered we would have to purchase right of way along the rail road’s right Baines asked if the cost reflects the purchase of property 12of way.. Williams stated it includes 13easement right of way when possible. Home owners could use the property they just cannot 14build structures in that area. Staff tries not to acquire property unless absolutely necessary. 15 16Williams then talked about the ‘green route’. The direct transmission cost for this route would 17be $20.2 million with a total system impact of $26.0 million. This route included park area. 18When you use park area that was partially funded by state funds, you have to obey their rules. 19Those rules include purchase right of way and replacement of park area that is being taken. Over 20a dozen homes and the Ann Windle School would be impacted in this route. 21 22Williams then talked about the ‘purple route’. The direct transmission cost for this route would 23be $14.8 million with a total system impact of $20.2 million. There are fewer homes impacted Gallivan asked if the right angles would cause problems with flow 24with a lower overall cost. of electricity 25. Williams answered it means additional cost for that pole. Chuck Sears, DME Herring 26Engineering Division Manager, stated that it does not cause any electrical problems. asked where our line will be parallel with the TMPA line, will we use their easement or will 27 we purchase additional easement. 28 Williams stated DME will have to purchase easement but it Smith asked about crossing Loop 288 29will be less than in any other area. . Williams stated that 30staff met with TxDOT and they have indicated that they would advise against crossing Loop 288. 31TxDOT would help DME stay on the west and south side of the Loop and it would not have to 32be crossed at all. This route is recommended by DME. 33 34Williams then showed a map of where the proposed new Kings Row substation would be. He 35then showed what the facade of the substation might look like surrounding that substation. In 36this area it would be a brick facade with some buffer trees. The new line would come north out 37of the new substation site along Loop 288 to Sherman Drive. At Sherman Drive the line would 38go down the open field side down to Hercules. At Hercules the line would be on the north side 39in open field. When the line reaches homes on Hercules, the homes are set back enough that 40only easement would be required in some areas. Williams stated that there are only three homes 41that are directly impacted by this route. 42 43Williams then talked about the next steps which are the vote from the Public Utilities Board of 44today. DME will then take the recommendation to City Council public hearings on October 18 45and November 15. City Council can choose to vote on or after November 15. 46 Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board Meeting October 10, 2011 Page 3 of 3 Board Member Russell moved to approve the purple route with a second from Board 1 Member Herring. The motion was approved by a 5-0 vote. 2 3 4Adjournment at 9:36am AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance adopting a schedule of fees for use of certain park facilities; superseding all prior fees in conflict with such schedule and providing for severability and an effective date. The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommend approval with a vote of 6-0. BACKGROUND This ordinance makes changes to the Schedule of Fees for parks and recreation services that are included in the FY 2011-12 budget. Specifically, fees are adjusted as follows: Addition of Athletic Tournament Fee of $850.00 per tournament per athletic complex for tournaments with a minimum 2 day, maximum 3 day rental with a minimum of 25 teams per softball complex. Currently tournaments are charged an hourly rate per field. Addition of language to permit staff to provide discounts to large multiple (consecutive) day athletic field rentals based on tournament needs. n from Tournaments are currently charged an hourly rate of $15/hour for fields without lights and $25/hour when the lights are used. A typical tournament will run from 8:00 am to 10:00 pm on Saturday and 8:00 am to 3 pm on Sunday. If the tournament were held at the Denia softball complex, the event organizer would be charged for 17 hours of unlighted fields and 4 hours of lighted fields for a total of $1,420. The new rate would reduce the total field rental charge to $850.00. The additional language requested will allow staff the flexibility to negotiate rental fees for tournament events that will last longer than three days. Council previously granted the same ability to the Civic Center staff for multiple day events at that location. The change to the tournament fee is the only change in the Schedule of Fees. All other fees remain the same. OPTIONS Council options include the approval or denial of the ordinance as submitted; Council may also opt to modify the Schedule of Fees to include additional or modified requirements. Agenda Information Sheet Parks and Recreation Schedule of Fees October 18, 2011 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this ordinance and agreement. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT If approved, the changes to fees will beeffective the date the ordinance is signed. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW On September 19, 2011, these increases were reviewed by the Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board; they recommend approval with a vote of 6-0. FISCAL INFORMATION It is projected that any reduced rental revenue will be recovered by hosting additional events. EXHIBITS 1.Park, Recreation and Beautification Board Meeting Minutes September 19, 2011 2.Ordinance 3.Exhibit A Parks and Recreation Fees Respectfully submitted: Emerson Vorel, Director Parks and Recreation Prepared by: Amanda Green, Superintendent Parks and Recreation DRAFT Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board Minutes September 19, 2011 Civic Center Community Room Members present : Carol Brantley, Alex Lieban, Derrick Murray, Dave Rowley, Janet Shelton, Russ Stukel Members absent: Vicki Byrd, Staff present: Emerson Vorel, Bob Tickner, Jim Mays, Mary Aukerman WORK SESSION 1. Derrick Murray, chairperson, called the Meeting for Public Comment to order at 6:03 p.m. Eighteen people filled out a Request to Address an Agenda Item card. The following people spoke in support of the renaming: Isabella Piña-Hinojosa-LULAC President, Jerry Vela, Don Smith, Popo Gonzalez, Dorothy Damico, Marilyn Mays, Keith Shelton, Tony Damico, Roberto R. Calderon, Gloria Contreras, Yolanda Vela, Lee Theriot, Gene Wright, John Rainey, and John Stodola. The following people spoke in opposition of the renaming: Sandy Kristoferson, Glenn Dean. The following filled out a card in opposition of the renaming but did not speak: Jason Warren. Dorothy Martinez spoke in support of the renaming but did not fill out a card. After the last person spoke, the Board took a short break and reconvened for its regular meeting. REGULAR MEETING 1.CALL TO ORDER Murray, Park Board Chairperson called the meeting to order at 7:18 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF August 1, 2011 MEETING: 2. Lieban made a motion to approve the minutes as written, Brantley seconded and the motion carried with a vote of 6-0. 3.AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS: Introduction of new Park Board Member A. Russ Stukel was welcomed by the Board. Stukel has been with UNT for 20 plus years. Council Members Roden and Watts encouraged him to join the Board. He is a runner. 4. ACTION ITEMS: Parks and Recreation Fees Ordinance Athletic Fields Rentals A. Vorel stated that the proposed fees were incorrectly presented to the Board at the August meeting and he wanted to clarify that the $850.00 Athletic Tournament Fee was per tournament and not per day, as previously presented. The City of Denton will still operate the concession stands at the tournaments, which will boost our revenue as well as that of the City since those attending will often stay in area motels and eat in area restaurants. Several tournament organizers complained that our rental fees are too high so this should make Denton more attractive to them. MOTION: Shelton made the motion to accept the changes to the revised schedule of fees and to approve the ordinance adopting them. Rowley seconded the motion and it carried with a vote of 6-0. Chapter 26: Proposed Sewer Line Easement at Avondale Park Tickner stated that B. the Denton Municipal Utilities has requested a 20 foot easement within the boundaries of Avondale Park, west of Nottingham at Devonshire Street, to reroute a sewer line. The park will remain open as they will only do a small section at a time that will be fenced off to the public. A compensation fee will be paid by Water Utilities for the use of park property. They have selected a route that will be the least intrusive to the park and if any trees are removed during the process, new trees will be planted. Mays stated that they are trying to bore under a large tree in the path so that it does not have to cut down. Tickner stated that, if all other easements are obtained, they could start as early as January 2012. MOTION: Rowley made the motion to recommend approval of the ordinance granting approval of a sub-surface use of a portion of Avondale Parks for a utility easement. Lieban seconded the motion and it carried with a vote of 6-0. OTHER BUSINESS: 4. A.Parks Department Projects Status Report Tickner updated the Board on various projects on the list, including: Neighborhood Park Design SPC Ernest W. Dallas Jr. Veterans Memorial Park Tickner is working with the contractor to ensure that this park is completed for its dedicatio Milam Park Land Purchase This property is expected to close in October and is right on schedule. Unicorn Lake Estates Park land and construction of the trail in the Unicorn Lake Estates Subdivision. The project should get underway in the spring of 2012. Public Art Committee Meeting Minutes Draft B.Vorel pointed out that the attached minutes are from a previous year and should be discarded. There was no Public Art meeting in July or August and the June minutes were considered at the August Park Board meeting. 5.FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: The committee for the proposal submitted to rename South Lakes Park to the G. Roland Vela South Lakes Park was informed that when they meet, it has to be posted for the public for 72 hours prior to the meeting. The committee proposed that they meet after the next regularly scheduled Park Board Meeting and that the meeting be moved to October 10 in order to give them adequate time for research. The Park Board members agree that the move to October 10 would be acceptable and it was approved by unanimous vote. With no further items on the agenda, Murray asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Brantley made the motion to adjourn, Stukel seconded and the meeting was adjourned at 7:44 p.m. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Mike Ellis at 349-8424 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute contracts through the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network for the acquisition of two trucks, two Backhoe Loaders, and one Skid Steer Loader for the City of Denton Street and Traffic Departments; and providing an effective date (File 4839-Trucks and Heavy Equipment for Street and Traffic Departments awarded to Southwest International Trucks in the amount of $190,034.31, Holt-Cat in the amount of $173,016, and Bobcat Co. in the amount of $47,766.04 for a total award amount of $410,816.35). FILE INFORMATION The items listed below reflect replacements of heavy equipment for the Street and Traffic departments. These purchases were outlined in the fiscal year 2011-12 Vehicle Replacement Plan and fiscal year 2011-12 Annual Operating Budget, with one exception. On Item #2, the Street Department experienced a major equipment failure on a Utility truck and will need to replace it to continue operations at their current level. While not contemplated in the FY 2011/12 Budget, this item can be purchased through available Capital Improvement Program funding. Item Description Price (Ea) Department Contract# 1 Truck/Bucket Body $129,218.42 Traffic BB# 358-10 2 Truck/Utility Body $ 60,815.89 Streets BB# 358-10 3 Backhoe Loader $ 86,508.00 Streets BB# 345-10 4 Backhoe Loader $ 86,508.00 Streets BB# 345-10 5 Skid Steer Loader $ 47,766.04 Streets BB# 345-10 Total$410,816.35 Cooperative agreement handling fees and service manuals are estimated at $1,000 and may vary depending upon the number of purchase orders issued and service manuals required. All of the trucks are powered by diesel engines with LEV ratings that meet or exceed EPA Standards. There are no local suppliers (City of Denton) which can provide this equipment, and the cooperative buying agreements represent the best value to the City. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) The City Council approved the Vehicle Replacement schedule for this equipment in the fiscal year 2011-2012 budget process. Agenda Information Sheet October 18, 2011 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Award the purchase of General Fund vehicles and equipment through the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network to the vendors listed below for a total award amount of $410,816.35. ITEM NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT 1, 2 Southwest International Trucks $ 190,034.31 3, 4 Holt-Cat $ 173,016.00 5 Bobcat Co. $ 47,766.04 Total for Equipment $ 410,816.35 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Holt Cat Bob Cat of Dallas Southwest International Fort Worth, TX Lewisville, TX McKinney, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The purchase and delivery of the truck and equipment will occur within 180 days of purchase order issuance. FISCAL INFORMATION A reimbursement ordinance related to the purchase of vehicles was approved on the October 4 Council agenda in the amount of $2,070,092. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Price Quotes Exhibit 2: Price Comparison for Vehicles Exhibit 3: GF Vehicle Replacement Schedule for FY 2011-2012 Respectfully submitted: Antonio Puente, Jr., 349-7283 Assistant Director of Finance Exhibit 1 Item 1 Item 2 Items 3 and 4 Item 5 CONTRACT COMPARISONS FOR EQUIPMENT October 18, 2011 AGENDA Exhibit 2 DESCRIPTIONBUY BOARDNON GOVERNMENT Contract ##358-10PRICING TC1124 2012 INTERNATIONAL TERRASTAR CREW CAB SVC BODY TRUCK Base Price$ 39,637.67$ 48,667.00 Published Options$ 5,979.75 Altec Utility Bucket Body$ 83,116.00$ 83,116.00 Buy Board Cost per PO$ 200.00 $ - Transportation$ 100.00 $ - DOT Inspection w/ Fire Ext & Flares$ 185.00 $ 185.00 Delivery per vehicle$ - Subtotal by vehicle$ 129,218.42$ 131,968.00 Qty ordered11 Subtotal of cost$ 129,218.42$ 131,968.00 Total of purchase$ 129,218.42$ 131,968.00 Vendor:Southwest International TrucksSouthwest International Trucks of McKinneyof McKinney McKinney TX McKinney TX Calvin LewisCalvin Lewis calvin.lewis@swit-tx.comcalvin.lewis@swit-tx.com 972-542-1201972-542-1201 DESCRIPTIONBUY BOARDNON GOVERNMENT Contract ##358-10PRICING ST1123 2012 INTERNATIONAL TERRASTAR CREW CAB SVC BODY TRUCK Replacing ST0047- Major Equipment Failure Base Price$ 39,033.59$ 63,485.00 Published Options$ 11,595.30 Knapheide Service Body$ 9,702.00 Buy Board Cost per PO$ 200.00 Transportation$ 100.00 DOT Inspection w/ Fire Ext & Flares$ 185.00 $ 185.00 Delivery per vehicle$ - Subtotal by vehicle$ 60,815.89$ 63,670.00 Qty ordered11 Subtotal of cost$ 60,815.89$ 63,670.00 Total of purchase$ 60,815.89$ 63,670.00 Vendor:Southwest International TrucksSouthwest International Trucks of McKinneyof McKinney McKinney TX McKinney TX Calvin LewisCalvin Lewis calvin.lewis@swit-tx.comcalvin.lewis@swit-tx.com 972-542-1201972-542-1201 BACKHOE LOADER ST1120 & ST1122 DESCRIPTIONBUY BOARDHGAC Contract ##345-10#EM06-11 CATERPILLAR 430ECASE 590SN $ 86,508.00$ 86,817.00 HOLT CATHi-Way Equipment Co LLC OF FORT WORTH Bryan NicholsBill Roberson Bryan.Nichols@holtcat.combroberson@hiwayequip.com 214-226-9589817-283-7836 10/11/20114:53 PM3-BU-File 4839.XLSBB HGAC COMPARISON CONTRACT COMPARISONS FOR EQUIPMENT October 18, 2011 AGENDA Exhibit 2 SKID STEER for ST1121 BUY BOARD #345-10 STANDARD PACKAGEBOB CAT STANDARD OPTIONS$ 40,699.52There is no other "Articulating" A91 Option Package$ 5,885.44Skid Steer on the market 74" C/I HEAVY DUTY BUCKET$ 941.50 BOLT ON CUTTING EDGE 74"$ 239.58 FREIGHT SUBTOTAL$47,766.04$0.00 Discount$ -$ - Subtotal by vehicle$47,766.04$0.00 10/11/20114:53 PM3-BU-File 4839.XLSBB HGAC COMPARISON Vehicle Replacement and Supplemental Additions FY11-12 Exhibit 3 Amount HBUUNIT#Dept/DivNew DescriptionEstimate 402130Parks/MainFORD Truck 3/4T Ext$ 27,852 680001AirportUtility Tractor$ 60,056 230001FacilitiesPick up Truck$ 23,500 310100PD OpsChev Impala$ 32,212 310100PD OpsChev Impala$ 32,212 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Impala$ 32,212 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 310100PD OpsChev Tahoe$ 56,000 320100Fire OpsFire Engine Replacement$ 700,312 353001StreetsBackhoe/Loader$ 96,373 353001StreetsSkid Loader$ 43,250 353001StreetsBackhoe/Loader$ 96,373 352001TrafficIntl/ Altec Bucket Truck$ 148,000 General Fund Subtotal $ 1,908,352 $ 229,002 Admin Fee & Contingency 12% General Fund Total$ 2,137,354 14-BU-File 4839.xls GF VEH REPLACEMENTS FY 1112 10/11/2011 ORDINANCE NO. ___________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE CONTRACTS THROUGH THE BUY BOARD COOPERATIVE PURCHASING NETWORK FOR THE ACQUISITION OF TWO TRUCKS, TWO BACKHOE LOADERS, AND ONE SKID STEER LOADER FOR THE CITY OF DENTON STREET AND TRAFFIC DEPARTMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 4839-TRUCKS AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT FOR STREET AND TRAFFIC DEPARTMENTS AWARDED TO SOUTHWEST INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS IN THE AMOUNT OF $190,034.31, HOLT-CAT IN THE AMOUNT OF $173,016, AND BOBCAT CO. IN THE AMOUNT OF $47,766.04 FOR A TOTAL AWARD AMOUNT OF $410,816.35). WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 2005-034, the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network has solicited, received, and tabulated competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies, or services in accordance with the procedures of state law on behalf of the City of Denton; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described materials, equipment, supplies, or services can be purchased by the City through the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network programs at less cost than the City would expend if bidding these items individually; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the materials, equipment, supplies, or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The items sh office of the Purchasing Agent, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: FILE NUMBER ITEM# VENDOR AMOUNT 4839 1, 2 Southwest International Trucks $190,034.31 4839 3, 4 Holt-Cat $173,016.00 4839 5 Bobcat Co. $ 47,766.04 SECTION 2. By the acceptance and approval of the items set forth in the referenced file number, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids to the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies, or services in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the bid documents and related documents filed with the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network and the purchase orders issued by the City. SECTION 3. Should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items set forth in the referenced file number wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract which shall be attached hereto; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications and standards contained in the Proposal submitted to the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network, and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. The City Council of the City of Denton, Texas hereby expressly delegates the authority to take any actions that may be required or permitted to be performed by the City of Denton under File 4839 to the City Manager of the City of Denton, Texas, or his designee. SECTION 5. By the acceptance and approval of the items set forth in the referenced file number, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approval purchase orders or pursuant to a written contract made pursuant thereto as authorized herein SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this ________ day of ______________, 2011. ______________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: ________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: _________________________________ 5-ORD-File 4839 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Vance Kemler at 349-8044 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with CP&Y, Inc. of Dallas, Texas for Engineering Services, Design and Development, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality interface, and other consulting providing an effective date (File 4840-in an amount not to exceed $135,000). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (7-0). FILE INFORMATION Th Inc., which will enable CP&Y, Inc., to assist the Solid Waste Department with general engineering services, design and development related to investigation and evaluation of various solid waste projects, providing assistance and support with registration, permitting and other Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) agency interface, and in providing assistance on bidding processes and construction submittal documents. The Solid Waste Department utilizes outside consultants to provide professional engineering services for a variety of solid waste and environmental tasks which require a licensed professional engineer (P.E.). Neither the Solid Waste or Engineering Department have a resident staff engineer with the technical subject training to provide these services and staff is not aware of any local licensed engineer or firm that has the expertise in landfill design and permitting that is required. The Solid Waste Department has used CP&Y, Inc., on numerous solid waste projects, and they are familiar with the departmental issues concerning the TCEQ landfill permit registration, and the departCP&Y, Inc. is also currently working on several multi-year projects for Solid Waste that will carry over into the 2012 fiscal year. During the 2012 fiscal year, the Solid Waste Department will work with the Purchasing Department to develop a Request for Qualifications to solicit qualified engineering firms who are interested in entering into a multi-year agreement for these types of services. This will assist the City in obtaining the best value for a longer time period. Agenda Information Sheet October 18, 2011 Page 2 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) On September 26, 2011, the Public Utilities Board recommended approval to forward this item to the City Council for consideration. RECOMMENDATION Approve a Professional Services Agreement with CP&Y, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $135,000. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS CP&Y, Inc. Dallas, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This is an annual agreement for a time period of October 1, 2011-September 30, 2012. FISCAL INFORMATION The Professional Services Agreement will be funded from Capital Improvement Project fund account 660067592.1360.21100. Requisition #105094 has been entered in the Purchasing software system. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Public Utilities Board Minutes Respectfully submitted: Antonio Puente, Jr., 349-7283 Assistant Director of Finance Exhibit 1 DRAFT MINUTES 1 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 2 3 September 26, 2011 4 5 After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas is 6 present, the Chair of the Public Utilities Board will thereafter convene into an open meeting on 7 Monday, September 26, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton 8 Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. 9 10 Present: Chair Dick Smith, Vice Chair Bill Cheek, Randy Robinson, John Baines and 11 Leonard Herring, Phil Gallivan, Barbara Russell 12 13 Ex Officio Members: Howard Martin, ACM Utilities 14 15 Absent: George Campbell, City Manager 16 OPEN MEETING: 17 18 CONSENT AGENDA: 19 20 Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the Assistant City Manager of Utilities, or his 21 designee, to implement each item in accordance with the staff recommendations. The Public 22 23 opportunity to raise questions regarding these items prior to consideration. 24 25 2)Consider a recommendation of an approval of a Professional Services Agreement between 26 Chiang, Patel, and Yerby, Inc. (CP&Y) and the City of Denton Solid Waste Department for 27 CP&Y to provide annual professional engineering consulting services in the amount not-to- 28 exceed $135,000. 29 Board Member Baines moved to approve item 2 with a second from Board Member 30 Russell. The motion was approved by a 7-0 vote. 31 32 33 Adjournment 10:56am 34 35 36 37 ORDINANCE NO. ________________ AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (PSA) WITH CP&Y, INC. OF DALLAS, TEXAS FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES, DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY INTERFACE, AND OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES FACILITY AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 4840-IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $135,000). WHEREAS, the professional services p is being selected as the most highly qualified on the basis of its demonstrated competence and qualifications to perform the proposed professional services; and WHEREAS, the fees under the proposed contract are fair and reasonable and are consistent with and not higher than the recommended practices and fees published by the professional provided by law; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to enter into a professional service contract with CP&Y, Inc., to provide general engineering services related to design and development, TCEQ interface, construction submittal documents, bid specifications and other consulting services , a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION 2. The City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to expend funds as required by the attached contract. SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Denton, Texas hereby expressly delegates the authority to take any actions that may be required or permitted to be performed by the City of Denton under the professional services agreement with CP&Y, Inc. to the City Manager of the City of Denton, Texas, or his designee. SECTION 4. The findings in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2011. ______________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY:_________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: _________________________________ 4-ORD-File 4840 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Vance Kemler 349-8044 ACM: Jon Fortune ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas providing for, authorizing, and approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Retaining Wall Materials utilized in the construction of a screening wall at the City of Denton Landfill. The requested materials are from only one source and in accordance with Chapter 252.022 of the Texas Local Government Code and City of Denton Purchasing Policy Chapter 2, Section III. Such purchases are exempt from the requirements of competitive bidding; and providing an effective date (File 4834-Three Year contract for the Purchase of Retaining Wall Materials for City of Denton Landfill awarded to Stone Strong, LLC in estimated amount of $150,000 annually). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). FILE INFORMATION In 1996, the City applied to the state to expand its Landfill operation within the boundary of its property. It was granted a permit amendment to expand the facility in October 1997. As part of the permitting process, the C their issues concerning the Landfill expansion. A formal agreement was reached with those land owners which were classified as affected parties. Among the issues that were resolved between the City and the affected parties was their request that the Landfill daily disposal operations not be visible from the road (Mayhill Road). The City agreed to provide screening berms and established a landscaping plan to plant trees in the buffer zone between the west side of the Landfill and Mayhill Road. We have been operating in the south portion of Phase 3 since February 2009. This filling operation initially was conducted below the surrounding ground elevation. This year the filling operation has been above the elevation of Old Edwards Road and Quail Creek Road. The addition of a block retaining wall or a packed earth wall will provide improved visual screening for adjacent residents and traffic on this portion of Mayhill Road. The packed earth screening wall would be visually less desirable, would require the installation of a tall security fence along the top edge and would have a higher cost of maintenance. Additionally, the installation of the retaining wall system will allow for the improvement in the stormwater management conveyance system for the west side of the facility. This item is for the purchase of materials to continue the construction of the block retaining wall that is being installed by Solid Waste staff. This product has other civil engineering applications and this agreement would provide for the acquisition of this material for other projects in the City over the term of this agreement. Agenda Information Sheet October 18, 2011 Page 2 FILE INFORMATION (CONTINUED) Stone Strong, LLC is the exclusive distributor of Stone Strong Systems, LLC in the State of Texas; therefore, this is a sole source acquisition. The City of Denton has expended approximately $310,727 over the past three years with Stone Strong Systems, LLC. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) The first two phases of this retaining wall system item was approved by the Public Utilities Board on July 12, 2010 and December 13, 2010. City Council authorized the purchase of materials for the first two phases of this multi-year project on July 20, 2010 and January 4, 2011. The Public Utilities Board recommended approval of this action on October 10, 2010. RECOMMENDATION Award a three year contract for the purchase of Landfill Retaining Wall Materials to Stone Strong, LLC. in the estimated amount of $150,000 annually. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Stone Strong, LLC Lincoln, NE ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This is a three year contract with the option to renew for two additional one year periods. At renewal, the bid prices may be adjusted in accordance with a federal index for related items. FISCAL INFORMATION This item will be funded from Bond account 660543592.1350.30100. Purchase orders will be issued on an as needed basis. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Quotation from Stone Strong, LLC Exhibit 2: Sole Source Letter Exhibit 3: Public Utilities Board Minutes Agenda Information Sheet October 18, 2011 Page 3 Respectfully submitted: Antonio Puente, Jr., 349-7283 Assistant Director of Finance 1-AIS-File 4834 Exhibit1 PROPOSAL Stone Strong of Texas Bigger Stronger Faster ™™ Issue Date:09/08/11 Expiration Date:N/A To:City of Denton C/O Karen Smith Materials Management 901B Texas Street Denton, TX 76209 Sales/Engineering ManagerProject IDProject NameLocation Jody DuBoisLong Term Agreement Proposal N/ADenton, TX Manufacturing CodeCore ComponentsFee Per SFPrice Per Unit 24SF Block RF 24RF$ 22.00$ 516.00 24SF Block 24SF$ 17.50$ 420.00 24SF Top Block 24TB$ 17.50$ 420.00 6SF Block 6SF$ 17.50$ 105.00 6SF Top Block 6TB$ 17.50$ 105.00 3SF Block 3SF$ 17.50$ 53.00 3SF Top Block 3TB$ 17.50$ 53.00 End / Corner Unit (9SF) EC$ 22.00$ 198.00 Manufacturing CodeSystem AccessoriesFee Per SFPrice Per Unit Cap / Step Unit CSper piece costs$ 220.00 Dual Face Unit 12DF$ 16.00$ 384.00 90 90 À …“z·$ 22.00$ 258.00 45 À …“z·$ 22.00$ 132.00 $0.00 Subtotal Proposal Prepared by: Rhonda DuBois - Business Development Mana $0.00 Shipping per load @ 500.00 $0.00 Sales Tax To Accept this proposal, please sign, date and return via fax or $0.00 Total Name: Date: Thank you for your business! P.O. Box 835, Justin, TX 76247 940-231-6075 940-627-6768 ™ tIt ™ C–t jody@stonestrongoftexas.com · rhonda@stonestrongoftexas.com Exhibit 2 September 6, 2011 City Request RE: CITY OF DENTON Stone Strong Systems To Whom It May Concern: This letter is to serve as notification that Stone Strong of Texas is the exclusive producer and sole source of Stone Strong Systems products in the State of Texas. By license, Stone Strong of Texas will continue to be the sole source, through Sept. 2016, at which time the license may be renewed. Stone Strong is a patented product; U.S. Patent No. 6,796,098 and 7,073,304 and the name Strong Systems is a Registered Trademark. All information pertaining to Stone Strong is copyright protected as well. Stone Strong has been in business since 2001. Information regarding Stone Strong can be obtained from the website www.stonestrong.com. If any additional information pertaining to the use of the Stone Strong Systems is required, please forward it to my attention for further assistance. All project specific requests, i.e., engineering and pricing should be directed to Jody DuBois, jody@stonestrongoftexas.com or 940-389-7583. Sincerely, John Gran President Stone Strong, LLC 26/0 ÅÙÔÚÙ ´Ý-+ ÃàÔßÐ 0/0+ ¼ÔÙÎÚ×Ù+ ¾µ 57405 ÀÓ9 3/1,323,4541 ¶Ìã9 3/1,323,/652 Exhibit 3 DRAFT MINUTES 1 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 2 3 October 10, 2011 4 5 After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas is 6 present, the Chair of the Public Utilities Board will thereafter convene into an open meeting on 7 Monday, October 10, 2011 at 9:01 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton 8 Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. 9 10 Present: Chair Dick Smith, John Baines, Phil Gallivan, Barbara Russell and Leonard 11 Herring 12 13 Ex Officio Members: Howard Martin, ACM Utilities 14 15 Absent excused: Vice Chair Bill Cheek, Randy Robinson 16 George Campbell, City Manager 17 OPEN MEETING: 18 19 CONSENT AGENDA: 20 21 Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the Assistant City Manager of Utilities, or his 22 designee, to implement each item in accordance with the staff recommendations. The Public 23 24 opportunity to raise questions regarding these items prior to consideration. 25 26 2)Consider a recommendation of an approval of the acquisition of retaining wall materials for 27 construction of a retaining wall at the City of Denton Landfill which is available from only 28 one source in accordance with the pertinent provisions of Chapter 252 of the Texas Local 29 Government Code exempting such purchases from the requirements of competitive bidding; 30 and providing an effective date (File 4532-Three Year contract for the Purchase of Retaining 31 Wall Materials for City of Denton Landfill awarded to Stone Strong, LLC in estimated 32 amount of $150,000 annually). 33 Board Member Russell moved to approve item 2 with a second from Board Member 34 Gallivan. The motion was approved by a 5-0 vote. 35 36 37 Adjournment at 9:36am ORDINANCE NO. ____________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS PROVIDING FOR, AUTHORIZING, AND APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF RETAINING WALL MATERIALS UTILIZED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SCREENING WALL AT THE CITY OF DENTON LANDFILL; THE REQUESTED MATERIALS ARE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 252.022 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND CITY OF DENTON PURCHASING POLICY CHAPTER 2, SECTION III. SUCH PURCHASES ARE EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 4834-THREE YEAR CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF RETAINING WALL MATERIALS FOR CITY OF DENTON LANDFILL AWARDED TO STONE STRONG, LLC IN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $150,000 ANNUALLY). WHEREAS, Section 252.022 of the Local Government Code provides that procurement of items that are only available from one source, including; items that are only available from one source because of patents, copyrights, secret processes or natural monopolies; films, manuscripts or books; electricity, gas, water and other utility purchases; captive replacement parts or components for equipment; and library materials for a public library that are available only from the persons holding exclusive distribution rights to the materials; and need not be submitted to competitive bids; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to procure one or more of the items mentioned in the above paragraph; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The following purchase of materials, equipment or supplies, as and the license terms attached are hereby approved: FILE NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT 4834 Stone Strong, LLC Per Exhibit D of Agreement SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds that this bid, and the award thereof, constitutes a procurement of items that are available from only one source, including, items that are only available from one source because of patents, copyrights, secret processes or natural monopolies; films, manuscripts or books; electricity, gas, water and other utility purchases; captive replacement parts or components for equipment; and library materials for a public library that are available only from the persons holding exclusive distribution rights to the materials; and need not be submitted to competitive bids. SECTION 3. The acceptance and approval of the above items shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the quotation for such items until such person shall comply with all requirements specified by the Purchasing Department. SECTION 4. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute any contracts relating to the items specified in Section 1 and the expenditure of funds pursuant to said contracts is hereby authorized. SECTION 5. The City Council of the City of Denton, Texas hereby expressly delegates the authority to take any actions that may be required or permitted to be performed by the City of Denton under File 4834 to the City Manager of the City of Denton, Texas, or his designee. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the _________ day of ____________, 2011. ______________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: ______________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: _________________________________ 5-ORD-File 4834 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Mark Nelson at 349-7702 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. for Transportation Services as set forth in the contract; and providing an effective date (File 4848-Professional Services Agreement for Transportation Consultant Services to Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. for a total amount of $126,000). FILE INFORMATION Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. (ITS) has provided the City of Denton with quality transportation consultant services since 2002. ITS has been able to identify and produce many opportunities to leverage municipal funds with county, regional, state and federal funds to advance transportation infrastructure projects throughout the City of Denton and Denton County improving mobility for Denton residents. In fact, as part of the Regional Toll Revenue Financing Initiative through the State Highway 121 Comprehensive Development Agreement (CDA) in 2007/2008 and through the Denton County 2008 transportation bond program, ITS has assisted in securing approximately $100 million for transportation infrastructure projects in the city of Denton. ITS provides a unique service to the City of Denton and the continued use of ITS services is integral to the development of future transportation infrastructure for the City of Denton. It is expected this contract will result in an overall savings of tax dollars above and beyond the expenditure for these services. As the president of ITS, John extensive knowledge regarding CDAs will be extremely important over the next 12 months as the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) develops a procurement method for implementing the Interstate 35E widening project. In fact, Mr. Polster serves on the technical committee currently working with TxDOT, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Denton County, Dallas County and the Dallas Regional Mobility Committee to interview potential CDA developers and to help craft a procurement mechanism for I-35E. Based on the respect and influence Mr. Polster has within the North Texas transportation community and TxDOTAustin, and that no other consultant firms have been identified that can deliver the quality of service and results ITS has delivered in the past, staff is confident that ITS can provide the best value to our organization in advancing transportation projects for the City of Denton. Agenda Information Sheet October 18, 2011 Page 2 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) This item is scheduled for consideration by the Mobility Committee on October 17, 2011. At the time this document was prepared a formal recommendation to City Council by the Mobility Committee was not available. RECOMMENDATION Approve a Professional Services Agreement with Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. for a total amount of $126,000. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. Farmers Branch, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This contract authorizes services to be performed through September 30, 2012. FISCAL INFORMATION The proposed contract establishes a one-year term in the amount of $126,000 to be paid in 12 monthly payments of $10,500. Funds have been budgeted for this contract in the FY 2011-2012 Transportation Operations account 350000.7854. Requisition #105161 has been entered in the Purchasing software system. Respectfully submitted: Antonio Puente, Jr., 349-7283 Assistant Director of Finance 1-AIS-File 4848 ORDINANCE NO. _______________ AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (PSA) WITH INNOVATIVE TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AS SET FORTH IN THE CONTRACT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 4848-PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANT SERVICES TO INNOVATIVE TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $126,000). WHEREAS, t ordinance is being selected as the most highly qualified on the basis of its demonstrated competence and qualifications to perform the proposed professional services; and WHEREAS, the fees under the proposed contract are fair and reasonable and are consistent with and not higher than the recommended practices and fees published by the professional provided by law; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to enter into a professional service contract with Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. to provide transportation consultation services for the City of Denton, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION 2. The City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to expend funds as required by the attached contract. SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Denton, Texas hereby expressly delegates the authority to take any actions that may be required or permitted to be performed by the City of Denton under File 4848 to the City Manager of the City of Denton, Texas, or his designee. SECTION 4. The findings in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2011. ______________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY:_________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: _________________________________ 3-ORD-File 4848 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution allowing the Denton Community Theatre to be the sole participant allowed to sell alcoholic beverages at the Beaujolais on November 17, 2011, upon certain conditions; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an agreement in conformity with this resolution; and providing for an effective date. Staff recommends approval of Denton Community Beaujolais event. BACKGROUND Beaujolais and More will be held for the fifth year in the Civic Center. The Civic Center is the only facility in Quakertown Park where alcohol is permitted, . RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the resolution and agreement as submitted, which is consistent with agreements for other events serving alcoholic beverages. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) An ordinance was adopted on October 6, 2009, requiring approval by City Council for an event to have alcohol in the Civic Center building. This will be the third request by Denton Community Theatre since the adoption of the ordinance. Prior requests have been approved by City Council. FISCAL INFORMATION None. EXHIBITS 1.Letter of Request 2.Resolution 3.Civic Center Agreement Respectfully submitted: Emerson Vorel Director of Parks and Recreation Prepared by: Janie McLeod Community Events Coordinator AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT Consider a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance for the purpose of the first Denton Day of the Dead, sponsored by the Industrial Street Guild. The event will be held on Industrial Street on Saturday, October 29, 2011, from 11:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. The exception is specifically requested to increase hours of operation for amplified sound on Saturday from 10:00 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. The amplified sound will not go above the allowable 70 decibels for an outdoor concert. Staff recommends approval of the request. BACKGROUND The Industrial Street Guild will be hosting a first- Festival, featuring two performances of a musical called Cirque Du Horror. The family friendly musical features local celebrities in costume and is accompanied by an orchestra; it has a run time of one and half hours. The second performance will start at 9:00 p.m. and will over at 10:30 p.m. The event organizers state that neighboring residents have been contacted and are in support of the event. There will also be a family carnival with a pumpkin patch, vendors, games and entertainment throughout the day. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the extension of hours for amplified sound from 10:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. FISCAL INFORMATION None. EXHIBITS 1.Letter of Request Respectfully submitted: Emerson Vorel Director of Parks and Recreation Prepared by: Janie McLeod Community Events Coordinator AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas to declare the intent to reimburse expenditures from the Wastewater Fund with Certificates of Obligation with an aggregate maximum principal amount equal to $350,000 to allow the Wastewater Department to purchase and acquire a piece of equipment for the beneficial reuse division, and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND The FY 2011-12 Capital Improvement Program Budget includes provisions for the replacement or purchase of new vehicles and equipment. Vehicles and equipment are purchased with Certificates of Obligation, which are sold in conjunction with a capital improvement program bond sale. The Due to necessary lead times in the purchase of vehicles and equipment, Fleet Services would like to initiate this purchase prior to the sale of the Certificates of Obligation. The purchase will be made out of the Wastewater Fund, and with the approval of the ordinance, these funds will be reimbursed once the Certificates of Obligation are sold. Replacement Criteria (see Exhibit 1). In general, vehicles and equipment are recommended for replacement to avoid increased costs associated for maintenance and fleet downtime. For FY 2011- 12, the fleet purchase for Wastewater is for the replacement of a Volvo loader which is necessary to move various materials as part of their beneficial reuse operation. This piece of equipment is an all- wheel drive articulated rubber tire loader compatible for multiple accessories to include buckets ranging from 6.3 cubic yards up to 13 cubic yards with a gross vehicle operating weight of approximately 57,000 pounds. In total, one piece of equipment is recommended for replacement. Following the approval of this ordinance, staff will submit a separate item to approve the Volvo loader purchase. This item is expected to be considered by the PUB and Council in October or November. PRIOR ACTION/VIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISIONS) th This item was considered and approved at the Public Utility Board meeting on October 10. FISCAL INFORMATION This ordinance will allow the Certificates of Obligation to reimburse the Wastewater Fund in the amount of $350,000. Agenda Information Sheet October 18, 2011 Page 2 EXHIBITS 1.Exhibit 1 2.Ordinance Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer EXHIBIT 1 FLEET SERVICES FUND - INTERNAL SERVICE (Fleet Administration/Vehicle Maintenance/Fuel/Parts/Fleet Rental) CURRENT PRACTICES Every vehicle and piece of equipment in the Fleet has its life-to-date maintenance and repair costs, age and mileage recorded in the fleet management software. Using these three criteria, the software rates each vehicle on a 15-point weighted system as to whether or not this particular unit should be considered for replacement during the next budget year. Two of the following criteria should be met to justify replacement of vehicles and equipment: Age of vehicle/equipment should meet or exceed estimated useful life (maximum 5 points) Mileage/Hours should meet or exceed estimated useful life of the meter ( maximum 5 points) *Maintenance & repair costs should meet or exceed 50% of original cost (maximum 10 points) * Maintenance costs are defined as, but not limited to, any repairs, maintenance or adjustments that are made from the date of acquisition until the date of disposal. public and private, from organizations such as the National Association of Fleet Administrators and the American Public Works Association. The City of Denton has adopted the best practices of the public sector as well as the private This assists Fleet Services with the disposal of vehicles and equipment with the optimum payback based on current market value. See next page for Vehicle Replacement Criteria Schedule. VEHICLE REPLACEMENT CRITERIA SCHEDULE Revised for FY 06-07 TYPE Estimated Useful MILES or Equipment & Vehicle Life / Years HOURS (1 hr=33 mi) 5 Years Refuse Truck & Street Sweeper 150,000 Mi./ 3,750 Hr. 6 Years Mower: Riding & Walking 3,000 Hr. Tractor: Mower, light 6,000 Hr. ATV, Gator 5,000 Hr. Concrete Saw 5,000 Hr. Roller: All types 6,000 Hr. 8 Years Car: Full, Mid, Compact 100,000 Mi. Suburban, SUV 100,000 Mi. Van: All types 100,000 Mi. Truck: Flushing 150,000 Mi. *8 Years *Replacement will be based on current Market Loader: Track & Wheel 10,000 Hr. Motorgrader, Backhoe, Trencher, Trackhoe, Dozer 10,000 Hr. Scraper, Compactor (Landfill) 10,000 Hr. Tractor: Mower, heavy 7,000 Hr. 8 / 10 Years Truck: Pick-up, all tonnage & types (Gas / Diesel) 100,000 / 150,000 Mi. 10 Years Truck: 5th Wheel, Tank, Dump, Haul 150,000 Mi. Truck, Aerial Bucket (Utility) 6,000 Hr. Paving Equipment, Crane, Boring Machine 7,000 Hr. Chipper, Sprayer, Shredder, Mulcher, Aerator, Auger > 10,000 Hr. if metered or as needed 15 Years Generator, Air Compressor, Welder, Cutter > 10,000 Hr. if metered or as needed Forklift 10,000 Hr. Scarab (Beneficial Reuse) 10,000 Hr. Sand Spreader As Needed Trailer: All types As Needed Emergency Vehicles (Police & Fire) Years Mileage/Hours Motorcycle 4 40,000 Mi. Police Ops-Patrol Car (Take Home) 5 75,000 Mi. Police Support / Investigative Svcs. Car 6 85,000 Mi. SUV (FD & PD only) 8 80,000 Mi. Truck, Hummer & Special Support unit 10 100,000 Mi. / 7,000 Hr. Ambulance, Front-Line / Reserve 4 / 7 6,000 Hr. / 8,000 Hr. Truck, Aerial Platform 15 8,000 Hr. Quint, Front-Line / Reserve 10 / 12 6,000 Hr. / 8,000 Hr. Engine, Pumper, Front-Line / Reserve 10 / 12 6,000 Hr. / 8,000 Hr. Truck, Brush 12 7,000 Hr. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune _____________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas to declare the intent to reimburse expenditures from the Solid Waste Fund with Certificates of Obligation with an aggregate maximum principal amount equal to $2,261,655 to allow the Solid Waste Department to purchase and acquire refuse and recycling vehicles and equipment in order to continue providing solid waste refuse and recycling collection operations; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). BACKGROUND The FY 2011-12 Capital Improvement Program Budget includes provisions for the replacement or purchase of new vehicles and equipment. Vehicles and equipment are purchased with Certificates of Obligation, which are sold in conjunction with a capital improvement program occur in April 2012. Due to necessary lead times in the purchase of vehicles and equipment, Fleet Services would like to initiate this purchase prior to the sale of the Certificates of Obligation. The purchase will be made out of the unreserved fund balance of the Solid Waste Fund, and with the approval of the ordinance, these funds will be reimbursed once the Certificates of Obligation are sold. Replacement Criteria (see Exhibit 1). In general, vehicles and equipment are recommended for replacement to avoid increased costs associated for maintenance and fleet downtime. For FY 2011-12, the fleet purchase for Solid Waste is for the replacement of existing vehicles that were approved in the budget process. Below is a brief summary of the proposed fleet acquisitions (all units being replaced meet or exceed the fleet replacement criteria): (5) Auto Side loaders, two for the residential division and three for the recycling division to replace existing equipment. (1) Rear Loader for the residential division to replace existing equipment. (2) Front Loaders, one for use in the commercial division and one in the recycling division to replace existing equipment. (1) ¾ Ton Pickup for the commercial division to replace an existing vehicle. (1) Roll Off Loader for the commercial division to replace existing equipment. Agenda Information Sheet October 18, 2011 Page 2 In total, 10 vehicles are recommended for replacement. Following the approval of this ordinance, staff will submit separate items to purchase each of the vehicles mentioned above. These items are expected to be considered by the PUB and Council in October and November. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The Public Utilities Board recommended approval of this action on October 10, 2011. FISCAL INFORMATION This ordinance will allow $2,261,655 from the Solid Waste unreserved fund balance to be expended and subsequently reimbursed with Certificates of Obligation. EXHIBIT 1.Exhibit 1 2.Ordinance Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer EXHIBIT 1 FLEET SERVICES FUND - INTERNAL SERVICE (Fleet Administration/Vehicle Maintenance/Fuel/Parts/Fleet Rental) CURRENT PRACTICES Every vehicle and piece of equipment in the Fleet has its life-to-date maintenance and repair costs, age and mileage recorded in the fleet management software. Using these three criteria, the software rates each vehicle on a 15-point weighted system as to whether or not this particular unit should be considered for replacement during the next budget year. Two of the following criteria should be met to justify replacement of vehicles and equipment: Age of vehicle/equipment should meet or exceed estimated useful life (maximum 5 points) Mileage/Hours should meet or exceed estimated useful life of the meter ( maximum 5 points) *Maintenance & repair costs should meet or exceed 50% of original cost (maximum 10 points) * Maintenance costs are defined as, but not limited to, any repairs, maintenance or adjustments that are made from the date of acquisition until the date of disposal. public and private, from organizations such as the National Association of Fleet Administrators and the American Public Works Association. The City of Denton has adopted the best practices of the public sector as well as the private This assists Fleet Services with the disposal of vehicles and equipment with the optimum payback based on current market value. See next page for Vehicle Replacement Criteria Schedule. VEHICLE REPLACEMENT CRITERIA SCHEDULE Revised for FY 06-07 TYPE Estimated Useful MILES or Equipment & Vehicle Life / Years HOURS (1 hr=33 mi) 5 Years Refuse Truck & Street Sweeper 150,000 Mi./ 3,750 Hr. 6 Years Mower: Riding & Walking 3,000 Hr. Tractor: Mower, light 6,000 Hr. ATV, Gator 5,000 Hr. Concrete Saw 5,000 Hr. Roller: All types 6,000 Hr. 8 Years Car: Full, Mid, Compact 100,000 Mi. Suburban, SUV 100,000 Mi. Van: All types 100,000 Mi. Truck: Flushing 150,000 Mi. *8 Years *Replacement will be based on current Market Loader: Track & Wheel 10,000 Hr. Motorgrader, Backhoe, Trencher, Trackhoe, Dozer 10,000 Hr. Scraper, Compactor (Landfill) 10,000 Hr. Tractor: Mower, heavy 7,000 Hr. 8 / 10 Years Truck: Pick-up, all tonnage & types (Gas / Diesel) 100,000 / 150,000 Mi. 10 Years Truck: 5th Wheel, Tank, Dump, Haul 150,000 Mi. Truck, Aerial Bucket (Utility) 6,000 Hr. Paving Equipment, Crane, Boring Machine 7,000 Hr. Chipper, Sprayer, Shredder, Mulcher, Aerator, Auger > 10,000 Hr. if metered or as needed 15 Years Generator, Air Compressor, Welder, Cutter > 10,000 Hr. if metered or as needed Forklift 10,000 Hr. Scarab (Beneficial Reuse) 10,000 Hr. Sand Spreader As Needed Trailer: All types As Needed Emergency Vehicles (Police & Fire) Years Mileage/Hours Motorcycle 4 40,000 Mi. Police Ops-Patrol Car (Take Home) 5 75,000 Mi. Police Support / Investigative Svcs. Car 6 85,000 Mi. SUV (FD & PD only) 8 80,000 Mi. Truck, Hummer & Special Support unit 10 100,000 Mi. / 7,000 Hr. Ambulance, Front-Line / Reserve 4 / 7 6,000 Hr. / 8,000 Hr. Truck, Aerial Platform 15 8,000 Hr. Quint, Front-Line / Reserve 10 / 12 6,000 Hr. / 8,000 Hr. Engine, Pumper, Front-Line / Reserve 10 / 12 6,000 Hr. / 8,000 Hr. Truck, Brush 12 7,000 Hr. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, granting to Denton County Electric Cooperative, Inc., D/B/A CoServ Electric, its successors and assigns, the non-exclusive right to use and occupy rights-of-way within the City of Denton for the construction and operation of an electric transmission and distribution system; prescribing conditions governing the use of the public rights-of-way; providing for compensation therefor, providing for a term of said franchise; providing for written acceptance of this franchise; finding that the meeting at which this ordinance is passed is open to the public; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date. BACKGROUND ent with CoServ Electric was due to expire on December 6, 2009. However, the franchise agreement was extended in order to allow adequate time to resolve issues surrounding an audit of delinquent franchise fees and to re-negotiate a new franchise agreement. In an effort to defray the costs of re-negotiation and to reduce the burden on CoServ Electric, the City of Denton joined a group of cities served by CoServ Electric (Highland Village, Little Elm, Lewisville, McKinney, and The Colony) to attempt to re-negotiate a standard franchise agreement. Over the last year and a half, staff has provided several updates to the City Council on this project and numerous attempts were made to promptly bring this matter to a resolution. In July 2011, the Town of Little Elm withdrew from the group of cities and negotiated a separate agreement with CoServ Electric. Their agreement was based on the last version submitted by CoServ Electric to the group of cities but which lacked full support by all the cities. After reviewing that agreement and discussing the various components with the City Council, staff received direction to contact the company independently and attempt to bring this matter to a resolution. Staff is glad to inform the City Council that all issues surrounding the audit of delinquent franchise fees and the franchise agreement have been resolved and both the company and staff are jointly recommending approval of the attached franchise agreement. The agreement incorporates a number of provisions re (i.e., three readings, full publication of ordinance and written acceptance) and sets the franchise compensation on a per kilowatt basis rather than on a gross revenue basis. Agenda Information Sheet October 18, 2011 Page 2 The negotiated franchise will include compensation that is equivalent to 5% of gross revenues, but it will be paid to the City on the basis of a per kilowatt hour fee calculated to be $0.005764 per kWh. By doing so, the CoServ Electric franchise fee will be in alignment with that of Denton Municipal Utilities (Electric, Water and Wastewater) and other outside utilities that have a franchise agreement with the City of Denton. The City of Denton Charter requires the franchise to be approved three (3) times before it becomes effective. Staff anticipates that the franchise agreement will be presented again to the City Council for consideration on November 1 and if approved, the new franchise will be effective January 1, 2012. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of this ordinance. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) On October 4, 2011, the City Council approved the first reading of the ordinance. Respectfully Submitted By: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Denton Municipal Electric (DME) ACM: Howard Martin, 349-8232 ________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT: Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council approving a “Transmission Operator Consulting Services Agreement” by and between the City of Denton, Texas and the City of Garland, Texas in the amount not-to-exceed $350,000; directing the City Attorney or her designee to seal Exhibit “C” to the Agreement and deliver said Exhibit “C” to the City Secretary for deposit; as the said Exhibit “C” contains information that is confidential, competitive, sensitive and deals with the security of the DME system; which Exhibit “C” constitutes a Public Power Competitive and Financial Matter in accordance with Section 552.133 of the Texas Government Code; authorizing the City Manager to execute and deliver said Agreement; providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board has considered this Agreement. BACKGROUND: The City operates its municipal electric utility, Denton Municipal Electric (“DME”); and in connection therewith engages in electric transmission activities. DME must qualify with and comply with the applicable rules and regulations in serving its ratepayers. These transmission activities are regulated by the Texas Reliability Entity (“TRE”), the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (“ERCOT”), the Public Utility Commission of Texas (“PUCT”), the North American Reliability Corporation (“NERC”), and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). DME is currently making the transition to being registered as three different NERC utilities. It is presently registered both as a “Transmission Planner” and as a “Transmission Owner.” However, since DME is operating transmission assets greater than 100Kv, it must now also qualify to serve as a “Transmission Operator.” Qualification and registration as a “Transmission Operator” is a major step for DME and is mandatorily required by the regulatory authority. A requirement of this registration as a “Transmission Operator” is that one of fourteen (14) existing ERCOT Transmission Operators must operate DME’s transmission assets until the arrival of the TRE authorities on-site. The TRE authorities have not yet arrived on-site and in order to comply with the applicable regulations, DME must obtain the services of one of the fourteen existing ERCOT Transmission Operators to provide services for it to serve as a Transmission Operator consultant to DME; and The City of Garland is the present Transmission Operator for the Texas Municipal Power Agency, which interconnects with the DME system. Garland in addition, already has Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (“SCADA”) equipment in place to monitor these transmission assets. Garland is willing and able to provide the necessary services, cooperation, supervision and assistance to DME until DME qualifies as a Transmission Operator and meets the TRE established criteria. 1 OPTIONS: Authorize acceptance of the Agreement; or reject the Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council accept and approve the Agreement. 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: Expenditure of not-to-exceed $350,000. EXHIBITS: 1. Proposed Transmission Operator Consulting Services Agreement (Except for Exhibit “C” thereto which is a Public Power Competitive document protected under the provisions of Texas Government Code, Sec. 552.133) 2. Proposed Ordinance Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Phil Williams General Manager Denton Municipal Electric Prepared by: ________________________________ Michael S. Grim Executive Manager – Power, Legislative & Regulatory Affairs Denton Municipal Electric 2 TRANSMISSION OPERATOR CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT This Transmission Operator Consulting Services Agreement is entered into on this ___ day of __________, 2011 (the “Effective Date”) between the City of Denton, Texas (“Denton”) and the City of Garland, Texas (“Garland”). WHEREAS, Denton owns and operates, as “Denton Municipal Electric”, a municipal electric system that includes certain transmission facilities for the purpose of delivering electric power and energy to customers of DME, including wholesale transmission customers within the area of jurisdiction of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (“ERCOT”) as identified in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, in order to operate its transmission system (the “DME Transmission System”), DME must provide or obtain certain services related to the DME Transmission System in compliance with the rules and regulations applicable to transmission operators registered with North American Reliability Cooperation (“NERC”); Now, therefore, for and in consideration of the mutual obligations of the parties as expressed below and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: Section 1. Transmission Operator Consulting Services. (A) Garland shall, during the term of this Agreement, provide to Denton those transmission operator consulting services associated with the DME Transmission System as more particularly described in the matrix of requirements and responsibilities attached to this Agreement as Exhibit C. In provided those transmission operator consulting services to Denton, Garland shall provide such services in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations, if any, of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”), the Public Utility Commission of Texas (“PUC”), the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (“NERC”), and ERCOT in the manner that Garland provides such functions on its own behalf. (B) Garland does not, by this Agreement, by implication, or otherwise, assume or promise to perform any function or obligation of DME in particular, or of transmission operators in general, not otherwise required of a transmission operator by the applicable rules and regulations of FERC, the PUC, NERC, ERCOT or any other entity that has or may acquire jurisdiction over Garland, Denton or transmission operators in general. Garland does not assume or undertake responsibility for any functions other than those assigned to Garland in Exhibits A and C to this Agreement. Unless otherwise expressly agreed in writing by the parties, this Agreement does not extend to any material expansion or alteration of the DME Transmission System. In the event that any applicable rule or regulation promulgated by FERC, the PUC, NERC, ERCOT or any other entity that has or may acquire jurisdiction over Garland, Denton or transmission operators in general materially and adversely affects, as determined in the sole discretion of Garland, the utility, feasibility or financial parameters of this Agreement, Garland may terminate this Agreement, at will and without cause, by giving written notice of termination to the Denton not less than sixty days prior to the date of termination contingent on a time in which ERCOT can accommodate communications to switch transmission operator control back to DME’s control system, whichever is later. (C) During the term of this Agreement, DME shall be responsible for creating, issuing, and maintaining such policies, protocols or procedures as may be necessary to operate as a transmission operator on Denton’s behalf with Garland ‘s consultation, provided that Denton shall promptly, fully and timely cooperate with and assist Garland in the performance of Garland’s duties under this Agreement as identified in Exhibit C. Denton shall promptly, fully, and timely provide to Garland any and all information in its possession or control that is necessary to enable Garland to discharge its duties under this Agreement. Denton shall create, issue, and maintain all necessary policies and procedures required by the regulating agencies to function as a Transmission Owner/Transmission Planner. The Critical Infrastructure Protection (“CIP”) requirements described in Exhibit C to this Agreement shall be the responsibility of Denton with the exception of those CIP requirements related to Garland’s control center(s). Garland bears no responsibility for negotiating or participating in the drafting or execution of any agreement or transaction for or on behalf of Denton, even if those may relate to the provision of transmission operator services. (D) The parties acknowledge that, due to continuing changes in the design and configuration of the DME Transmission System as described in Exhibit A, because the potential for changes to the contact information in Exhibit “B”, and because of likely or potential changes in NERC standards or ERCOT operating guides and protocols reflected in the matrix in Exhibit “C” and referenced in the ‘Revision History’ of Exhibit C, the parties hereby authorize such amendments to those exhibits as may be necessary from time-to-time which the parties may, by mutual agreement and without the necessity of obtaining governing board approval from either party, revise as circumstances may warrant. Notwithstanding the amendment of an exhibit to this Agreement as authorized by this subsection, the other terms and provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. Section 2. Equipment. Denton shall promptly and fully provide and install all equipment necessary to enable Garland to perform the transmission operator consulting duties assigned to Garland by this Agreement. Such equipment shall be compatible with the Garland Supervisory and Control Data Acquisition (“SCADA”) and the Garland Energy Management System (“EMS” ). Denton shall provide all hardware and software associated with transmission elements installed in the field, including maintenance, testing and documentation thereof, for compliance purposes. Garland shall provide SCADA and Energy Management System (EMS) and control the DME transmission system as indicated in Exhibit A, including a primary and backup control center. Garland shall provide 24/7 communications with ERCOT in a manner that Garland provides such functions on its own behalf as a transmission operator on behalf of Denton in relation to the DME Transmission System. Section 3. Cost Reimbursement. (A) Denton agrees to pay Garland as follows: (1)An initial, one-time start-up fee of $20,000 payable upon the Effective Date of this Agreement; (2)A monthly fee of $25,000 payable on or before the last day of each month for the first six months of this Agreement; (3)For months seven through twelve, a monthly fee of $30,000.00 payable on or before the last day of each month; (4)For each month following one year after the Effective Date of this Agreement, a monthly fee of $39,000.00 payable on or before the last day of each month. (B) If Garland incurs the expense of adding additional equipment or man-power not covered in this Agreement, Denton agrees to reimburse Garland for such expenditures at not less than the actual, out-of-pocket costs incurred by Garland prior to any work being performed by Garland. Reimbursement includes field services or the expenses of additional help in gathering data for audit purposes requested by Denton or required to be performed under this Agreement. Section 4. Assumption of Liability for Fines and Penalties; Disclaimers of Warranties; Covenants Not to Sue; Limitations of Liability. (A) Denton acknowledges that, in performing transmission operator consulting duties on behalf of Denton, Garland is exposed to significant regulatory liabilities far in excess of the monetary consideration being paid to Garland under this Agreement. Denton further acknowledges that the consideration being paid to Garland under this Agreement does not reflect that regulatory exposure and thus does not adequately compensate Garland for the risks involved. As an integral and inseparable part of the consideration being given to Garland for undertaking the obligations of this Agreement, Denton agrees to assume all responsibility for the payment of any monetary fine, administrative penalty, or civil penalty assessed by a regulatory authority (including, without limitation, NERC or ERCOT) against Garland arising from Garland’s performance under or pursuant to this Agreement REGARDLESS WHETHER THE FINE OR PENALTY IS INCURRED AS A RESULT OF GARLAND'S NEGLIGENCE. Each party agrees to promptly notify the other party in the event it receives notice of a pending or proposed assessment of a fine or penalty, and each party agrees to fully cooperate in the defense of any proceedings taken to assess or contest the fine or penalty. (B) Garland agrees that it shall pursue all of its obligations under this Agreement using the same diligence and care with which it would undertake such matters on its own. GARLAND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED OR ANY EQUIPMENT TO BE PROVIDED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. WITHOUT LIMITING THE GENERALITY OF THE FOREGOING, GARLAND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES REGARDING MERCHANTABILITY, USAGE, SUITABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE WITH RESPECT TO THOSE SERVICES OR THAT EQUIPMENT, OR ANY PART THEREOF. THE LIMITED WARRANTIES CONTAINED IN THIS AGREEMENT ARE IN LIEU OF ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE GOODS AND SERVICES BEING PROVIDED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT ARE BEING OFFERED AND SOLD “AS IS”, “WHERE-IS”. DENTON FURTHER AGREES THAT GARLAND SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR FOR THE LOSS OF PROFIT OR REVENUE ARISING FROM THE PROVISION OF GOODS OR SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT EVEN IF GARLAND HAS BEEN ADVISED OF SUCH POSSIBILITY. IN NO EVENT SHALL DAMAGES TO DENTON, WHETHER ARISING FROM BREACH OF CONTRACT OR WARRANTY, BY TORT, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE EXCEED THE AMOUNT ACTUALLY PAID BY DENTON TO GARLAND UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. (C) Denton covenants and agrees not to sue Garland, its elected officials, officers, employees, attorneys, servants, agents or contractors for any act or omission related to their performance or obligations under this Agreement. Specifically, Denton waives its right to bring any claims or causes of action against Garland, its elected officials, officers, employees, attorneys, servants, agents or contractors in contract or in tort or otherwise, including but not limited to their negligence, in any way related to their performance or obligations under this Agreement. Denton represents and acknowledges that there is no disparity of bargaining power between Denton and Garland, that both parties have been advised by competent legal counsel as to the effect of this covenant, and that Denton is under no compulsion to agree to this covenant not to sue. (D) Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary herein the overall liability of Garland under this Agreement shall be limited to the amount of monetary consideration received in hand by Garland from Denton under the provisions of Section 3 of this Agreement. In no event shall Garland be liable for any consequential or punitive damages arising directly or indirectly from a breach of this Agreement. (E) The obligations of either party under this Agreement shall be without recourse to any of the elected officials, officers, employees, agents, attorneys, or representatives of such party. (F) The provisions of this section shall survive termination of this Agreement for any reason. Section 5. Term and Termination. (A) This Agreement shall have an initial term of eighteen months commencing with the Effective Date. (B) This Agreement may, at the option of Denton, be renewed for a month-to-month term by providing not less than fifteen days written notice of renewal to Garland prior to the end of the initial term and thereafter not less than fifteen days prior to the end of each renewal term. (C) In the event a party (the “Defaulting Party”) is in breach of a material provision of this Agreement, the party not in default (the “Non-defaulting Party”) may provide to the Defaulting Party notice of the default and a reasonable opportunity, not less than fifteen days, to cure the breach. If the Defaulting Party fails to cure the breach within the time specified, or (in the event the breach cannot be cured within such time) the Defaulting Party has failed to commence efforts necessary to cure the breach within such time, the Non-defaulting Party may, by sending a notice, terminate this Agreement. (D) Either party may terminate this Agreement for convenience, at will, and without cause, by giving written notice of termination to the other party not less than sixty days prior to the date of termination. Section 6. Notices. Any notice required or desired to be given from one party to the other party to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be given and shall be deemed to have been served and received (whether actually received or not) if (i) delivered in person to the address set forth below; (ii) deposited in an official depository under the regular care and custody of the United States Postal Service located within the confines of the United States of America and sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, and addressed to such party at the address hereinafter specified; or (iii) delivered to such party by courier receipted delivery. Either party may designate another address within the confines of the continental United States of America for notice, but until written notice of such change is actually received by the other party, the last address of such party designated for notice shall remain such party's address for notice. Section 7. No Assignment. Neither party shall have the right to assign that party's interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party. Section 8. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement is held to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable, the legality, validity or enforceability of the remaining terms or provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and in lieu of each such illegal, invalid or unenforceable term or provision, there shall be added automatically to this Agreement a legal, valid or enforceable term or provision as similar as possible to the term or provision declared illegal, invalid or unenforceable. Provided, however, that if the illegality, invalidity or unenforceability of any term or terms renders the basic purposes of this Agreement illegal, invalid or unenforceable or otherwise materially and adversely affects the utility or financial parameters of this Agreement, then either Denton or Garland may, upon written notice to the other, terminate this Agreement. The parties agree to thereafter enter into good faith negotiations to replace this Agreement with a contract as similar to the terms and conditions of this Agreement as legally permissible. Section 9. Waiver. Either Denton or Garland shall have the right to waive any requirement contained in this Agreement which is intended for the waiving party’s benefit, but, except as otherwise provided herein, such waiver shall be effective only if in writing executed by the party for whose benefit such requirement is intended. No waiver of any breach or violation of any term of this Agreement shall be deemed or construed to constitute a waiver of any other breach or violation, whether concurrent or subsequent, and whether of the same or of a different type of breach or violation. Section10. Governing Law; Venue. This Agreement and all of the transactions contemplated herein shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. The provisions and obligations of this Agreement are performable in Dallas County, Texas such that exclusive venue for any action arising out of this Agreement shall be in Dallas County, Texas. . Section11. Paragraph Headings; Construction The paragraph headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall in no way enlarge or limit the scope or meaning of the various and several paragraphs hereof. Both parties have participated in the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement and this Agreement shall not be construed either more or less strongly against or for either party. Section 12. Binding Effect. Except as limited herein, the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, devisees, personal and legal representatives, successors and assigns. Section 13. Gender. Within this Agreement, words of any gender shall be held and construed to include any other gender, and words in the singular number shall be held and construed to include the plural, unless the context otherwise requires. Section 14. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument. Section 15. Exhibits. All exhibits to this Agreement are incorporated herein by reference for all purposes wherever reference is made to the same. Section 16. Computation of Deadlines. If any deadline contained herein ends on a Saturday, Sunday or a legal holiday recognized by the Texas Supreme Court, such deadline shall automatically be extended to the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. Section 17. Entire Agreement. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes any and all prior agreements, arrangements or understandings between the parties relating to the subject matter. No oral understandings, statements, promises or inducements contrary to the terms of this Agreement exist. Subject to the provisions of Section (1)(D), this Agreement cannot be changed or terminated orally and no written modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless executed by both parties. Section 18. Relationship of Parties; No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed or construed by the parties hereto or by any third party to create the relationship of principal and agent or of partnership, joint venture, or employment, it being expressly understood and agreed that no provision contained in this Agreement nor any act or acts of the parties shall be deemed to create any relationship between the parties other than the relationship of independent parties contracting with each other solely for the purpose of effecting the provisions of this Agreement. Neither party has the authority to enter into contracts or to assume any obligation for the other, nor to make warranties or representations on behalf of the other except in accordance with the express terms of this Agreement or as otherwise authorized in writing by the other. Except for the provisions of this Agreement relating to the indemnification, release, and covenants not to sue the officials, employees, agents and representatives of Garland, there are no third-party beneficiaries to this Agreement and no third-party beneficiaries are intended by implication or otherwise. Section 19. Force Majeure. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement which is or may appear to be to the contrary, if the performance of any covenant or obligation to be performed by Garland is prevented or delayed as a result of circumstances which are beyond the reasonable control of Garland (which circumstances may include, without limitation, pending litigation, acts of God, war, terrorism or acts of civil disobedience, acts of sabotage, fire or other casualty, shortage of materials, adverse weather conditions [such as, by way of illustration and not of limitation, severe rain storms or below freezing temperatures, or tornados] labor action, strikes or similar acts, moratoriums or regulations or actions by governmental authorities), the time for such performance shall be extended by the amount of time of such delay, but no longer than the amount of time reasonably occasioned by the delay. Section 20. No Waiver of Immunity or Defense. No party, by execution of this Agreement, waives nor shall be deemed to have waived, any immunity or defense that would otherwise be available to it including, without limitation, immunity from liability and suit for damages to one another or to any third-party except as between Denton and Garland, both of which release, disclaim, and waive all immunities between them relating to the enforcability of this Agreement. EXECUTED on the dates indicated below but deemed to be effective on the Effective Date provided above. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS:CITY OF GARLAND, TEXAS: By:________________________By:_________________________ Name:______________________Name:_______________________ Title:_____________________Title:______________________ Date:______________________Date:_______________________ ADDRESS FOR NOTICE: EXHIBIT “B” NOTICE AND CONTACT INFORMATION 1.Transmission Operator Contact Information: Denton Municipal Electric (DME) Transmission Operator Desk 940-349-7580 Transmission Operations Manager Garland Power & Light 972-205-3098 214-202-5873 cell phone 2.DME Supervisor Contact Information: a.Name: Galen Gillum Title: Compliance Manager Phone: 940-349-7656 Cell Phone: 972-977-4141 Email Address: Galen.Gillum@cityofdenton.com FAX: 940-349-7334 b.Name: John Moore Title: Operations Division Manager Phone: 940-349-7544 Cell Phone: 512-415-1832 Email Address: John.Moore@cityofdenton.com FAX: 940-349-7549 3.Garland Addresses For Receipt of Written Notice: a.Mailing Address: Garland Power and Light P O Box 469002 Garland, Texas 75046-9002 Attention: Ray Schwertner b.Physical Address: Garland Power and Light 217 North 5th Street Garland, Texas 75040 Attention: Ray Schwertner Telephone: 972-205-2651 c.Email: Name: Ray Schwertner Email Address: rschwertner@garlandpower-light.org d.Facsimile: Name: Ray Schwertner Facsimile Telephone Number: 972-205-2636 4.Denton Addresses for Receipt of Written Notice: a.Mailing Address: Denton Municipal Electric 1569 Spencer Rd. Denton, Texas 76205 Attention: Phil Williams b.Physical Address: Denton Municipal Electric 1569 Spencer Rd. Denton, Texas 76205 Attention: Phil Williams Telephone: 940-349-8487 c.Email: Name: Phil Williams Email address: phil.williams@cityofdenton.com d.Facsimile: Name: Phil Williams Facsimile Telephone Number: 940-380-0403 Revision History Revision Reason for Revision Date By No. 0Original11-01-2010 Fred Sherman 1Update contact information 3-29-2011 Fred Sherman ORDINANCE NO. 2011-_______ AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A “TRANSMISSION OPERATOR CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT” BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AND THE CITY OF GARLAND, TEXAS IN THE AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $350,000; DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY OR HER DESIGNEE TO SEAL EXHIBIT “C” TO THE AGREEMENT AND DELIVER SAID EXHIBIT “C” TO THE CITY SECRETARY FOR DEPOSIT; AS THE SAID EXHIBIT “C” CONTAINS INFORMATION THAT IS CONFIDENTIAL, COMPETITIVE, SENSITIVE AND DEALS WITH THE SECURITY OF THE DME SYSTEM; WHICH EXHIBIT “C” CONSTITUTES A PUBLIC POWER COMPETITIVE AND FINANCIAL MATTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 552.133 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AND DELIVER SAID AGFEEMENT; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD HAS CONSIDERED THIS AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the City of Denton, Texas is a Home-Rule City, and operates its municipal electric utility, Denton Municipal Electric; and in connection therewith it engages in electric transmission activities, and must qualify with and comply with the applicable rules and regulations in serving its ratepayers, which transmission activities are regulated by the Texas Reliability Entity (“TRE”), the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (“ERCOT”), the Public Utility Commission of Texas (“PUCT”), the North American Reliability Corporation (“NERC”), and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”); and WHEREAS, Denton Municipal Electric is currently making the transition to being registered as three different NERC utilities. It is presently registered both as a “Transmission Planner” and as a “Transmission Owner.” However, since DME is operating transmission assets greater than 100Kv, it must also now qualify to serve as a “Transmission Operator.” Qualification and registration as a “Transmission Operator” is a major step for DME and is mandatorily required by the regulatory authorities; and WHEREAS, a requirement of this registration is that one of fourteen (14) existing ERCOT Transmission Operators must operate DME’s transmission assets until the arrival of the TRE authorities arrive on-site. The TRE authorities have not yet arrived on-site and in order to comply with the applicable regulations, DME must obtain the services of one of the fourteen existing ERCOT Transmission Operators to provide services for it to serve as a Transmission Operator Consultant to DME; and WHEREAS, the City of Garland is the present Transmission Operator for Texas Municipal Power Agency, which interconnects with the DME system; Garland in addition, already has Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (“SCADA”) equipment in place to monitor these transmission assets; Garland is willing and able to provide the necessary services, cooperation, supervision and assistance to DME until DME qualifies as a Transmission Operator and meets TRE established criteria; and . Page 1 WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 551.086 of the Texas Government Code, after due public notice being given, the City Council, being a “Public Power Utility Governing Body” under Senate Bill 7, has discussed and deliberated the “Transmission Operator Consulting Services Agreement” (“Agreement”) in a Closed Meeting on October 18, 2011 and is of the opinion, after considering the Agreement, and after considering the advice and the opinion of legal counsel, that Exhibit “C” to the Agreement, being entitled “DME and GP&L TOP Responsibility Matrix” is a document that is a Public Power Utilities – Competitive Matter under the provisions of Section 552.133 of the Texas Government Code, as the document contains detailed confidential, sensitive, competitive matters, and security information relative to the DME system, and is therefore of the opinion that the said Exhibit “C” should be sealed and excepted from public disclosure; and the Council does hereby direct that the said Exhibit “C” to said Agreement be sealed by the City Attorney or her designee, and delivered in a sealed envelope to the City Secretary in accordance with the law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has further determined that it is in the public interest that it should exercise its rights under the Section 552 of the Texas Government Code to lawfully safeguard and keep said Exhibit “C” of the Agreement sealed, as that portion of the Agreement is a competitive document which contains competitive electric information; and WHEREAS, the Council deems that there is a substantial need for the services and it is in the public interest to enter into this Agreement with the City of Garland, Texas as provided in said Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The above Preamble to this ordinance is hereby incorporated by reference herewith, as a part of this ordinance for all purposes pertinent. SECTION 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute and deliver the “Transmission Operator Consulting Services Agreement” (“Agreement”) which is attached hereto, and provides for personal services to be rendered by the City of Garland, Texas for the benefit of the City of Denton, Texas, in the amount not-to-exceed $350,000. SECTION 3. The expenditure of funds therefore is hereby authorized in accordance with said Agreement. SECTION 4. Immediately following the execution of the Agreement, the City Attorney or her designee, seal, and the City Secretary shall, as provided for above in this ordinance, maintain the said Exhibit “C” to said Agreement in her custody and control, as a document excepted from disclosure under the provisions of Section 552.133 of the Texas Government Code (the “Public Power Exception”), unless otherwise lawfully ordered to disclose said document. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. Page 2 PASSED AND APPROVED this the _____ day of ___ , 2011. _________________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY By: Page 3 CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 6, 2011 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on Tuesday, September 6, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Council Member King, Council Member Watts, Council Member Gregory, Council Member Engelbrecht, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp, Mayor Burroughs, and Council Member Roden. ABSENT: None. 1. Citizen Comments on Consent Agenda Items There were no citizen comments submitted for this item. 2. Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for September 6, 2011. Council Member Watts stated that he was absent from the last council meeting and listened to the meeting on-line. He suggested member make sure their mikes were on as sometime it was hard to hear what was being said. 3. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction on the FY 2011-12 Proposed Budget, Capital Improvement Program, and Five-Year Financial Forecast. Bryan Langley, Chief Financial Officer, presented information on the process thus far and upcoming events. The staff had made adjustments to the budget as requested by Council. General Fund – due to an increase in the sales tax forecast, staff increased the level of funding for Council initiatives to $333,000. These funds were placed in a non-departmental budget and once additional details were known on the expenditures, the items would be brought back to Council for consideration. Possible uses of the funds included additional street maintenance, implementation of the bike plan, additional traffic signals, Denton County Transportation Authority Downtown shuttle operations costs, or any other Council priority. Council also directed staff to increase the level of funding for street maintenance activities. Council directed staff to transfer 100% of the growth in franchise fees to the Street Improvement Fund. This would reduce the General Fund by $439,827 and increase the street maintenance funding by the same amount in the Street Improvement Fund. The budget would be presented to th Council on September 20 for consideration. Mayor Burroughs stated that at an earlier meeting he had asked for information on what other taxing entities such as the DISD and the County was doing with employees in terms of compensation. He asked for an update on that prior information. Council Member Roden asked if there was going to be a staff presentation before the public hearing on the budget. Langley stated that there would be a brief presentation on the budget similar to what he had just done. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 2 Council Member Roden stated that he knew of some people who were interested in the Council initiative fund and who wanted to comment on how to spend that money. Council Member King stated that the budget was projected to be approximately $700,000 over budget with that amount to be drawn out of the fund balance. If the $300,000 was not spent, only half that amount would be over budget. Council Member Watts asked how the process would work in terms of the money. He would like to be prudent with that additional money which was based on the sales tax forecast. He was interested in the process whereby a decision would be made on how to spend the money. Langley stated that as staff received more information on the cost for a specific project the information would be presented to Council to see if they wanted to spend it on that project. City Manager Campbell stated that Council would determine how to spend that money. Council Member Watts stated that his preference would be to have individual council votes concerning the spending of that money. 4. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the Aesthetic Study that the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is preparing for the IH-35 expansion project. Emerson Vorel, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated staff had been attending meetings since February regarding the aesthetics of I-35E when it was reconstructed. Patrick Owens of the consulting firm contracted by TxDOT to prepare an Aesthetics Master Plan was present to provide an overview of the information. Patrick Owens, HNTB Corporation, stated that there were two areas for consideration – one was the technical guidelines and the other was the aesthetics master plan. The Master Plan would be done first followed by the technical guidelines. The project was kicked off in the December/January time frame with a discussion of the aesthetics from IH-635 to US Highway 380. TxDOT had requested input to establish what the design would look like before going to the design/build stage. They received input from groups along the corridor and divided the corridor into four different districts to manage all of the information. The goal set by TxDOT was to have two supplemental documents to be included in the procurement package so bidders would know what was expected. He noted that there were common elements which could and could not be touched in conjunction with the study. HNTB also looked at how to organize the aesthetics in terms of where particular community elements were located and where corridor- wide elements were located. The participants agreed with having a community specific look and feel in the corridor. Three general character zones were developed and implemented with some local specifics such as abutment walls allowing graphics or art work for a specific community. The Master Plan documents provided a consensus on the concept and direction to move forward. That set the stage for more technical documents for contractors in the form of aesthetic design guidelines. Information was needed on where the accent graphics would be applied and if the intersection was a priority. TxDOT would eventually like to have specific feedback on what the City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 3 art work would be and identify where it would be located. Owens presented various options for th wall accent panels, colors and texture patterns. He indicated that by September 15 they needed information on how the feedback would work but did not need specific artwork at that time. Council Member Roden asked if there was a specific overlay and did the City need to provide a specific design for that. He questioned if once the artwork was chosen would it have to be the same for every overpass. Owens replied that every intersection would have a specific design. Baseline aesthetics were established at specific intersections. They were requesting feedback on whether to have the same artwork or unique art work at the intersections which would be determined by the communities. City Manager Campbell stated that suggestions were needed on which intersections the city would like to have treatments. Some of the intersections would have more visibility than others from the freeway and some would only be seen from the frontage roads. Owens stated that all of the intersections were overpass scenarios which would put retaining walls visible from the community and not from the main corridor. Council Member Gregory asked if there were any photos or if Owens could direct him to some to some that show the metal technique. Owens indicated that he had a small sample to show to Council and could provide some photos of completed projects. Mayor Burroughs asked at what point the City would have to tell TxDOT that it wanted some enhanced intersections and was willing to pay for them. Owens stated that they would like to have those intersections identified by the 15th to complete the document. The city could ask TxDOT about a deadline as the information would not immediately go to a contractor to begin work. Council Member Gregory suggested coordinating the intersections with the city's entrance signage. The Public Art Committee could review the graphics. Mayor Burroughs clarified that the specific graphics were not due on the 15th. Owens stated that was correct. Council Member Watts questioned if the intersections labeled for graphics accents had to have the same graphics on each of the four corners. Owens replied correct but if the City wanted to do two and two, it would not be out of the question and would not be any additional cost. Council Member Watts asked that if there were four identified intersections with four corners each, what would be maximum number of different graphics on each intersection. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 4 Owens stated that they were gearing the document that each intersection with four corners would have the same graphics. He indicated that if the City wanted concrete graphics that would be a different project and would be more expensive. Council Member Watts asked what the baseline for landscaping at the intersections was and what would be enhanced. Owens stated that everything was base lined with Bermuda grass but enhanced intersections would have basic shrubs. If a city wanted to go up from there, options were also available for that. A city could also suggest a plant palate if it wanted to enhance the site. Mayor Burroughs asked about the timing on grass and shrub preferences. Owens stated that they needed to know by the 15th but the City could ask TxDOT for an exact timeline. Vorel stated that entities which requested enhanced landscaping also took on future maintenance of the plantings. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked if plants native to Texas could be used instead of Bermuda which needed lots of maintenance. Owens stated that anything above and beyond would be installed by TxDOT and maintained by the local community. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp questioned that if this process had started in January and had to be th completed by September 15, why was Council just now discussing it. Owens stated that Lewisville hired its own consultant to look at the border corridor and how it would have a ripple effect throughout the community. Elements specific to that study were no farther along than Denton. The Lewisville consultant, TxDOT and his firm had talked about ideas but where the lines would be drawn was still being worked out. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked how Denton would do that process. th City Manager Campbell stated that he was not sure as the 15 was a short time frame. He suggested brainstorming on how to proceed such as referring it to the Mobility Committee, the Public Art Committee or form a council committee. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp suggested a committee made up of three members of the Public Art Committee and three members from Council to meet on the issue. Council Member Engelbrecht asked how the four intersections were selected and who selected them. Owens stated that it was from feedback from the advisory committee meetings and their staff. However, that was not a final decision. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 5 Council Member Engelbrecht stated that Highway 380 was not one of the intersections selected but was going to be a major cross thoroughfare throughout city. He also asked if thought had been given to having the graphic on just one side of an intersection where traffic would be and possibly be able to do eight intersections. Owens stated that could be an option if the City wanted. Council Member Engelbrecht questioned if the City could purchase a set for future use, leaving some blank for the time being. Owens felt that could be an option. The use of the applied metal would allow for such an option and could easily be refreshed with new graphics in the future. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that it could be part of a master plan with a statement on how to change or add graphics in the future. th City Manager Campbell asked if the information requested was critical for September 15 or st could it be moved to October 1. Owens stated that he would defer to TxDOT on when the information needed to be turned in for document review. TxDOT would set the date for feedback. Mayor Burroughs noted that accents on Post Oak would face oncoming traffic and not from the community as that was an underpass. Post Oak was an entrance way and it would be critical for the artwork. He asked what it would take to add another intersection to the list of four as accents. Owens stated that there was no magic to the number four of intersections. The City could make a case to TxDOT to have five because of specific reasons. He felt that would not be a problem. Mayor Burroughs questioned if the number of intersections would have to have done by 15th. Owens replied correct. He felt that TxDOT would consider anything brought forward to them. Council Member Gregory indicated that Highway 380 was an important intersection which needed to be in the mix. Council Member Roden asked about the possibility of leaving an overpass blank for a public art project. Owens stated that public art was discussed early on in the process. A problem with public art was the factor of the unknown plus it would not have a consistent look and feel. It was not the direction that the committee went; however, Council could bring it up to TxDOT if it desired. The abutment face was not addressed but might be a consideration from a pedestrian standpoint. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 6 5. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding a proposed ordinance which establishes child safety zones within the City of Denton in which certain registered sex offenders may not legally reside. Captain Len Carter, Denton Police Department, presented information on the proposal. The purpose of sex offender residency law was to create a child safety zone in which registered sex offenders did not live, thereby reducing the risk that they might have the opportunity to victimize children. Denton currently did not have an ordinance regulating the residency of sex offenders and when they were on parole, they could live anywhere in the city. Most area cities had adopted ordinances establishing child safety zones which prohibited sex offenders convicted of offenses against minors from residing within at least 1,500 feet of places where children gather such as schools, parks, recreation centers, video arcades and day care centers. State law already required offenders with children to register with the local police department but while on parole must maintain certain distance. Currently there were 138 registered sex offenders in Denton. The Police Department monitored the activity of these offenders by conducting monthly visits to confirm their residences. Since 2007 Denton had experienced a steady increase in the number of registered sex offenders who chose to reside in Denton for personal reasons or after being paroled to Denton after release from incarceration. Other areas had reported a leveling out or decrease. There were no documented incidents of registered sex offenders reoffending and victimizing children in Denton. The city would maintain a map depicting the prohibited areas. The map would be reviewed annually and made available to juvenile offenders and exempted the permanent residences of those offenders who were registered prior to the date of the adoption of the ordinance. Council Member Watts questioned why the ordinance did not apply to offenders who were minors. Carter indicated that no other ordinance had that provision. Council Member Roden asked for reasons why there might be more offenders in Denton. Carter stated that when the offenders were released they had to have a place to live and family members here might take them in. It might also be because Denton did not have an ordinance on file while others cities did. Council Member Gregory stated that he did not see any information on bus stops. Carter indicated that there were legal and logistical issues with bus stops. Currently there were approximately 376 bus stops which would make it difficult to provide notice to offenders and bus stops frequently moved which would make difficult to make a prior notice to offenders. Council Member Gregory stated that an offense might have been against an older person rather than just a child and questioned if that person would be prohibited from being around children. Carter replied that it only applied to offences where the victims were under the age of 17. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 7 Council Member King stated that these offenders had already paid their debt to society and questioned if they were more repetitious offenders than others. Carter stated that there were several subgroups some of which fixated and targeted children. It was difficult to assess a risk level to humans as it was hard to predict what might happen. He stated that State law allowed for the County Sheriff to prevent an offender from being enrolled in his county. The purpose of that was to balance the load. A police department had to monitor the activities of these offenders which could be difficult if the numbers were high. Council Member Engelbrecht asked if neighborhood day cares in homes registered with the State were included in the protected areas. Carter stated that only public day care centers were included. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the ordinance. Following the completion of the Work Session, the Council convened into a Closed Session to discuss the following: 1. Closed Meeting: A. Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.086. 1. Receive competitive public power information from staff in the form of a proposed operating budget for Denton Municipal Electric ("DME") for the upcoming fiscal year, including without limitation, revenues, expenses, commodity volumes, and commitments, and the direction of DME; and discuss, deliberate, consider adoption of the budget and other matters, and provide staff with direction regarding such matters. This item was not considered in Closed Session. B. Consultation with Attorneys - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071. 1. Receive a status report regarding the litigation entitled: The University of North Texas, Appellant v. The City of Denton, Texas, Appellee, Cause No. 02-09-00395-CV, now pending before the Fort Worth Court of Appeals; and discuss, deliberate and provide the City’s attorneys with direction and any recommendations regarding such legal matter. A public discussion of this legal matter would conflict with the duty of the City’s Attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 8 C. Deliberations regarding Real Property - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.072; Consultation with Attorneys - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071. 1. Discuss, deliberate, and receive information from Staff and provide Staff with direction pertaining to the acquisition or the condemnation of fee simple tracts, permanent drainage easement tracts and temporary construction easement tracts for the Mayhill Road Widening and Improvements project, affecting real property tracts in the D. Hough Survey, Abstract No. 646, the M.E.P. & P.R.R. Surveys, Abstract Nos. 927and 950, the D. Lambert Survey, Abstract No. 784, the G. Walker Survey, Abstract 1330, and the J. Brandon Survey, Abstract No. 1515, in the City and County of Denton, Texas. Consultation with the City’s attorneys regarding legal issues associated with the acquisition or condemnation of the tracts referenced above where a public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City’s attorneys to the Denton City Council and the City of Denton, Texas under the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Conduct of the State Bar of Texas, or would jeopardize the City’s legal position in any administrative proceedings or potential litigation. This item was not considered in Closed Session. Council convened in a Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. 1. POSTING OF COLORS The Fire Department Honor Guard posted the colors in remembrance of the 10th anniversary of the 911 attacks. 2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U. S. and Texas flags. 3.PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamations/Awards 1. Constitution Week Mayor Burroughs presented the proclamation for Constitution Week. 2. Friday is UNT Pride Day 2011 Mayor Burroughs presented the proclamation for UNT Pride Day. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 9 3. Leukemia, Lymphoma & Myeloma Awareness Month Mayor Burroughs presented the proclamation for the Leukemia, Lymphoma & Myeloma Awareness Month. 4.National Moment of Remembrance of the 10th Anniversary of September 11th Mayor Burroughs presented the proclamation for National Moment of Remembrance of the 10th Anniversary of September 11. 4. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. B. Receive citizen reports from the following: 1. Rebecca Smith-Murdock regarding a Denton Smoke-Free city ordinance. Ms. Smith-Murdock asked for a comprehensive smoke free ordinance in Denton. All public places would be smoke free including offices, restaurants, and bars. Data indicated that smoke free restaurants and bars were not adversely economically affected by such an ordinance. She asked Council to pass a comprehensive ordinance to make Denton smoke free. 2. Hannah Murdock regarding a comprehensive smoke-free ordinance for Denton. Ms. Murdock asked Council to consider a smoke free ordinance for the city of Denton. Citizens had the right to clean air but had a limited selection of work sites, restaurants and bars to go to. She requested Council consider this issue now instead of waiting for state-wide action. 3. Bob Clifton regarding the proposed budget. Mr. Clifton spoke regarding the proposed budget. He presented a comparison between the County budget and the City proposed budget. He detailed the number and amount of salaries for city employees. 5.CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Gregory motioned, Council Member King seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and accompanying ordinances. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 10 Ordinance No. 2011-139 A. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager to enter into a development agreement between the City of Denton and ULE, L.L.C. for the dedication of park land and construction of trails at a neighborhood park at the Unicorn Lake Estates Subdivision; authorizing acceptance of land and improvements; and providing an effective date. The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommends approval (5-0). The minutes below were approved. B. Consider approval of the minutes of: July 12, 2011 July 19, 2011 Ordinance No. 2011-140 C. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with CP&Y, Inc. of Dallas, Texas for engineering services and consulting services associated with Tasks 2 through 4 of the City of Denton’s Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Facility Permit# 1590A, and providing an effective date (File 4683 - in an amount not to exceed $865,880.00.) The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5- 0). 6.ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION A. Consider nominations/appointments to the City’s boards and commissions. 1. Animal Shelter Advisory Committee 2. Health & Building Standards Commission 3. Historic Landmark Commission 4. Public Art Committee 5. Traffic Safety Commission 6. Zoning Board of Adjustment Mayor Burroughs nominated Sally Cavness to the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp nominated Pati Haworth to the Historic Landmark Commission and Council Member Roden nominated John Murphy to the Traffic Safety Commission. Council Member King motioned, Council Member Watts seconded to approve the nominations. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 11 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ordinance No. 2011-141 A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton Texas, providing for a zoning change from Downtown Residential 1 (DR-1) zoning district classification and use designation to Downtown Commercial General (DC-G) zoning district classification and use designation, on 2.5 acres, legally described as Lots 2-9, Block B, Paul Hamilton Addition, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing a severability clause and an effective date. (Z11-0006) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0.) DUE TO THE OPPOSITION OF MORE THAN 20% OF THE LAND AREA WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE REQUIRED TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST. Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, presented the details regarding the proposal. The applicant was requesting a zoning change from DR-1 to DC-G in order to expand the Midtown student housing project which was just completing construction. The property was currently developed with eight single family lots that the developer had acquired that would be an extension of the Midtown Student Housing Complex. The proposed zoning was consistent with the existing Denton Development Code; however, opposition exceeded 20% which would require a super majority vote by Council. The Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommended approval. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that the picture of the site did not show the new development. There were four story structures in the area. Cunningham stated that the structures were already built but were not facing Cleveland Street. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked about the opposition to the proposal. Cunningham stated that it was one property owner who owned or managed the lots in question. Council Member Watts asked about the single lot to the south that was not part of the rezoning. Cunningham stated that the zoning was for multi-family and the other areas were for the club house for the new apartments. Council Member Watts stated that the requested change was to not restrict the property to multi- family and that the zoning change would allow for other uses as submitted. Cunningham stated that the proposed zoning was for straight zoning to DC-G and that all uses would be allowed that were in DC-G Council Member Roden asked about the traffic flow from the new apartments. Cunningham stated that the access would be on Cleveland Street. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 12 Council Member Roden asked if that would be the only access or would that change with the new zoning. Cunningham stated that parking would be adjacent to the existing parking. Currently there was no official site plan. Council Member Roden stated that there were a large number of large trees on the property and questioned what the process was to save those trees. Cunningham stated that the developer would have to meet the current tree ordinance as noted in the Development Code or do mitigation as noted in the Development Code. Council Member Gregory asked about the site plan review process. Cunningham stated that the site plan would be submitted to the City for review but that there would be no public hearing. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke during the public hearing: Mac Jones, applicant, spoke in support. Council Member Gregory stated that the proposal was designed as student housing and asked Mr. Jones to describe the units. Jones stated that they would be 2-4 bedroom units with amenities already in place with the other complex. Each bedroom would have its own bathroom and would be blocked off from the common area of the apartment. The apartments would be listed by the bedroom. Only one additional building would be constructed on the property. He was proposing forty units and 150 beds with no more than one tenant per bedroom. Council Member Gregory asked how parking would be allocated. Jones stated that there would be enough parking for each bedroom to have a parking space. His policy was to not have spill over parking outside of the complex. Council Member Gregory asked if there was any retail space included within the development. Jones stated that he had done one development in Arlington with retail but that was generally not his practice. Council Member Watts stated that with the forty units and 150 beds the apartments would be a mix of two, three and four bedrooms. Jones stated that the majority would be four bedrooms. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 13 Council Member Watts stated that with no site plan, the density could be 150 units per acre so to zone with the requested zoning it was only constricted by the size of the site for the number of units. He questioned if the site plan would be able to accommodate 150 cars on site. Jones indicated that it could. Council Member Watts asked Mr. Jones if he would agree to put a restriction to have only multi- family on the property. Jones stated he would agree to that. Council Member Watts expressed a concern regarding the height of the buildings. In the past, there were some presentations made of what was going to be built but that might have changed in the process. He was uncomfortable with not having a site plan to look at. He asked about the ingress/egress and whether the property would be replated into one large development. Jones stated that the property would be replated. Council Member Watts asked about the access and the fact that there was only one access. Jones stated that was correct as that was what was required. They would like another point of egress but that was dependent on City code. Council Member Watts asked if the parking would be in the back. Jones stated that was what was being considered. Council Member Watts asked Mr. Jones if he would agree to restrict the buildings to be similar in nature to the ones already there. Jones replied that was what they were going to do. They were going to make it identical to the other buildings. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked Mr. Jones to address the tree issue. Jones stated that they were going to save as many trees as they could as they were an amenity to the site. Council Member Roden asked if the resident’s cars were staying in the parking lot or how were the students getting to the university. Jones indicated that a lot of the students rode the bus or bikes. Council Member Roden asked what the complex did for bike riders. Jones stated that they had just purchased two additional bike racks for all the bikes used on site. He felt that most of the cars stayed put and were not driven to campus. They had applied to the university to add a bus stop at the club house. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 14 Council Member Engelbrecht asked if there would be retail on the lower floor on the Cleveland Street side. Jones stated that it was not considered as visibility there was not high enough. Council Member Watts asked if Jones had sold any units to a tax exempt entity. Jones replied no. They had built seven projects and still owned and managed six of them. James Lockridge, 917 Cleveland, Denton, 76201 - spoke in favor. David Shelton, 919 Cleveland, Denton, 76201 – spoke in favor. Ivan Goddard, 1017 Cleveland, Denton, 76201 – spoke in favor. Robert Detaneglo, owner of 1001 Cleveland, Denton 76201 - spoke in favor. Devin Taylor, 2710 Hinkle, Denton, 76201 – request retail not be restricted. The Mayor closed public hearing. Council Member King motioned, Council Member Watts seconded to adopt the ordinance with the conditions that the use be limited to multi-family and with similar construction as those building around it. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Council Member Roden “aye”, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", and Mayor Burroughs "aye". Motion carried unanimously. B. Hold a public hearing and receive citizen input on the FY 2011-12 Proposed Budget. Bryan Langley, Chief Financial Officer, presented an overview of the budget process to date. The proposed budget was presented to Council on July 29 with detailed discussions during August. The current tax rate was maintained with no base rate increase for electric customers. There was an increase proposed in water and solid waste. The budget also created a street improvement fund with $3.5 million to be placed in that fund for street maintenance. Following the August 16th meeting staff made changes in the budget following Council direction. The projected sales tax increase which increased the Council’s initiative funding would be part of the budget but no specifics at this time for the uses of that money. Detailed costs for projects would be presented to Council at the appropriate time. The amount of transfer to the Street Improvement Fund would be increased by using the franchise fees. An additional work session th on would be held on September 13 regarding the budget with budget approval scheduled for th September 20. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that the total budget was approximately $587 million and asked how much of that was the DME budget. Langley stated that $140.4 million was Electric Fund expenditures. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that it was not an equal comparison when Denton’s budget was compared to cities with no utility company. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 15 Mayor Burroughs asked how much was the General Fund budget. Langley replied it was $88.5 million for tax supported services such as police, fire and libraries. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke during the public hearing: Jeffrey Rasch, 301 Bradley, Denton, 76201 – more money for bike lanes Devin Taylor, 2710 Hinkle, Denton, 76201 – support for the budget Amaya Herrington-Alexander, 2043 Scripture, Denton, 76201 – support for bike lanes Vicki Oppenheim, 600 Windfield, Denton, 76209 – more money for bike lanes Christopher Walker, 1310 Scripture, Denton, 76201 – more money for bike lanes Jennifer Lane, 2024 Bowling Green, Denton, 76201 – support for the budget Laurent Provost, 1301 Sena Street, Denton, 76201 – in support of bike lanes Amber Briggle, 1315 Dartmouth, Denton, 76201 – in support of bike lanes Elma Walker, 9805 Grandview, Denton, 76207 – support for the budget Ian Veteto, 2006 Camellia Street, Denton, 76205 – support for bike lanes Alena Veteto, 2006 Camellia Street, Denton, 76205 – support for bike lanes Cooper Barner, 1701 Wisteria, Denton, 76205 – support for bike lanes Zarian Peresly-Boone, 601 Crescent, Denton, 76201 – support for bike lanes Lydia Alexander, 2043 Scripture, Denton, 76201 – support for bike lanes Clinton McBride, 1400 N. Elm, Denton, 76201 – support for bike lanes Howard Draper, 919 W. Hickory, Denton, 76201 – support for bike plan Kris Ohlinger, 1121 Bernard, Denton – support for bike infrastructure Raina Joines, 801 Greenwood, Denton, 87208 – support for bike lanes Joseph Kinrad, 65 W. Sycamore, Denton, 76201 - support for bike lanes Kevin Marshall, 530 S. Locust, Denton - support for bike lanes Hatice Salih, 300 Northridge, Denton, 76207 – opposed to budget Bob Clifton, 1800 Morse, Denton, 76205 – opposed to budget The following individuals submitted comment cards all in support of bike lanes: Will Frenkel, 1704 Westchester, Denton, 76201 Jeremiah Trinidad, 1220 Crescent, Denton, 76201 Dylan Thomas Dunn, Denton, 76201 Tyler Reinhold, 516 W. Oak, Denton, 76201 Chris Thrasher, 409 Janie Street, Denton, 76209 Jennifer Bailey, 1003 Avenue A, Denton, 76201 Allison Gilmer, 400 Jagoe, Denton, 76201 Remington Pohlmeyer, 1417 Anna Street, Denton, 76201 Antonio Mondrayer-Becher, 409 Janie, Denton, 76209 Pauline Farrestin, 2015 Bowling Green, Denton, 76201 Desiree Chuskul, 316 Fry Street, Denton, 76201 Nathaniel Lightfoot, 111 Lane Street, Denton, 76209 Jessica Menth, 816 N. Bell, Denton, 76209 Chris Flesher, 816 N. Bell, Denton, 76209 Agatha Beins, 2421 N. Bell, Denton, 76209 Rhonda Love, 1921 Hollyhill, Denton, 76205 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 16 Justin Stewart, 1808 Panhandle, Denton, 76201 Julie Stebbins, 1220 Crescent, Denton, 76201 Chris Oller, 514 N. Austin, Denton, 76201 Nicholas Magruder, 425 Normal, Denton, 76201 Cayla Bramlett, 716 W. Sycamore, Denton, 76201 Lily Sloan, 1104 Manhattan, Denton, 76209 Brian Bartels, 716 W. Sycamore, Denton, 76201 The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Engelbrecht thanked the citizens for coming to Council as a group for a particular effort. Mayor closed public hearing No action was required by Council on this item. 8. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. B. Receive citizen reports from the following: 1. Hatice Salih regarding the proposed budget. Ms. Salih presented her views on the city's proposed budget. 2. Melissa Rodriguez concerning a smoke free Denton. Ms. Rodriguez presented her views on a smoke free ordinance for the city of Denton. 9. CONCLUDING ITEMS A. Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting AND Under Section 551.0415 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, provide reports about items of community interest regarding which no action will be taken, to include: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen; a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality; or an announcement involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 17 Mayor Pro Tem Kamp invited Council and citizens to a city-wide commemoration of 9/11 at the First United Methodist Church on Sunday at 6:00 p.m. Council Member Gregory requested that the Agenda Committee work on a time to have a work session on a smoke free ordinance and would like to see the proposed legislation by Myra Crownover. He would also like to see ordinance in this area that had been implemented by neighboring cities as a model. Council Member Roden asked for a history of the bike plan and reasons why items in the plan were not in effect. Council Member Watts asked for a work session regarding an apartment policy for Denton. Council Member Watts asked for recommendations from the TIF Board for financing options for the County property. Mayor Burroughs asked that it also include what was the best possible type of development for the property per the Board and what kind of zoning should be on the property. Council Member Engelbrecht agreed with the smoking and apartment policy suggestions. He also asked that staff be able to talk about money for the bike plan at the next budget discussion. Mayor Burroughs asked for suggestions on where in the increased funding for road maintenance prioritization of bike traffic would be located. He suggested looking at that when prioritizing a street for maintenance and make it one of the factors if it currently was not one. Mayor Burroughs asked about traffic light functioning so that it recognized a bike there instead of car. B. Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Mayor Burroughs indicated that Council would be returning to the Closed Session. C. Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. There was no official action on Closed Meeting items. Council returned to Closed Session at 9:00 p.m. to consider the following: A. Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.086. 2. Receive a status report and further presentation from staff regarding public power competitive and financial matters regarding the possible construction City of Denton City Council Minutes September 6, 2011 Page 18 and installation of a state-of-the-art combined heat and power (CHP) tri- generation station, and associated structures including a proposed natural gas pipeline, for the City to be located in the industrial district in the City of Denton, Texas; discuss, deliberate, consider and provide staff with direction regarding same. The Council returned to Open Session and with no further business adjourned at 9:15 p.m. _________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS __________________________ JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 13, 2011 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on Tuesday, September 13, 2011 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Council Member Roden, Council Member Gregory, Council Member Engelbrecht, Mayor Burroughs, Council Member Watts, and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp. ABSENT: Council Member King. 1. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction on the FY 2011-12 Proposed Budget, Capital Improvement Program, and Five-Year Financial Forecast. Bryan Langley, Chief Financial Officer, stated that staff had already had a number of meetings with Council regarding the budget. This was another opportunity for Council to discuss the budget. At the next meeting, Council would be considering approval of the budget and all of the ordinances and resolutions associated with the budget. Mayor Burroughs asked when the budget had to be approved. stth Langley stated that the new fiscal year would start on October 1 with September 20 being the last Council meeting prior to that date. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that there had been a lot of dialog regarding the bike and pedestrian plan. The Mobility Committee had just met regarding that issue and had learned that the City might be able to proceed with the plan based on a recent proposal. Mayor Burroughs stated that he had a communication with Commissioner Coleman who indicated that he and Commissioner Eads might have an interest in putting up matching funds to assist with the implementation of the bike plan. Each Commissioner would put up $50,000 if the City Council would commit that much for a total of $150,000. There were two general propositions associated with the offer. One was a priority for connectivity to the DCTA facilities and Commissioner Coleman requested the provision for bike markings on Pennsylvania. The City would need to communicate as a follow-up to establish that funding. Right now there was only $50,000 allocated to that program. Council could add to that amount by giving staff direction to include an additional $50,000 out of the $333,000 in the contingency fund. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp suggested Council consider $50,000 at this time from the $333,000 extra funding and to have staff negotiate with the County. Council Member Roden questioned where the revenue would come from and if the funding was limited to the $333,000. He asked if it would be possible to take money from the streets fund to put in that account. Langley stated it could be taken from the street fund but that Council had talked about putting more resource to the OCI. Council Member Gregory stated that the Mobility Committee formally went though the bike linkage policy. That policy was part of a comprehensive system of routes from DCTA to UNT and called for bike facilities on Pennsylvania in the Southridge neighborhood. The request from City of Denton City Council Minutes September 13, 2011 Page 2 the County to participate matched what the plan called for. The City could meet another $50,000 but did not want to say that was all that could be used. Once the entire Council had reviewed the plan there might be more interest to take more of that money. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that was not what she was suggesting. She was suggesting using an additional $50,000 of the $333,000 at this time but this was not a limit. Council Member Watts stated that it was his understanding that the $50,000 Downtown Incentive Grant program was suspended and suggested using that money for the additional $50,000 which left the full $333,000 to make a decision on how to use that money. There were lots of economic incentives throughout the City and the bike plan had been talked about for many years. It was now at a point to see it in a concrete form. He felt it would be a better use of the funds. That money was already there but was just not appropriated. He asked about the County condition that a priority be give to connect with DCTA. Mayor Burroughs stated the allocation for those funds would be to meet those ends and the details needed to be worked out. The Downtown Incentive Grant was suspended because it was going through a vetting process for the policies of the program. He would rather not cut out that process and would not tie the bike program with the economic incentive grants. He suggested getting input from the Economic Development Partnership Board and then see how to process the funds. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that the TIF portion was not for those kinds of projects. It was for major kinds of projects and the number one priority was a parking garage for the area. Council Member Watts stated that his point was that there were a lot of programs that a small amount of funds might be helpful for and the City had made a large commitment to the downtown area over the years. Several projects that received the grants were retroactive in nature. There were also other parts of the City that needed help as opposed to always being in the downtown area. He did agree with waiting and vetting it in the proper process. He asked if the allocation would now be $100,000. Langley stated that the $333,000 would be reduced by $50,000 and adding it to the bike plan for a total of $100,000. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that there was a list of people interested in the bike program and asked to have one representative to speak on behalf of them. He asked if the people on the list regarding the bike plan had some priorities regarding implementation of the plan such as Pennsylvania. Amber Briggle stated that she was not sure of the presentation made by Devin Taylor at the last meeting but looked at the core of the city. Mayor Burroughs stated that Taylor’s presentation did not go below I35. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that this group was still requesting $250,000 for the bike plan. He felt that there was a considerable group of citizens of all ages who were interested in City of Denton City Council Minutes September 13, 2011 Page 3 seeing the bike plan move forward. He also felt it was appropriate to address the funding in this budget. He would still like to have $250,000 recognizing that there was already $50,000 set up for that. Part of the County money would go to an area which would not be a first priority for the organized group. Council Member Watts stated that he would like staff to look at the presentation by Mr. Taylor to see if the numbers and locations compared with the bike plan in the initial stages. They should also look at the presentation in terms of what the costs would be and if the costs would be in line with what was presented. He questioned if Council Member Engelbrecht was suggesting using $50,000 from the $333,000 to get to the $250,000 excluding the County's contribution plus take another $50,000 from the fund. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that $50,000 of the County money was committed and that the other funds could be used in all of the areas. Council Member Gregory stated that he had talked with Commissioner Coleman who indicated he would allocate $50,000 for sure but wanted to make sure Commissioner Eades was also going to allocate funds. Commissioner Coleman did not want the funds to be used for studies or staffing. He wanted it to be used for facilities. The Council had received a flood of emails over a year ago regarding the issue on Pennsylvania. There would be significant money left over from the Pennsylvania Drive project for other projects. He was comfortable with that and the fact that priorities could be shifted around for the most efficient use of the funding. Mayor Burroughs stated that an additional $50,000 could accommodate the offer by the County and clearly represent that the Council would revisit the prioritization of the unappropriated funds for bikes and get more breakouts of the costs for each of the elements. Council Member Roden asked if the $50,000 would be included in future budgets. Langley stated that the $333,000 was a re-occurring cost that would be available for future years. City Manager Campbell stated that the funding would become the current level of service and would continue unless the Council decided to change it. Council Member Gregory stated that he eventually would like the total amount of $262,000 for the bike plan which was the amount that it would take to fund the program over a 10 year period. 2. 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. Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, stated that in March Council directed staff to proceed with the drafting of a new ordinance to establish a process and development standards governing PD districts. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 13, 2011 Page 4 PD History in Denton – the City’s first PD regulations were approved between the adoption of the 1966 and 1969 zoning ordinances. There were 200 PDs in Denton in 2002 when the Denton Development Code was adopted. The Denton Development Code and city-wide rezoning was adopted in 2002 which eliminated the PD district option, and only 15 PD districts were retained in the Denton Development Code as part of Section 35.1.5.B. There were several reasons for the elimination of PDs which included (1) below par guidelines, (2) disparity in guidelines from PD to PD which caused difficulty with interpretation and enforcement, (3) did not have timelines for development and often became no longer compatible with adjacent districts plus the infrastructure was below par, (4) developments with high standards were not necessarily achieved, (5) PDs became a means to circumvent conventional code requirements, (6) many PDs were not consistent with the Denton Plan, and (7) great administrative difficulty tracking the paperwork and amendments to the PDs. In 2007 the City adopted the MPC district which was intended to accommodate large-scale, unified, comprehensively planned developments. There were four MPCs approved in Denton. PDs and MPCs made up about 25% of the city land area. Purposed PD Ordinance – the purpose of a PD zoning district was to (1) provide for development of contiguous land as an integral unit that may vary from the established regulations of other zoning districts within the Development Code; (2) encourage flexibility under controlled conditions; (3) allow for creative planning with regards to design, building placement, and the inclusion of densities and intensities that also ensured compatibility of land uses; and (4) provide for a development model that was superior in attractiveness, quality, and efficiency and effective use of land in its natural state. Mayor Burroughs asked if it could be contiguous land with different ownership. Cunningham stated that it could be but it was not necessary. The goals of a PD district included (1) enhance the City’s physical character and promote public health, safety, and general welfare, (2) create developments that were designed in accordance with sound site planning principles and development techniques, (3) produce more effective, highly aesthetic and desirable developments, (4) provided for development regulations that were tailored to the opportunities and constraints of the environment, (5) create viable economic development opportunities though a balance of land-uses and job creation; and (6) should not be used as a tool to achieve a de-facto use variance, nor should they be used as a means of circumventing the administration of the conventional zoning regulations that were established in the Development Code PD approval process – the first step was the PD Concept Plan which was non-binding. It would familiarize both the developer and the City with each other’s intentions with respect to the intended PD district and familiarize the developer with the process of obtaining a PD district rezoning and to discuss potential issues that should be considered in planning the project. The PD Concept Plan would demonstrate a general statement on how the proposed PD district would relate to the Denton Plan and how the proposed PD district would achieve the established purpose and intent. Step Two involved a Community Input Meeting and City Council Work Session which would present the proposed PD Concept Plan to the community and provide a public forum for input and discussion to formulate resolutions for community concerns and development constraints. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 13, 2011 Page 5 The PD Concept Plan would not be retained on file longer than 24 months after the date of its initial pre-application meeting unless a PD District Development Plan had been submitted to the City for review and approval. If a PD District Development Plan was not submitted by the established deadline, the PD Concept Plan would be discarded. The third step was the PD Development Plan and City Council approval. The PD Development Plan application was the official submission to staff for approval. The application would include (1) the PD District development regulations; (2) PD phasing map (if necessary); (3) PD Development Plan map; and (4) would include a master transportation, water, wastewater, and drainage study for the entire PD area with details to identify the major public infrastructure facilities needed by each phase, the connection of those facilities to the existing public infrastructure, and any off-site improvements required. It would be in conformance with all other applicable City codes, regulations and ordinances. Mayor Burroughs questioned that if a development were submitted in phases, would Item 4 have to be done for the all phases. Cunningham stated that it would have to be for the whole entire development. Mayor Burroughs stated that some of the larger developments might be 20 years in developing and would definitely change over the course of time. He questioned if the development was done in phases, if there would be a way to submit a certain level of detail but further out do generalities. He felt the farther out, the more unreal the plan would be. Cunningham stated that the City would need some idea of what might be required so it could move forward with infrastructure. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that he would like to see this vetted very carefully with the development community with regards to what specifics would be needed at this level. Council Member Watts felt that there needed to be a balance and also include how the project would be paid. PD Development Phasing Plan - when a PD District was to be developed over multiple phases, a PD Phasing Plan should be submitted with the PD District Development regulations. Additionally, (1) when critical infrastructure improvements were tied to certain phases of a PD, the City could enforce the development phasing sequencing to prevent avoidances or delays in construction of vital infrastructure, amenities, or public or private facilities; (2) the PD Development Phasing Plan should reflect that multi-family development must follow other land- uses in the phasing; multi-family housing should not be the first land-use constructed or the primary land-use constructed in any phase of the proposed development. Mayor Burroughs stated that if the multi-family were done first, then the public infrastructure would have to be done. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 13, 2011 Page 6 Cunningham stated that the Phasing Plan should include a schedule indicating the approximate time-frame in which construction or development was expected to begin, and the duration of time required for completion of the development. Council Member Engelbrecht questioned if another way to go around the PD would be to have part of it expire if it all wasn’t built in the time frame. Cunningham stated that vested rights could not be ignored. If just one piece was developed and then the rest went away, it could work the system. Mayor Burroughs stated that economics could change rather than trying to go around the system. He felt a time line couldn’t be held when a developer couldn't get funding for the project. Council discussed time limits of a PD and when vested rights might go away. Cunningham continued with the expiration of the PD District Development Plan. He stated that nd the PD District Development Plan should automatically expire on the 2 anniversary of the date of its approval without any further action of the city or the applicant, unless a PD Detailed Plan had been approved for the PD district, or a portion thereof; and a Final Plat had been recorded for the PD Detailed Plan, or a portion thereof. Prior to expiration, the PD Development Plan may be granted a one-time six month extension by the Council. PD Districts – three types of PD districts were proposed. (1) Small scale would consist of 5 contiguous acres or greater but not to exceed 15 contiguous acres. It should be designed, constructed and maintained in a single phase. It would include a schedule indicating the approximate timeframe when construction or development was expected to begin and the duration of time required for completion of the development. It would not necessitate an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan or Mobility Plan. (2) Mid Scale would be greater than 15 but less than 125 contiguous acres and provide a range of housing opportunities and choices. Mid-Scale PDs that were 50 acres or larger should be designed as a mixed-use district and constructed in an orderly and creative arrangement of all land-uses; should provide employment opportunities and commercial services to achieve a balanced community for families of all ages, sizes, and levels of income. Council Member Gregory asked if this would this reduce the number of specific use permits. Cunningham stated that it might or might not depending on what the developer chose to use. He continued that a mid-scale development should have a cost impact analysis done by an independent contractor engaged by the City at the applicant’s expense, or be subject to a CIA model administered by the City. It would provide a Job: Housing balance of 1:1.3-1.7 and provide passive and active open space areas. A Large Scale PD District which would provide a combination of land uses on sites that were 125 contiguous acres or greater. It would be required to meet all the requirements of the Mid-Scale PD district that was 50 acres or larger and provide adequate educational, medical, and cultural facilities for all segments of the community. Another PD District specific requirement was abandonment of the project. In order to protect the City from potential negative financial consequences that could result from abandoning a PD City of Denton City Council Minutes September 13, 2011 Page 7 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. Possible cash out provisions might be available based on a declining percentage of the total amount required relative to the amount of development completed. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that staff should look at these processes and address them with the developer during the phasing of the development. Council Member Watts felt that in larger developments, commercial would be built in and it was a higher level policy issue concerning Job to Housing balance which could be addressed in a comprehensive plan revision. While it was a valid concern and a worthy goal, it was a different venue than the PD. Cunningham stated that the job: housing balance indicated that for each house 1.3-1.7 jobs would be created within the PD which was an attempt to keep the vehicles off the street and local to the development. Mayor Burroughs felt there were lots of problems with this which was forcing the PD to be used only for mixed use development. He like mixed use development but it should not be a requirement for the job-housing ratio. Some developments do not need either commercial or housing in it. Cunningham stated that the intent was to prohibit a PD of a particular size from being all residential. Both Mayor Burroughs and Council Member Watts felt that was not a good idea to predetermine that. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that a staff report could indicate what the proposal did for commercial services, etc. Mayor Burroughs noted that he did not know how a cost impact analysis could be accurate if done far out in advance. It would be more meaningful if it were provided at the time of each phase or in five year increments. He questioned why a PD would be limited to mixed ages. Doing that would prevent the development of a senior community with a PD. Cunningham stated that it was not a requirement. The wording was "should" and not "shall". There was a need to determine what was wanted to achieve balance between residences, shopping, jobs, etc. Mayor Burroughs noted that if it were a community goal then it would make sense. Due to a time constraint, this item was held over to an upcoming meeting. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 13, 2011 Page 8 3. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the Aesthetic Study that the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is preparing for the IH-35 expansion project. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that she had met with Bill Hale, TxDOT District Engineer and asked TxDOT for a 30 day extension. Hale had agreed to the extension which would provide time to have the Public Art Committee involved in the process. Mayor Burroughs indicated that staff would provide further details as the project developed. 4. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the status of the routing of the Northeast Electric Transmission Line Re-Build Project in the City of Denton. Phil Williams, DME General Manager, presented a summary of the two public hearings that already had been held. He showed examples of the old transmission lines and the proposed new lines. He also showed the existing line and indicated that the rebuild project had been in the capital budget for several years. The project was needed due to the growth of the City. The original line was built to the standards at that time with 30 feet of right-of-way. As staff went further into the project, they learned that there would be a need for 75 feet of right-of-way. If that would have been done in an existing neighborhood it would have taken many homes. Staff knew that they needed to get out of the neighborhoods and into open field areas. Activities to date included (1) the project was approved in the CIP budget, (2) identified the need for property acquisition assistance, (3) held two neighborhood meetings on July 18 and August 8, (4) updated th the City Council on September 13 and (5) set a tentative date to discuss the staff st recommendation at second neighborhood meeting on October 1. At the second neighborhood meeting staff discussed alternate routes trying to get to open fields. One option, the Red Route, impacted several homes which prompted staff to look at further options. Option B, the Green Route, had an issue getting over to Mack Park. When using parkland which was partially funded with State funds which Mack Park was, there was the issue that any land displaced with transmission lines would have to be replaced. Besides the additional cost of going through the park, this route would impact 14 homes. Another option would have stayed on the TMPA route but there was an apartment complex there which would not allow for the expansion of the right-of-way. One of the neighborhood meetings suggested combining the two options going up as far as possible in open land and then cut over at Paisley. That route would only impact 3 homes but would require an additional crossing of Highway 380 and an additional railroad crossing. North of Highway 380 the other issue was with Kings Row and TxDOT right-of-way which came right up to the homes. There was the issue of whether the city could overhang TxDOT or have to cross over to the other side. The substation itself was moved. Going north out of the substation, the exiting line went through some very tight areas with limited right-of-way. An option would be to go more along Loop 288, come down Sherman and north to Hercules. Most of Hercules, however, was too tight and couldn’t be done in some areas. One other route was Loop 288, cross it and go over on to school property then go back over Loop 288 and come in on north side. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 13, 2011 Page 9 Planned activities forward included (1) publish a staff recommendation within two weeks on the rd city’s website, (2) hold a 3rd neighborhood meeting on October 3, (3) conduct two public thth hearings on October 18 and November 15 with approval of the route on or after November th 15. Council Member Gregory thanked staff for all work done and for listening to the neighbors. He suggested staff find a route with the least possible negative effect on the neighborhoods. Council Member Engelbrecht suggested that when a recommendation on a route was completed, it should be posted on the city’s website. Council Member Roden asked about the aesthetics to the utility lines. The current corridor had high lines which would be replaced with lower lines. He asked if the higher parts of the poles would be removed. Williams indicated that an issue was other entities such as Verizon using the poles. The challenge was to wait for those entities to move their lines off the City’s poles. Council Member Watts requested a cost estimate on the different alternatives. Following the completion of the 2nd Tuesday Session, the City Council convened in a Closed Meeting to consider the specific items listed below under the Closed Meeting section of this agenda. 1. Closed Meeting: A. Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.086. 1. Receive competitive public power information from staff in the form of a proposed operating budget for Denton Municipal Electric ("DME") for the upcoming fiscal year, including without limitation, revenues, expenses, commodity volumes, and commitments, and the direction of DME; and discuss, deliberate, consider adoption of the budget and other matters, and provide staff with direction regarding such matters. This item was not considered in the Closed Session. B. Deliberations regarding Real Property - Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.072; Consultation with Attorneys - Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.071. 1. Discuss, deliberate, and receive information from Staff and provide Staff with direction pertaining to the acquisition or condemnation of tracts of real property pertaining to the routing of the Northeast Electric Transmission Line Re-Build Project in the City of Denton, City of Denton City Council Minutes September 13, 2011 Page 10 Denton County, Texas; and consultation with the City’s attorneys regarding legal issues associated with the acquisition or condemnation of the tracts referenced above where a public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duties of the City’s attorneys to the Denton City Council under the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Conduct of the State Bar of Texas, or would jeopardize the City’s legal position in any administrative proceedings or potential litigation. This item was not considered in the Closed Session. 2. Discuss, deliberate, and receive information from Staff and provide Staff with direction pertaining to the acquisition or the condemnation of fee simple tracts, permanent drainage easement tracts and temporary construction easement tracts for the Mayhill Road Widening and Improvements project, affecting real property tracts in the D. Hough Survey, Abstract No. 646, the M.E.P. & P.R.R. Surveys, Abstract Nos. 927and 950, the D. Lambert Survey, Abstract No. 784, the G. Walker Survey, Abstract 1330, and the J. Brandon Survey, Abstract No. 1515, in the City and County of Denton, Texas. Consultation with the City’s attorneys regarding legal issues associated with the acquisition or condemnation of the tracts referenced above where a public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City’s attorneys to the Denton City Council and the City of Denton, Texas under the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Conduct of the State Bar of Texas, or would jeopardize the City’s legal position in any administrative proceedings or potential litigation. C. 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. This item was not considered in the Close Session. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. __________________________ ___________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS JENNIFER WALTERS MAYOR CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 20, 2011 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on Tuesday, September 20, 2011 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Council Member Watts, Council Member Gregory, Council Member Engelbrecht, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp, Mayor Burroughs, and Council Member Roden. ABSENT: Council Member King 1. Citizen Comments on Consent Agenda Items Bob Moses, 115-117 W. Hickory, Denton 76201, spoke regarding Consent Agenda Item 6G. He encouraged Council to approve the grant. An EPA inspection would be required when selling the property and it would be beneficial to know in advance the situation before the EPA requested it. He felt it was a very worthwhile project and encouraged Council to approve it. 2. Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for September 20, 2011. Council Member Roden asked about Item 6H concerning the map for the sex offender ordinance. One of the areas of prohibition for the offender was arcades but the one at the entrance to the Golden Triangle Mall was not included. Captain Len Carter, Denton Police Department, stated that arcade was not included as it was part of the mall and not a separate facility. Council Member Watts asked about Item 5C and questioned if this was for the annual maintenance. Kevin Gunn, Director of Technology Services, stated that the item was for the annual maintenance for the software itself. It provided all software support and licensing support. Council Member Watts asked about a “minute bank” mentioned in Item 5E. Gunn stated that was associated with the Code Red system. One part of the system was for weather notifications and the other was for general notifications for any category. The bank of minutes allowed for the general notices. Council Member Watts asked if all of the minutes were used last year. Gunn stated that he would prepare an informal staff report on the usage for the past several years. Council Member Watts asked about Item 5J concerning the recreation fund. He assumed that there would also be associated expenses with the program. Bryan Langley, Chief Financial Officer, replied yes such as swimming classes and basketball. Council Member Watts stated that the backup materials for Item 6G, the Brownfield Grant, talked about various Phase I and Phase II and was not restricted to the Downtown City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 2 Implementation Plan area. He asked how that would be administered at the staff level and which assessment to perform. Ken Banks, Director of Environmental Services and Sustainability, stated that it would have to be derived from an analysis of the properties themselves. One concern was once the city received the grant was to spend the funds. While the focus was on the DTIP area, if there were not enough applicants the risk would be that the funding would not be completely used as it was not known at this point how many applications would be received. The expectation was to keep the focus in the DTIP area but staff did not want to limit it to the DTIP. Council Member Watts asked about the time frame for funding. Banks stated it was three years. Council Member Watts asked if other areas in the community knew about this program. Banks stated that an open meeting held which was focused on the DTIP but sent through other areas to make a broad area. Council Member Watts questioned that after an application was received and an agreement was in place to perform an analysis did those reports become property of the city or of the property owner. Banks stated that it was done for the property owner. Council Member King arrived at the meeting. Council Member Engelbrecht asked if staff expected to use the funds in the three year time frame or before. Banks stated that they would like to do it as soon as possible. Council Member Engelbrecht asked if it would be possible to hold back funds for someone later on in the program in order to do an assessment. Banks stated that might be a possibility. At this point staff was just asking for approval to apply for the funding. There would be no notification on success of the grant until spring of next year st and no funding until October 1 of the following year. Item 6 was considered next. 6. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the Oncor Arco Substation to Krugerville Substation 138 kV Transmission line rebuild project located in east Denton. Phil Williams, DME General Manager, stated that Council had asked for an update on the project from Oncor. Danny Hodges, Area Manager for Oncor was at the meeting to make a presentation to Council. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 3 Danny Hodges, Area Manager for Oncor, presented information on the project. The proposed project was a rebuild of an existing transmission line from the southwest corner of the Arco substation. The existing H frame line needed to be upgraded in capacity for the entire length of the line. The southwest end of the line had upgrades of the system and also the northeast end of the line. The pipe was too small between the two upgraded areas so the proposal was to rebuild the existing line with a bigger line to increase the capacity of the line. It was anticipated that the project would be completed by the spring of next year. Another H frame structure would be built with a larger line and would be 100-115 feet tall. Oncor had communicated the plans to the general public including the City. The schedule called for working on the Corps of Engineer property as soon as possible while the weather was dry. As soon as that was completed, the project would move outside the Corps property and in the green belt areas early next year. Council Member Gregory stated that he had recently been out to the green belt and where the current line stakes and flagging were it did not look like Oncor would be expanding the width of the area. Robert Holt, Oncor, stated that the existing right-of-way would accommodate the increase in the line. There would be no changes in the existing easements. Council Member Gregory asked if the distance between the H frame poles would be the same. Holt stated that Oncor would have to put up the same type and number of structures and install them as close to the same places as they currently were now. Council Member Gregory asked about the type of structure. Holt stated that originally they were going to use a steel galvanized structure but revised the plan to use a concrete structure that could be tinted brown to match the vegetation. Mayor Burroughs asked whether Oncor would have to go outside the easements for temporary construction sites and staging and what impact that would have on the vegetation. Holt stated that all construction would be done in the right-of-way. The work completed thus far had used vegetation management access points through private property owners. There was an existing access road that they had used in the past for maintenance and they had permission from the Corps and the City to use that same access road. Council Member Gregory stated that there had been concern expressed about the route from Hartley Field Road to the Arco Station. Holt stated that Oncor would be using the TMPA line in that area. Item #3 was considered. 3. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding mobile food trailers. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 4 Kurt Hansen, Building Official, presented research information staff had gathered from cities which already had some of these trailers. Current Denton code allowed mobile food vendors to travel throughout the city and to prepare and sell food; however, they were not allowed to park or stay stationary for more than 15 minutes in one place. Another option was to get a temporary food permit which was good for 14 days but could only be issued 3 per year per applicant. He reviewed information from other cities including location; duration of stay; connection to utilities; fees, permits, certificates of occupancy and inspections; waste disposal; and restroom facilities. Staff was seeking direction on whether to continue with the current code with regard to mobile food cart/trailers or amend the code to permit mobile food vendors to stay in one location for an extended period of time. Council Member Watts asked if the food would be prepared somewhere else and sold in the trailer. Hanson stated that most food would be prepared on site using propane or battery power. The cart/trailer would need to have everything a regular restaurant would have. Some preliminary preparation could be done in a commissary and brought with them. Mayor Burroughs asked if grease from these vendors could be used for biodiesel. Hansen stated yes as long as it was clean grease. Council Member Roden asked if an existing restaurant could be classified as a commissary. Hanson stated that it sounded like a good idea but as far as his research indicated it was not a commercial restaurant. He indicated that some businesses such as a donut business would be open early or a restaurant that was open at night might be able to coop the kitchen. Points of consideration included possible competition with brick and mortar restaurants; potential nuisances such as noise, odor and light; difficulty of enforcement or monitoring of potential food borne illness due to mobility; difficulty in determining place and condition of food preparation; and limit to the number of units. Potential benefits included sales tax revenue; bringing more people to town; and providing food options in areas of the city that had no or limited food choices. Council Member Roden stated that there was no restriction in the current ordinance regarding a setback requirement from existing structures. Hansen stated that the current ordinance only allowed the cart/trailer to stay 15 minutes in one location. Council Member Roden expressed concern about competition and asked if any research had been done on the economic impact on brick and mortar restaurants. Hansen stated one article he researched was in favor of the carts/trailers as they brought people into the area and then allowed a choice of where to eat. Council Member Gregory asked about some cities having a background check. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 5 Hansen stated he would check to see if cities other than San Antonio performed background checks. Council Member Gregory asked about the current inspection process for mobile vendors. Hansen stated that they went to City Hall West to get inspected. Council Member Gregory suggested that not all the information in the surveys was accurate as he knew some trailers had utility hookups. He questioned those locations that had the cart/trailers and how they did their inspections compared to brick and mortar restaurants. Hansen stated that a LA news report indicated that almost 27% of the mobile units failed inspection and had to close. Laurie Pearson, Health Inspector, stated that the city of Austin did some mobile inspections on site and others were inspected when the health inspection saw them. Austin indicated that if a unit failed inspection the permit would be suspended and the operator would have to apply for a new permit. Current inspections were not as well as restaurants. The city of Dallas had considered pod locations in a lower Greenville park where groups would park in one location and be provided utilities. Private property could allow such units on that type of property. Council Member King expressed concern for brick and mortar businesses as they had more expenses and a limited area where they could sell the food. They might benefit more economically from brick and mortar restaurants. The city of Denton did not have the same population base as the surveyed cities did. Council Member Engelbrecht asked about distances from schools. If the city proceeded with this idea, he would like communication from the DISD on a distance that these units could be from schools. He questioned if these units received the same amount of health inspections as other restaurants. Hansen that was there was some difference as some of the cities did an inspection on a risk assessment and did them more often. Council Member Engelbrecht suggested more frequent inspections for these kinds of facilities. He asked if the zoning ordinances allowed these in any zoning district. Hansen stated that they would be treated like a restaurant with appropriate zoning. Mayor Burroughs stated that any definition of “restaurant” needed to be broad enough to accommodate the trailers. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that if a unit did not have electricity it would use a generator. He was not in favor of the units having generators. Hansen stated that option had not been considered yet. He did know that other cities allowed generators. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 6 Council Member Engelbrecht asked staff to address the issue of generators due to a noise factor Council Member Engelbrecht asked if the regulations would accommodate the community market. There were a few facilities selling some type of produce that did not have a cart. They used a tent. He questioned if there would be a difference in those. Hansen stated that if the ordinance allowed mobile food vendors to remain longer than 15 minutes it would affect the community market. Council Member Engelbrecht suggested developing a set of regulations just for the community market. Hansen stated that if mobile food vendors could remain for an extended amount of time it would take care of the community market concerns. However, the tent locations would still have to be addressed. Mayor Burroughs asked about a temporary situation in a park where there might not be a concessions stand. Hansen stated that at least one city allowed for that but the vendor had to have permission from the Parks Department and a permit. Mayor Burroughs suggested a separate category for that type of situation. There also was no zoning category for that so it would also have to be considered. Hansen stated that could be done through an ordinance that would allow for the correct zoning and with permission of private property owners. Council Member Gregory asked about the time period for the temporary permit and why it was only for 14 days. Pearson stated that the definition of a temporary permit was from the State of Texas for a temporary event. Council Member Gregory stated that he would like to see regulations to allow the community market to extend their activities. He felt that a food cart might be competition for a fast food restaurant but not for a regular restaurant. This proposal would allow a business to formulate a new venture and move forward later to a brick and mortar place. Council Member Roden stated that the zoning issue would also have to be considered. A commercial area had to consider a site plan, setbacks, etc. and suggested that staff think about those issues for the food carts. He also suggested they consider how close they could be to a curb and how close they could be to each other. The market would determine whether or not they were successful. Council Member Engelbrecht questioned if these would be limited to food only or include other items such as shoes or clothing. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 7 Mayor Burroughs stated he would not be in favor of that option. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with a draft ordinance for council consideration. The draft ordinance would have two sections, one for a private owner and one for a public area. Council Member Engelbrecht also suggested that pods be considered in general locations for private locations as opposed to individual ones all over the city. 4. Receive a report, hold a discussion and provide direction on the Hickory Street Sidewalk Enhancement project. Mark Nelson, Transportation Director, stated that this project started in the fall of 2009. At that time the proposal was for eight foot sidewalks only on the south side of Hickory with limited streetscape enhancement (lighting and trees). The project design was delayed to complement the DTIP complete street concept of public street furniture, pedestrian street lighting, pedestrian bulb outs, traffic lanes and angle/parallel parking. In September, the consultant submitted 90% plans to the Planning Department. The scope of the project was to provide sidewalks on both the north and south sides of Hickory Street from the Downtown Denton Transit Center to Bell Avenue as well as appropriate pedestrian crossings across the Union Pacific Railroad and Bell Avenue. The proposed enhancements included 11.5’ sidewalks on both the north and south side of Hickory, the sidewalks would include brick accents similar to the Square and Cedar Street, street trees, public street furniture, pedestrian bulb-outs, pedestrian lighting, establishment of crosswalks and ADA ramps at the Hickory Street/Bell Avenue intersection, pedestrian enhancements for the Hickory Street/Bell Avenue signal, parallel parking, relocation of railroad signals and gate arms, and extension of railroad street panels for pedestrian rail crossings. Staff was continuing to work with the Union Pacific Railroad with the relocation of the railroad signals and gate arms. The Railroad had to approve and install any new gates. Council Member Gregory asked if there was a problem with lighting in the area between the main line and the other railroad crossing as that was also Railroad property. Nelson replied yes because there was a 25 foot setback. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked if the crossing was designated as a quite zone. Nelson stated not at this time as the medians at the driveways would have to be done before that happened. Council Member Watts asked if the construction costs were coming out of the grant funds. Nelson stated that the design costs were out of the grant funds. The construction costs were from city bond funds and funds repaid from DCTA. 5. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding redistricting of City Council districts as a result of the 2010 census. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 8 Anita Burgess, City Attorney, stated that on April 19, 2011 Bickerstaff Heath Delgado Acosta presented their initial assessment for redistricting in terms of one person one vote. Their conclusion was that a population imbalance existed which required redistricting of the Council districts. Council moved forward with a number of plans, one of which addressed the concerns of the Denia neighborhood to preserve the Denia community of interest. That neighborhood wanted to remain in District 4. That plan, Illustrative Plan 1-Revised, was within the required deviation of 9.14% and did not produce any retrogression of the lines. When the plan was presented at a public hearing on August 15, 2011, concerns were expressed from residents in District Two about the “finger” what was carved in the district. There were also representatives from District One who wanted the Downtown Square area retained in the District. In view of those comments, the consultants were asked to prepare another map, Illustrative Plan 1-Revision 2, which removed a portion of District 2 finger and placed the downtown Courthouse Square back in District 1. The Illustrative Plan 1, Revision 2 adjustment improved the one person one- vote total maximum deviation to 6.81% from the Illustrative Plan 1 Revised map under which the total maximum deviation was 9.14%. Minority voting rights retrogression was minimal. The Revision 2 plan was supported by representatives of the minority community who spoke at the public hearing. There was still one split County precinct which the County will have to address. This process listened to Council, the public, citizens and produced a plan that appeared to be acceptable to the community. Staff was recommending approve of the plan as presented Council Member Roden indicated that this was a great opportunity to determine a method to educate voters on which district they lived in. He felt some good procedures might be through the city’s website or utility mailings to let people know in which district they resided. Following the completion of the Work Session, the Council convened in a Closed Session at 4:45 p.m. to consider the following: 1. Closed Meeting: A. Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.086. 1. Receive competitive public power information from staff in the form of a proposed operating budget for Denton Municipal Electric ("DME") for the upcoming fiscal year, including without limitation, revenues, expenses, commodity volumes, and commitments, and the direction of DME; and discuss, deliberate, consider adoption of the budget and other matters, and provide staff with direction regarding such matters. This item was not considered. B. Consultation with Attorney - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 1. Consultation with City’s attorneys with regard to any legal issues that could potentially result from the recent failure of what was referred to as a "Juliet balcony" at 701 Fort Worth Drive, Denton, Texas, and consider the potential City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 9 legal issues or consequences associated with any amendment of building standards, or the imposition or retrofit of further corrective measures. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. 1.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U. S. and Texas flags. 2.PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamations/Awards 1. Presentation of the Government Finance Officers Association Distinguished Budget Award for the City of Denton FY 2010-11 Budget. Bryan Langley, Chief Financial Officer, announced that the City had been awarded the Distinguished Budget award for the 25th year in a row. 3. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. B. Receive citizen reports from the following: 1. Pamela Mallory regarding traffic in the Wheeler Ridge community. Ms. Mallory presented information concerning a major traffic problem in the Wheeler Ridge area. Nolan Road had been paved as residents in Oakmont had asked for an access to the new Kroger on Teasley. Vehicles were coming through her community on their way to the new Kroger which was causing safety problems. 2. Donna Woodfork regarding lack of follow-up to citizen reports. Ms. Woodfork spoke on the lack of follow-up to citizen reports. She had spoken on various topics over the past several years and had not received any written response. She suggested a written response should be provided to citizens within 7 business days of a report. 4.BUDGET ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION Bryan Langley, Chief Financial Officer, stated that he would be presenting information concerning Items 4A-D. Item A dealt with the tax rate which was $0.68975 per $100 valuation and was the same tax rate as the current rate. The budget included a gradual increase in the over City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 10 65 tax exemption which would be $40,000 for next year. Item B was approval of the tax rolls which was required by the Property Tax Code. Item C was the budget for the next fiscal year which had been discussed over the past several months. He reviewed the budgets for the utility services. Adjustments made to the budget since the preliminary presentation in July included an increase in the sales tax forecast and increased level funding for council initiatives with $333,676 for allocations. Council had directed staff to place an additional $50,000 for the bike plan improvements for a total of $100,000. That amount was going to be matched by Denton County for another $100,000. The remaining balance would be incorporated into the General Fund budget and would be used as needed per Council. Other changes included an increase in street maintenance which was 100% of the growth of the franchise fees and added $1 million in the non-airport gas well fund for a potential purchase of land. Item D was a requirement by the State Property Tax Code which was a ratification of the vote on the budget. Ordinance No. 2011-142 A. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, levying the ad valorem property tax of the City of Denton, Texas, for the year 2011, on all taxable property within the corporate limits of the city on January 1, 2011, and adopting a tax rate of $0.68975 per $100 of valuation for 2011; providing revenues for payment of current municipal maintenance and operation expenses and for payment of interest and principal on outstanding City of Denton debt; providing for limited exemptions of certain homesteads; providing for enforcement of collections; providing for a severability clause; and providing an effective date. Council Member Gregory motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 2011-143 B. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, approving the 2011 tax rolls; and providing an effective date. Council Member King motioned, Council Member Roden seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 2011-144 C. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, adopting the Fiscal Year 2011-2012 Annual Program of Services (Budget) and the Capital Improvement Program of the City of Denton, Texas, for the fiscal year beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on September 30, 2012; and declaring an effective date. Council Member Watts motioned, Council Member Gregory seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 11 Ordinance 2011-145 D. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, ratifying the adoption of the Fiscal Year 2011-12 Annual Program of Services (Budget) and the Capital Improvement Program of the City of Denton, Texas, for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2011, and ending on September 30, 2012 when the Budget will raise more revenue from property taxes than last year’s budget; and providing an effective date. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp motioned, Council Member King seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 5.BUDGET CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Gregory motioned, Council Member Engelbrecht seconded to approve the Budget Consent Agenda and accompanying ordinances. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 2011-146 A. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an Agreement between the City of Denton, Texas, and the Denton Chamber of Commerce regarding an Economic Development Partnership; and providing an effective date. ($255,193) Ordinance No. 2011-147 B. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Annual Maintenance for Harris Public Utility Billing System and associated Software Modules available from only one source in accordance with the provision for State Law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4770-Purchase of Annual Maintenance for Harris Public Utility Billing awarded to Harris Computer Systems, Inc. in the amount of $102,642.68). Ordinance No. 2011-148 C. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Annual Maintenance for continued vendor support of the Oracle EnterpriseOne (formerly PeopleSoft EnterpriseOne (formerly JD Edwards OneWorld)) from only one source in accordance with the provision for State Law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4773-Purchase of Annual Maintenance for Oracle EnterpriseOne Software Package awarded to Oracle USA, Inc. in the amount of $128,814.36). City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 12 Ordinance No. 2011-149 D. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Annual Maintenance for Interactive Voice Response and Outage Management System and associated Software Modules for Denton Municipal Electric (DME) utility available from only one source in accordance with the provision for State Law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4774-Purchase of Annual Maintenance for Milsoft Utility Systems awarded to Milsoft Utility Solutions in the amount of $62,282.53). Ordinance No. 2011-150 E. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Annual Service for CodeRED Emergency Notification System and CodeRED Weather Warning Service available from only one source in accordance with the provision for State Law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids; providing for expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4776-Purchase of Annual Service for CodeRED Emergency Notification and CodeRED Weather Warning Service awarded to Emergency Communications Network, Inc. in the amount of $56,250.00). Ordinance No. 2011-151 F. Consider adoption of an ordinance awarding a contract for the purchase of continued Software Maintenance and Services for the Laserfiche-DocuNav Document Imaging System currently being used by the City of Denton from VP Imaging, Inc., dba DocuNav Solutions available from only one source in accordance with the provision for State Law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4777-Purchase of Annual Maintenance for Laserfiche-DocuNav Document Imaging System awarded to VP Imaging, Inc. dba DocuNav Solutions, in the amount of $57,977.53, the first of three payments, for a total three-year maintenance agreement in the amount of $173,932.59). Ordinance No. 2011-152 G. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Annual Maintenance for VisionAir Public Safety Software System and Associated Modules used for Police and Fire Department dispatching and records management available from only one source in accordance with the provision for State Law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4781-Purchase of Annual Maintenance for VisionAir Public Safety Software System awarded to VisionAir, Inc. in the amount of $205,381.50). Ordinance No. 2011-153 H. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Annual Service Access and Support for Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE) and 3G (third-generation) wireless computer network from the Texas Department of Information Resources contract (DIR-SDD-597) for the Public Safety mobile computers used by City of Denton Police, Fire and EMS personnel available from only one source in accordance with the provision for State Law exempting such purchases from requirements City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 13 of competitive bids; providing for the expenditure of funds therfor; and providing an effective date (File 4782-Purchase of Annual Service Access and Support for Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE), and 3G (third-generation) awarded to AT&T Mobility (DIR-SDD-597) in the amount of $129,073.00). Ordinance No. 2011-154 I. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, establishing a Street Improvement Fund; defining and committing certain fees and other revenues of the City; providing a severability clause; and providing an effective date. The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3-0). Ordinance No. 2011-155 J. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, defining the scope, funding source and purpose of the Recreation Fund; providing a severability clause; and providing an effective date. The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3-0). Ordinance No. 2011-156 K. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, defining the scope, funding source and purpose of the Non-Airport Gas Well Fund; providing a severability clause; and providing an effective date. The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3-0). Ordinance No. 2011-157 L. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, adopting Governmental Accounting Standards Board ("GASB") Statement 54; establishing a fund balance policy; and providing an effective date. The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3-0). Ordinance No. 2011-158 M. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas amending the schedule of rates contained in Ordinance No. 2010-288 for electric service; deleting interruptible power supply (Schedule UPS); amend commercial renewable energy service rider (Schedule CGR) to increase term of agreement and to define participation requirement; amend residential renewable energy service rider (Schedule RG) to define participation requirement; amend general service time of use (Schedule TGS) to define participation requirement; amend economic growth rider (Schedule EGR) to define participation requirement; amend greensense energy efficiency rebate program (Schedule GRP) to define participation requirement; amend distributed generation from renewable sources rider (Schedule DGR) to define participation requirement; providing for a repealer; providing for a severability clause; and providing for an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 14 Ordinance No. 2011-159 N. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending the schedule of engineering fees contained in Ordinance No. 2010-233; providing an amendment to the right-of-way inspection fee and the right-of-way overtime inspection fee; providing a repealer; providing for a severability clause; providing for an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5- 0). Ordinance No. 2011-160 O. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas providing for the schedule of miscellaneous fees, deposits, billings and procedures for administrative services to city utilities customers contained in Ordinance No. 2010-232; amending account and reconnection charges; amending meter charges; amending miscellaneous fees, charges and deposits; providing for a repealer; providing for a severability clause; and providing for an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). Ordinance No. 2011-161 P. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas amending the schedule of rates for solid waste service contained in Ordinance No. 2010-231 as authorized by Chapter 24 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas; providing that the provisions of Sections 26-3, 26-4, 26-5, 26-7, 26-8(a), and 26-9 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas shall expressly apply to City of Denton solid waste service; providing for the amendment to the residential refuse and recycling collection services rates and clarification thereof (Schedule SWR); amending the residential multi-family household furniture collection services rate (Schedule SWMFS); amendment to the multi-family chemical collection/recycling rate (Schedule MFR); amendment to the commercial solid waste collection services dumpster rates (Schedule SWC); amendment to the commercial recycling services rate to reflect an increase to the small business recycling cart rate (Schedule SWCR); amendment to the collection and transportation services permit and clarifications (Schedule SWP); amendment to the sanitary landfill services rates (Schedule SWL); providing for a repealer; providing for a severability clause; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). Ordinance No. 2011-162 Q. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending the schedule of wastewater rates contained in Ordinance No. 2010-230; providing for an amendment in the rates for residential wastewater service (Schedule SR); amending the mobile home park wastewater service (Schedule SMH); amending the commercial and industrial wastewater service (Schedule SC); amending the commercial/industrial wastewater service which measures with dedicated water meters (sub-meters) (Schedule SCD); amending the commercial /industrial wastewater service which measures with dedicated water meters (sub-meters) (Schedule SCS); amending the septage & chemical toilet disposal at the Pecan Creek Water Reclamation Plant septage transfer station (Schedule SCH); amending the equipment services facilities and restaurant & food service establishments wastewater service (Schedule SEE); amending the metered wastewater inside and outside corporate limits (Schedule SM); amending the sale of treated wastewater effluent (Schedule SGE); amending the wholesale wastewater treatment service for a governmental agency, division City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 15 or subdivision (Schedule SSC); amending the wastewater tap fees (Schedule ST); amending the on-site sewage facility permit fees (Schedule OSSF); providing for a repealer; providing for a severability clause; and providing for an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). Ordinance No. 2011-163 R. Consider adoption of an ordinance an ordinance amending the schedule of water rates contained in Ordinance No. 2010-229 for water service rates and water rates; amending the residential water service rate (Schedule WR); amending the commercial/industrial water service rate (Schedule WC); amending the metered water from fire hydrant rate (Schedule WFH); amending the wholesale treated water service rate to the Upper Trinity Regional Water District (Schedule WW); amending the wholesale raw water service rate to Upper Trinity Regional Water District (Schedule WRW); amending the wholesale raw water pass- through rate to Upper Trinity Regional Water District from Lake Chapman into Lake Lewisville (Schedule WC1); amending the water tap and meter fees, amending the water laboratory testing fees; providing for a repealer; providing for a severability clause; and providing for an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). 6.CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Pro Tem Kamp motioned, Council Member King seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and accompanying ordinances and resolutions. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Approved the requested noise exception. A. Consider a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance for an increase in amplified sound from 70 decibels to 75 decibels and for an increase in hours of operation from 10:00 p.m. to 12:30 a.m. on Friday, October 28, 2011, for the Sigma Chi Fraternity’s "Fight Night" amateur boxing match that will take place in the parking lot behind Lucky Lou’s, located at 1209 West Prairie Street. The exception is requested for an increase in amplified sound to 75 decibels from noon to 2:00 p.m. for a sound check and from 7:00 p.m. until 12:30 a.m. for the event. Staff recommends approving the request. Ordinance No. 2011-164 B. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for the construction of the cast in place concrete portions of the Paisley Street Paving and Drainage Improvements project for the extension and connection of Paisley Street, near Lee Elementary School; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 3516-awarded to the lowest responsible bidder meeting specification, Floyd Smith Concrete, Inc. in the amount of $165,190.88). City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 16 Ordinance No. 2011-165 C. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas providing for, authorizing, and approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Two LifePak 15 Defibrillators from Physio Control, Inc., which is available from only one source in accordance with the pertinent provisions of Chapter 252 of the Texas Local Government Code exempting such purchases from the requirements of competitive bidding; and providing an effective date (File 4822-Purchase of Two Defibrillators for the City of Denton Fire Department in the amount of $75,383.60). Ordinance No. 2011-166 D. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, approving a grant application from Martha Jensen, proprietor of Mellow Mushroom Pizza Bakery, 217 E. Hickory Street, from the Downtown Incentive Grant Program not to exceed $7,235; and providing for an effective date. The Economic Development Partnership Board recommends approval (8-0-1). Ordinance No. 2011-167 E. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, approving a grant application from John Cartwright, owner of 111 N. Elm Street, from the Downtown Incentive Grant Program not to exceed $5,700; and providing for an effective date. The Economic Development Partnership Board recommends approval (8-0-1). Approved the minutes listed below. F. Consider approval of the minutes of: August 2, 2011 August 4, 2011 August 9, 2011 August 16, 2011 August 25, 2011 Resolution No. R2011-033 G. Consider approval of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the filing of a grant application with the United States Environmental Protection Agency for a Brownfield Assessment Grant in the amount of $200,000; and providing for an effective date. Ordinance No. 2011-168 H. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending Chapter 21 of the Code of Ordinances by adding Article IV, Sections 21-60 through 21-65, making it unlawful for certain sex offenders to reside within 1,500 feet of premises where children gather; providing that a culpable mental state is not required for committing an offense under this article of the City of Denton Code of Ordinances; providing for affirmative defenses; providing a repealing clause; providing a savings clause; providing a severability clause; providing for penalty of fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00); and providing for an effective date. Resolution No. R2011-034 I. Consider approval of a resolution of the City of Denton, Texas, in support of the passage of legislation during the 83rd State Legislative Session that will revise the current interpretation of the Texas Administrative Code, such that staff of municipal governments City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 17 and non-profit housing organizations are not designated as mortgage loan originators and are therefore not required to meet state licensing requirements; and providing for an effective date. Resolution No. R2011-035 J. Consider approval of a resolution of the City of Denton, Texas, in support of the passage of legislation during the 83rd State Legislative Session that will allow the release of information to the public prior to action by the governing body, and allow the discussion and presentation concerning requests for proposals in an open meeting; and providing for an effective date. 7.ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION Ordinance No. 2011-169 A. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, approving the redistricting of the city’s single-member council districts and establishing new district boundary lines based on 2010 Census data for Denton city council elections; directing the city’s redistricting consultant to submit the adopted plan for preclearance under Section 5 of the Federal Voting Rights Act; and providing for an effective date. Anita Burgess, City Attorney, stated that she would provide any information Council desired regarding this item. She had presented an update to Council during the Work Session. Mayor Burroughs indicated there was a Speaker Card submitted for this item. Danna Zoltner, 610 Emery, Denton, 76201, spoke in opposition. She felt the lines for District Two were breaking up the neighborhood in which she resided. Charlye Heggins, 1606 E. McKinney, Denton, 76209, spoke in support. As a former Council Member for District One, she was appreciative of the fact that the revised map placed the Downtown Square area back in District One. She expressed thanks to the staff and Council for listening and agreeing to have the lines redrawn. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked the City Attorney to explain the new areas of map. City Attorney Burgess stated that after the public hearing in August, several citizens were concerned about the District Two "finger" and concerns from District One about taking the Courthouse Square area out of District One. Staff and the consultants looked at the map to try and redo those areas. In doing that, they had to adhere to the one person, one vote principle as they tried to balance with those concepts to redraw the map. The District Two finger was shortened and moved a little to the west which did not split that county precinct. The area to the south was returned to District One which contained the Downtown Square. Because of this change, the deviation numbers were substantially improved and the maximum deviation was now only 6.81% while it was over 9% with the last plan. Council Member Engelbrecht asked about the streets in District to the west. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 18 Burgess indicated that was Fulton Street Council Member Engelbrecht asked about the street to the south. Burgess indicated it was West Oak. She stated that the new map was posted on the city's website so citizens could view it and review it to determine which district they would be in. Council Member Engelbrecht motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Council Member Roden “aye”, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", and Mayor Burroughs "aye". Motion carried unanimously. B. Consider nominations/appointments to the City’s boards and commissions. 1. Health & Building Standards Commission 2. Public Art Committee 3. Zoning Board of Adjustment Council Member Gregory nominated Greg Johnson from the Alternate position to a full position on the Zoning Board of Adjustment. He also nominated Cecile Carson to an alternate position. Council Member Gregory motioned, Council Member King seconded to approve the nominations. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ordinance No. 2011-170 A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for a zoning change from a Regional Center Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) zoning district classification and use designation to a Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning district classification and use designation, on 1.441 acres of land located on the north side of Schuyler Road, northeast of Worthington Drive and known as Lot 6, Block A of the Hull Addition, within the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (Z11-0010, 3412 Schuyler Street) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Community Services, stated that the applicant was proposing to rezone the property with the intent to develop a vehicle repair use for the customization of commercial vehicles. The current zoning did not permit vehicle repair while the proposed zoning district would allow that type of use. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Development Review Committee recommended approval. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 19 Council Member Watts asked about screening requirements for the outside of the facility. Cunningham stated that there were buffer requirements between the uses but not between zoning districts. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Larry Reichhart, applicant, spoke in favor. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Watts motioned, Council Member King seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 2011-171 B. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending an overlay district and approving an amendment to the Quail Creek Special Sign District for 3.5 acres of land within the 35.5 acre district located at the northeast corner of Brinker Road and Quail Creek Boulevard and also known as Lot 1, Block A of the Biolife Plasma Addition, within the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (SD11-0004, BioLife Plasma Center) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval with conditions (7-0). Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Community Services, presented the details regarding this proposal. He stated that the request was an amendment to a special sign district. The amendment would eliminate one Type B sign and relocate a small type A sign on the property. There were no responses to the notices sent regarding the proposal. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Development Review Committee recommended approval with the conditions stating that Sign A was moving and Sign B was being removed. The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one spoke during the public hearing. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp motioned, Council Member King seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 2011-173 C. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for a zoning change from a Downtown Residential 1 (DR-1) zoning City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 20 district classification and use designation to a Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district classification and use designation; on approximately 0.51 acres of land located on the north side of Fannin Street and east of Avenue A, within the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (Z11-0009, 1118 & 1120 Fannin St.) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Community Services, stated that the request was to rezone the property for its proposed sale and redevelopment with a multi-family development. There currently were two structures on the property. The change in the zoning to DR-2 would match the surrounding properties. It would allow for some uses currently not allowed in the DR- 1 zoning category. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Development Review Committee recommended approval of the request. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Larry Reichhart, applicant, spoke in favor. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Gregory motioned, Council Member King seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 2011-173 D. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for a zoning change from a Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to a Downtown Commercial General (DC- G) zoning district classification and use designation on approximately 2.083 acres of land located south of Eagle Drive, west of Bernard Street, east of Beatty Street and north of Fannin Street, within the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (Z11-0016, Crosswind Village) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval, subject to a restrictive overlay district (6-1). Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Community Services, presented the details of the proposal. The property currently had 7 single family residential dwellings. If the property was rezoned it would be developed as student housing. The zoning designation sought would permit up to 150 units per acre with the applicant proposing 209 single family units, associated structured parking and some space at ground level for leasing and administration for the buildings. There were significant differences in use of the two categories of zoning designations. Three notices had been received in opposition and one in favor. The opposition was more than 20% of the property within 200 feet thus triggering the supermajority vote. The Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval with the condition that the buildings would not be higher than 65 feet. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 21 Council Member Gregory stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission had only placed a height restriction on the proposal. The proposed zoning had many more uses allowed than the current zoning. He asked if there was any effort to limit the other uses. Cunningham stated that there was some discussion but no action to restrict uses. Council Member Gregory noted that in the Planning and Zoning Commission minutes one of the Commissioners had made motion to table. The Chair and staff indicated that the original motion had to be considered and the motion to table was not considered. He asked if there was a legal problem with that procedure. Aaron Leal, Deputy City Attorney, stated that one Commissioner made a motion to approve which was seconded. Right after that another Commissioner made a motion to table. At that point there was no second to the motion to table. The Chair then asked for legal advice on the two motions. At that time, the Chair was told that one Commissioner made a motion that was seconded and another motion was made but with no second. The motion to table was a superior motion and should have been considered. Council Member Gregory asked if there was a long pause so no motion was made to second to table. Leal stated there was a long pause with no action to make a second. City Attorney Burgess stated that the rules were just that and were not law. The process was not defective or fatal and was not a defect under the law. Mayor Burroughs stated that an announcement should have been made indicating that the motion died for the lack of second rather than an amendment of the first motion. There was an opportunity to second but it was not used. Council Member Gregory stated that the intent of the developer was to build apartments and a multilevel parking. If the zoning change was approved, was there anything to compel it to be developed as it was currently being proposed. Cunningham replied there was not. Council Member Gregory asked that once the zoning was changed, would the developer have to submit a site plan to Council. Cunningham stated that the plans would be submitted to staff to review in accordance with Denton Development Code. There would be no approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission or the City Council. Council Member Roden asked if the site plan could be tied to the zoning approval and if not, why. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 22 Cunningham stated that if the rezoning were tied to the site plan and the site was not developed in that manner, staff could not take that zoning away. Council Member Watts questioned if the proposal was approved based on what was presented and if the development deviated from that, would it then have to come back to Council. Cunningham stated that once the rezoning had taken place, the zoning then was there. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke during the public hearing: Todd Thomas, applicant, spoke in favor. Council Member Gregory asked if the contracts would be per bedroom. Thomas replied correct. Council Member Gregory asked how many people per bedroom. Thomas stated that the lease would be one person per bedroom. Council Member Gregory asked how the provision to not have more than the required umber of people in apartment would be enforced. Thomas stated that the residents would report to management that provision in the lease on how long guests could stay. Council Member Roden asked about retail on the site. Thomas stated that it was being considered and that they had looked at property on Eagle. Retail to the east of the property would be a prime location. He felt retail needed to be redevelop in a space other than their location. Council Member Gregory stated that there was a current ordinance indicating no more than four unrelated persons in a dwelling. This proposal would be for one, two, three and four bedrooms. He questioned about placing a restriction on no more than four bedrooms in the development. Thomas stated that the four bedroom unit would be the largest apartment they would have. He stated that he would not object to a restriction to four bedrooms. Alex Payne, representing the current owners of the property, spoke in favor and wanted to make sure the conditions were not too onerous so as to not be able to sell the property. The Mayor closed the public hearing. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 23 Council Member Watts stated that he was concerned with the high density without regulations. He also understood that if the proposal was less dense, it would be not be economical. He had difficulty approving the request with just a height restriction. He liked the concept but struggled with the density. Mayor Burroughs stated that density was always a problem in Denton and was seen as an enemy to keeping things the same in a small town nature. One problem on Council was coping with the explosive growth of the two universities. Too often massive student complexes were away from the universities which forced students to drive to school. He was a strong proponent to increase density around the university for student housing. This area was student related and felt it was the highest density that wasn't offensive to surrounding properties. The area was surrounded by older multifamily units which in the future would need redeveloping. He agreed with no more than 4 bedrooms per unit. There were only two letters in opposition received with one person of those in opposition having a majority of the property and who was a competitor to the proposal. He felt this was the highest and best use of the property along this drive. Council Member Gregory stated that there were places for density and this was one location as it related to the university campus. He felt the development raised questions regarding the redevelopment of a property done by the same developer. He questioned how to word a restriction of no more than 4 bedrooms per unit. Cunningham stated that the wording could be “no more than 4 bedrooms per apartment”. Council Member King motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded to adopt the ordinance with a 65 foot height limitation and no more than four bedrooms per apartment. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Council Member Watts “nay”, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. Ordinance No. 2011-174 E. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for a zoning change from Rural Residential 5 (RD-5) zoning district classification and use designation to Industrial Center General (IC-G) zoning district classification and use designation, on 10.49 acres, located on the east side of South Mayhill Road, approximately 468 feet south of Morse Street, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing a severability clause and an effective date. (Z11- 0011, Pecan Orchard) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Community Services, stated that the applicant was requesting to rezone the property to Industrial Center General in order to bring the current uses onto conformance with the Denton Development Code. The site consisted of three tracts of land which were a part of DH-11, an area which was recently annexed into the city. The present uses on the site included office/warehouse facility, self serve storage units and storage/parking for RVs. The zoning request was consistent for the current use of the property and was consistent with the Denton Development Code. No responses were received in regard to the notices that City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 24 were sent out regarding the proposed rezoning. The Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommended approval. The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one spoke during the public hearing. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Gregory motioned, Council Member Watts seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member Roden "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 9. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. B. Receive citizen reports from the following: 1. Bob Clifton regarding the proposed budget. Mr. Clifton was not present at the meeting. 2. Hatice Salih regarding protocol, decorum and common courtesy during citizen reports; and the proposed budget. Ms. Salih was not present at the meeting. 10. CONCLUDING ITEMS A. Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting AND Under Section 551.0415 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, provide reports about items of community interest regarding which no action will be taken, to include: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen; a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality; or an announcement involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 20, 2011 Page 25 Council Member Watts asked if there was a method or a survey to find out where riders on the DCTA train were going, what they were using the train for, and how they were getting to their destinations once in Denton. Mayor Burroughs suggested also communicating with the Main Street people and Industrial Street people regarding advertising for cooperative ventures for ticket availability. Council Member Roden requested a work session relating to the food ordinance and the community market. Council Member Roden requested a status update on the citizen committee technical portion of the gas well ordinance. Council Member Gregory asked for a discussion or work session on redevelopment of old properties coming up to current code and the financial feasibility of that type of redevelopment. Council Member Engelbrecht asked that the Planning Department look at a basic 4-5 block along Eagle from Carroll to Avenue A and south 4-5 blocks to determine how many bedrooms were there now, what was needed, and what the market thought might be needed for redevelopment in the area. He questioned what could be done to encourage the redevelopment of that area. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that there were many events taking place in Denton this weekend including the Susan B. Komen Race for the Cure; Denton Public Safety Appreciation Day, the Wild Beast Feast and a home UNT football game. Mayor Burroughs requested a status on water resources in Denton. B. Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. There was no continuation of the Closed Meeting. C. Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. There was no official action taken on Closed Meeting items. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. __________________________ __________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS JENNIFER WALTERS MAYOR CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: October 18, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Denton Municipal Electric ACM: Howard Martin, Utilities 349-8232 SUBJECT Hold a public hearing and consider recommendations regarding the preferred alignment of the Denton Municipal Electric Northeast Denton Transmission Line Upgrade Rebuild Project. BACKGROUND Denton Municipal Electric has a project underway consisting of the rebuild of two existing 69kV electric transmission lines, in the northeast quadrant of the city. The existing electric transmission lines occupy an approximately thirty-foot wide easement corridor that begins at the Spencer Substation, goes north to the Kings Row Substation, then westerly to the Denton North Interchange (west side North Locust Street at Hercules Street). Reconstruction is required to replace aging facilities and to increase the capacity to 138kV in the future. Also, the existing wooden poles, having ostensibly reached the end of their useful service lives, will be replaced with steel poles, of similar class to that of recent DME system upgrade projects. The original easement footprint, established in the early 1960’s, conformed to the rural nature of the affected land tracts of that period. Presently, the proliferation of urbanized development activity and encroachments along and within the easement corridor has made it increasingly difficult to operate and maintain the existing electric facilities. Current practice indicates that an easement width of seventy-five feet (75’) is the optimal minimum width to accommodate electric power transmission infrastructure, operations, and maintenance. To determine a final alignment for the rebuild of the transmission line, DME has held three neighborhood meetings with citizens living within 500 feet of the existing transmission line and any alternative routes. Three routes were presented as alternatives to the original alignment. Those alternative routes were commonly referred to in the meetings and in information on the DME website as the “red”, “purple” and “green” routes. Cost estimates were formulated by DME staff to evaluate all routes. The factors employed to evaluate each of the alternate routes were: Impact on homeowners Cost of easements Cost of work in existing substations Transmission line construction cost Distribution line construction cost 1 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) October 10, 2011 Presented to the Public Utility Board in Open Meeting OPTIONS 1. Recommend approval for one of the following alignments for the transmission line rebuild project: Option A: Red route Option B: Green route Option C: Purple route RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends Option C. EXHIBITS 1. Preferred Route Map Respectfully prepared and submitted by, Phil Williams General Manager, Denton Municipal Electric 2 ExhibitA.