HomeMy WebLinkAbout122217 Friday Staff Report
City Manager’s Office
215 E. McKinney St., Denton, TX 76201 (940) 349-8307
OUR CORE VALUES
Integrity Fiscal Responsibility Transparency Outstanding Customer Service
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 22, 2017
TO: The Honorable Mayor Watts and Council Members
FROM: Todd Hileman, City Manager
SUBJECT: Friday Staff Report
I. Council Schedule
A. Meetings
1. No City Council on Tuesday, December 26, 2017.
2. No Agenda Committee Meeting on Wednesday, December 27, 2017.
3. No City Council on Tuesday, January 2, 2018.
B. Upcoming Events
1. US Conference of Mayors, January 24-26, 2018, Washington, DC.
II. General Information & Status Updates
A. Holiday Closings – City of Denton offices will be closed on Monday, Dec. 25 and
Tuesday, Dec. 26 in observance of the Christmas holiday; and Monday, Jan. 1 in
observance of New Year’s Day. More information on holiday operating hours and
closings is available on the website here. Staff contact: Jessica Rogers
B. No Friday Report Next Week – Please note that staff does not plan to have a Friday
report next week due to the holidays and a short week.
C. 2018 State of the City – The State of the City event has been rescheduled and will
be held on the evening of Thursday, February 15, 2018 at the Embassy Suites
by Hilton Denton Convention Center in the Equestrian Ballroom from 6 p.m. to
8:30 p.m. Staff will be push out marketing and communications on the event right
after the new year. Staff contact: Sarah Kuechler
D. Organizational Chart – For reference, please see attached an updated
organizational chart. Staff contact: Todd Hileman
E. DHA Feedback on Policy and Application – Please see attached correspondence
from the Denton Housing Authority Board of Commissioners regarding comments
and feedback to the City’s draft policy and application for low-income housing tax
credit projects requesting a resolution of support. Staff will review the comments
provided and work on completing a draft policy and application to bring back to
the City Council in a work session for some time likely in January. Staff contact:
Bryan Langley / Sarah Kuechler
F. Business Air Incentive Termination – In 2015, the City of Denton entered into a
Chapter 380 economic development program grant agreement with BAM Denton
Management Ventures, LLC (Business Air) for an expansion project at its Denton
Enterprise Airport facility. The Chapter 380 agreement granted a 70 percent tax
rebate on the increase in valuation attributable to improvements of existing
facilities and on eligible business personal property located at 5007 and 4777
Airport Road for a period of two years. Under the terms of the agreement, the
rebate is granted if the increase in the assessed real and business personal property
valuation is at least $5 million more than the 2014 base year valuation by Dec. 31,
2016. According to Economic Development’s calculations based on data from the
Denton Central Appraisal District, Business Air did not meet the required
threshold to receive the incentive. The 2014 base year valuation was $2.3 million,
and the 2016 valuation was $3.8 million. The result is an overall increase of only
$1.5 million. The agreement states that should the increase in improvements
valuation be less than $5 million, there will be no grant. Further, the agreement
states that conditions of the grant are that the improvements shall be operated and
maintained for the purposes set forth in the agreement, and Business Air must
occupy the improvements continuously for the term of the grant. Since Business
Air was purchased by US Aviation Group in 2017 and is no longer operating or
occupying property at 5007 and 4777 Airport Road, the City has the right to
terminate the grant. Therefore, the tax rebate agreement is terminated; no payment
has been or will be made to Business Air. Staff contact: Caroline Booth
G. Review of PD Tweet-Alongs – The Denton Police Department has been actively
involved in social media applications for a number of years. The Department has
approximately 43,600 followers on Twitter. Beginning in 2012, the Department
started doing periodic “Tweet-Alongs”, where one of the Public Information
Officers would accompany an officer out on patrol and post information about
calls. The Department has done 7 or 8 of these live tweet events over the past 5
years. These events have been popular outreach programs for law enforcement
agencies across the country. In the most recent Tweet-Along on December 15– 16,
the Department’s tweets reached 57,131 twitter accounts, including “retweets”.
While there are the occasional negative reactions to some of the tweets, the
majority of the public reactions are quite positive. The purpose of these is to
provide a look at some of the activities and calls that officers handle during a shift.
To that end, the Department has a set of criteria that serve as guidelines for the
content of any tweets:
1. No specific physical addresses,
2. No pictures from inside a private residence (only where the information is
available to or observable by the general public),
3. Nothing from any call that includes an allegation of family violence, a
death, any juvenile, or a suicidal person,
4. Pictures will not include identifying information for a person or a vehicle,
and
5. Pictures of individuals will be taken from an angle that makes it difficult
to identify anyone.
Following the recent Tweet-Along event, some concerns and negative feedback
were received. As such, the Department will review and discuss these guidelines
with the City Attorney and Public Affairs/Communications staff to determine how
the guidelines can be modified or expanded. The Police Department intends for
the events to be a tool to enhance public trust and understanding of police officers’
responsibilities, while properly safeguarding individual citizen rights. The
Department values that its communications exhibit professionalism and respect,
as reflected in the Department’s core values, and social media posts will be more
actively monitored to ensure this is demonstrated. Staff contact: Deputy Chief
Scott Fletcher
H. Agendas & Minutes on the Website – The City Secretary’s office has worked with
the Granicus vendor to create a new layout and design for the Agendas & Minutes
website page. Agenda, minutes, and videos are now organized by the name of each
Committee or Board to make it easier for users to locate and navigate the page,
rather than grouping the different committees and boards together.
As previously communicated, the City’s Secretary Office is also in the process of
transitioning all boards/commissions/council committees into the Granicus
Legistar agenda system to provide uniformity in the agenda process and a
consistent location on the City’s website for agenda postings. As
boards/commissions/council committees hold their first meetings using the
Granicus Legistar agenda system, a new tab with the committee’s name will be
created. Staff contact: Jennifer Walters
I. Information on US Radiopharmaceuticals – At the December 5 Council meeting,
Council Member Briggs inquired if the City could intervene or have any influence
regarding a Denton company, called US RadioPharmaceuticals, that has been
storing radioactive material since it ceased operations in 2009 and recently
received a notice of violation from the Texas Department of State Health Services
(“DSHS”). Please see attached memo with an update and information from
DSHS. Staff contact: Sarah Kuechler
J. City Hall West Steering Committee Meeting – The first meeting of the City Hall
West (CHW) Steering Committee was held on Monday, December 18 at the Civic
Center. Staff presented information on the project’s background, the August 2017
report from Architexas, and the Texas Open Meetings Act. Elections were then
held for the Chair and Vice Chair. Paul Abbott was selected as Chair and Val
Morgan was selected as Vice Chair. It was also decided that the committee would
meet on the third Monday of every month at 5:30pm. However, due to the Martin
Luther King holiday, the next committee meeting will be held on the fourth
Monday in January on Monday, January 22 at 5:30pm. The committee concluded
its first meeting with a tour of the CHW facility.
At the next meeting on January 22, staff has proposed the committee discuss
project goals and objectives, consider possible uses, agree on a project program
and design direction, and outline options to be studied. Staff contact: Mark Nelson
III. Attachments
A. Organizational Chart
B. Denton Housing Authority Response
C. Memo on US RadioPharmaceuticals
IV. Informal Staff Reports
A. Tree Code and Tree Fund Update
B. DME Transmission Cost of Service filing
V. Council Information
A. Council Requests for Information
B. Draft Agenda (No Draft Agenda)
C. Council Calendar
D. Future Council Items
E. Street Construction Report
Human Resources
Carla Romine
Director
Technology Services
Melissa Kraft
Chief Technology Officer
Parks and Recreation
Laura Behrens
Interim Director
Library
Jennifer Bekker
Director
City Secretary
Jennifer Walters
Economic Development
Caroline Booth
Director
Accounting
Budget/Treasury
Municipal Court
Customer Service
Finance
Antonio Puente
Director
Community Development
Communications
Public Affairs/ IGR
Sarah Kuechler
Director
Deputy City Manager/COO
Bryan Langley
Water
Wastewater
Solid Waste
Environmental Services
Gas Well Inspections
Utilities
Kenneth Banks
General Manager
Airport
Facilities
Fleet Services
Bike/Pedestrian
Transportation
Mark Nelson
Director
Engineering
Streets
Drainage
Traffic
Capital Projects
Todd Estes
Director
Assistant City Manager
Mario Canizares
Animal Services
Police
Lee Howell
Chief
Community Improvement Services
Fire
Robin Paulsgrove
Chief
Denton Municipal Electric
George Morrow
General Manager
Building Inspections
Planning
Development Services
Scott McDonald
Director
Materials Management
Procurement and Compliance
Cassandra Ogden
Director
Departments Reporting to
the City Manager
City Manager
Todd Hileman
City of Denton Organization Chart
Updated Dec. 22, 2017
City Manager’s Office
215 E. McKinney St., Denton, TX 76201 (940) 349-8307
OUR CORE VALUES
Integrity Fiscal Responsibility Transparency Outstanding Customer Service
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 22, 2017
TO: Todd Hileman, City Manager
Bryan Langley, Deputy City Manager
FROM: Sarah Kuechler, Director of Public Affairs
Ken Banks, General Manager of Utilities
SUBJECT: US RadioPharmaceuticals
At the December 5 Council meeting, Council Member Briggs inquired if the City could intervene
or have any influence regarding a Denton company, called US RadioPharmaceuticals (“USR”),
that has been storing radioactive material since it ceased operations in 2009 and recently received
a notice of violation from the Texas Department of State Health Services (“DSHS”). A hearing in
front of a state administrative law judge was originally scheduled for December 11, 2017, but was
postponed until January 26, 2018.
The City’s state legislative consultant, Focused Advocacy, helped to arrange a conference call and
briefing from DSHS with State Representative Stucky and State Senator Estes’ offices
participating. DSHS informed the group of the following:
USR does not have an active license – in other words, they are not producing or operating
as a producer of radiological pharmaceutical products, but rather are maintaining the
facility and materials.
DSHS inspectors routinely visit the main facility on Shady Oaks Drive to monitor
radioactive levels for materials inside the building. DSHS also has monitoring devices
placed outside of the main facility for continuous monitoring. DSHS stated that materials
in the building are being stored or otherwise handled appropriately and the outside
monitoring devices have not indicated levels of radioactive materials higher than
background levels. DSHS could not immediately report on their level of inspection for
USR’s second facility on Jim Christal Road; however, DSHS will follow-up with this
information and it was requested that inspections be performed at the same level as the
main facility.
USR has had an open, pending application to obtain a license from DSHS since 2012. In
order to have their application reviewed and receive a license to operate, USR must provide
a decommissioning plan and up front funding “well in excess of $2M” to handle
decommissioning.
The administrative hearing for the violation is scheduled for January 26, 2018. USR will
not be able to progress with obtaining their license unless they provide a decommissioning
plan and funding by this deadline.
2
If USR meets the January 26 deadline, it is likely that the hearing will be canceled as it
would serve no purpose.
There are many unknowns at this point, but for further information and context only, the following
is a scenario if the January 26, 2018 date were to pass without compliance:
The hearing date for compliance may be further extended.
DSHS may be able to seek enforcement action against USR. This would entail seeking out
the owner or a parent company to leverage private funds to fully decommission and clean-
up the site.
If these avenues are exhausted without success, the State has a Radiation and Perpetual
Care Account for the clean-up of sites with low level radioactive materials. However, the
DSHS would need to prove what actions have been taken, apply for the use of funds, and
petition the Governor’s office.
It is likely this process could continue for some time; however, it does not appear that any City
intervention would have a different result and the state agency may pursue an enforcement action
against USR. Staff will continue to monitor the case closely and consult with the City Attorney
depending upon future actions.
We are appreciative to have both state reps involved and wanting to resolve this for the City, with
Representative Stucky personally participating in the call. DSHS has committed to keeping the
offices informed.
Date: December 22, 2017 Report No. 2017-091
INFORMAL STAFF REPORT
TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT:
Status update of the Tree Code Revisions and Use of Tree Mitigation Fund (Tree Fund) for Purchasing
Treed Property.
BACKGROUND:
The existing Tree Preservation and Landscape Requirements (Tree Code) were adopted in 2004 to
promote tree preservation and to facilitate site design and construction that would allow for the long-
term viability of trees. While it has served to protect some of the existing tree canopy, more is needed to
further maintain essential tree cover and to provide clear guidance for tree preservation and mitigation
during site development.
In the fall of 2014, following discussions regarding the history and status of the Tree Code and related
programs, Council directed staff to proceed with an update to the Tree Code and to begin planting trees
with the Tree Fund. Proposed revisions to the Tree Code aim to accomplish the following objectives:
1. Streamlining the code to make it more user-friendly;
2. Aligning City standards with best management practices of the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI) and the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA); and
3. Providing a more robust code that will expand and protect tree canopy including planting of trees
on private property and expenditures from the Tree Fund.
Tree Code Update
Outlined below is a chronology of what has occurred since then:
March 3, 2015 City Council Work Session – Staff presented and sought formal approval on the
proposed percentages to be allocated from the Tree Fund as follows:
Tree Planting and Maintenance 75%
Purchase of Tree Property 15%
City Wide Tree Inventory 5%
Education of citizens and developers 5%
August 18, 2015 City Council Work Session & Public Hearing – As a component of the
update to the tree preservation code, Council adopted ordinance No.2015-252, modifying Section
35.13.7.e.i of the Denton Development Code (DDC) to allow use of the Tree Mitigation funds
for the planting of trees on private property (see exhibit 1).
December 2015 – May 2016 Stakeholder Meetings. - Several meetings were held with
representatives of the Denton Community Developer’s Alliance (DCDA), the Native Plant Society
of Texas, the University of North Texas, Texas Woman’s University, Committee on the
Environment, and the Keep Denton Beautiful (KDB) Board of Directors to gather feedback. In
those meetings, staff reviewed the proposed ordinance with the group and received input related
Date: December 22, 2017 Report No. 2017-091
to the major components of the ordinance and the City’s overall goal of tree preservation and
canopy coverage.
March 23, 2016, July 27, 2016 and February 8 & 15, 2017 Planning and Zoning Commission
Draft revisions presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission on four separate occasions has
resulted in no formal action primarily due to concerns from the DCDA. Most recently, concerns
expressed were over the use of the term developer vs. applicant, the possible effect of requiring a
tree removal permit for residents occupying a single family dwelling, and the financial burden on
developers for preserving trees.
April 4, 2017 Council Work Session and Closed Session– In response to a Council request,
Keep Denton Beautiful, in conjunction with City Staff, presented to Council five (5) properties to
consider purchasing for the preservation of trees. Also included were the following evaluation
criteria that were used in selecting these properties:
o Property located in Cross Timbers region or ESA Upland Habitat.
o Property has 50% or higher tree canopy cover.
o Property currently for sale.
o Property is developable as a park.
o Property is threatened by development.
o Property is not currently protected by a conservation easement.
o Property is not currently protected by an ESA Flood Plan.
o Present or future utility impact on the property is minimal or none.
o Present or future mobility/transportation impact on the property is minimal or none.
o City loss of potentially taxable land is minimal or none.
As part of the closed session discussion, staff presented the following cost comparison:
Cost Comparison Land Purchase to Preserve Trees Versus Planting Trees
Property Number
of Acres Cost
Percent
Canopy
Cover
Acres of
Tree
Canopy
Preserved
New
Trees
Planted*
Acres of
Future
Trees
Canopy
A 40 $2.2
Million 100% 40 4,400 126.86
B 33.6 $2.56
Million 48% 16.12 5,120 147.63
C 7.5 $1 Million 100% 7.5 2,000 57.67
D 82.2 $2.6
Million 75% 61.65 5,200 149.94
E 3.3 $715,690 86% 2.83 1,431 41.27
* based on $500 per tree which is $50 above the current average cost per
tree.
Date: December 22, 2017 Report No. 2017-091
Council discussed the advantages and disadvantages of purchasing property and alternatively the
possibly of establishing conservation easements; none of the properties identified were
recommended for purchase.
January 10, 2017 – May 29, 2017 Texas Legislature Special Session During the 85th Texas
Legislature regular session, multiple bills were debated in the House and Senate that would restrict
local government’s ability to regulate the removal of trees. The various bills ranged from
completely removing tree preservation requirements, to requiring credits for trees planted to offset
the tree mitigation fee. The session ended with House Bill number 744 passing, however the
Governor did not sign it into law. Subsequently, the Governor called a special session to consider
this and other issues that did not pass during the regular.
June 18 – July 18, 2017 Texas Legislature Special Session - During the special session, again
multiple bills were debated in the House and Senate concluding with the passage of House Bill
number 7, (see exhibit 2) which the Governor signed into law. Upon analysis of the new law staff
has determined that the existing and proposed revisions to the Tree Code are compliant with the
new law (see exhibit 3). Staff will also had the Legal Department review the bill to verify the
City’s compliance.
January 24, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission Work Session – Staff is currently updating
the attached draft, which was last presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission on February
15, 2017. The updates will be presented in a work session and will address:
o Concerns expressed were over the use of the term developer vs. applicant,
o The possible effect of requiring a tree removal permit for residents occupying a single family
dwelling; and
o The financial burden on developers for preserving trees.
February – March 2018 – Clarion, as part of the DDC update, will provide a Point System versus
current system for new landscaping.
Tree Fund Expenditure Update
Total deposits into the Tree Fund has been $3,174,644.52. Since council directive in 2015 to begin planting
trees, 90% of the Tree Fund expenditures has been to plant trees (see exhibit 4). During that same time,
$834,167.71 was collected and $935,878.33 was expended on planting trees and the canopy assessment.
Date: December 22, 2017 Report No. 2017-091
Since 2015 annual deposits and expenditures were:
The current balance of the Tree Fund is approximately $2.2 million. Approximately $833,877 has been
spent on providing 1,162 rebates or trees for planting on private property through the Denton Tree
Initiative and 1,158 trees planted along trails in 12 parks and several medians including 12 fruit trees in
Bowling Green Park. This will result in an approximate increase in tree canopy of 77 acres. Approximately
$137,390.00 has been spent on assessing the tree canopy in Denton.
Current and future planned expenditures include:
Parks and Recreation Department continues to plant trees along trails in parks and within center
medians.
Reconstruction of Fort Worth Drive and Teasley Lane, the planting of trees in the medians will be
completed using tree mitigation funds.
o Similarly, staff is working to include the same, as FM 2499 is complete.
Preserving existing trees helps to slow the loss of tree canopy; however, the only way to increase tree
canopy is by planting new trees. Planting new trees allows for the dispersed benefits throughout the City
verses a few designated areas. The current strategy of planting trees in parks and on private properties
allows an equal opportunity for all residents to receive and enjoy the benefits of trees.
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
To date, no properties have been purchased out of the Tree Fund. As land costs continue to increase, any
purchase of property would result in a substantial reduction in available funds for future tree planting
projects. Future payments into the tree fund are unpredictable; the fund is a mitigation tool designed as
the last option in lieu of tree preservation or planting. Ideally, a reduced fund balance would mean more
trees are preserved or planted.
It is staff’s recommendation, utilizing funds for the planting of trees instead of the investment of property
provides for the broadest benefits in terms of expanding tree canopy, beautifying the area, and not having
$-
$100,000.00
$200,000.00
$300,000.00
$400,000.00
$500,000.00
2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
Deposits $317,996.99 $393,402.02 $122,768.70
Expenditures $174,210.89 $467,259.61 $294,407.83
Tree Fund Deposits vs. Expenditures
Deposits Expenditures
Date: December 22, 2017 Report No. 2017-091
the loss of ad valorem. As a result, the most economical approach to expanding tree canopy is to continue
to plant trees.
Staff will be presenting a revised draft Tree Code update to the Planning and Zoning Commission at their
January 24, 2018 work session. It is our goal to present a final draft tree code in ordinance form to the
City Council in the second quarter of 2018. Attached is the most recent draft of the proposed revisions.
ATTACHMENT:
1. Ordinance 2015-252
2. House Bill 7
3. Impact Analysis of House Bill 7
4. Tree Fund Deposits and Expenditures
5. Draft Ordinance
STAFF CONTACT:
Haywood Morgan
Urban Forester
940-349-8337
haywood.morgan@cityofdenton.com
ORDINANCE NO. 2015 -252
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTION
35.13.7.A.7.e OF THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE, PERTAINING TO USE OF
THE TREE FUND; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY CLAUSE WITH A MAXIMUM
FINE AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR EACH VIOLATION THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2002 -040, the City Council of the City of
Denton, Texas adopted the Denton Development Code (the "Development Code "); and
WHEREAS, Subchapter 35.13 of the Development Code provides for the use of Tree
Fund deposits for tree mitigation, and the City desires also to use such deposits for the public
purpose of increasing the tree canopy within the City; and
WHEREAS, after providing notice and after conducting a public hearing on the
day of , 2015, as required by law, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval ol`' ehatiges to Subchapter 35.13 of the Development Code as described herein; and
WHEREAS, after providing notice and after conducting a public hearing as required by
law, the City Council finds that the subject changes to the Development Code are consistent with
the Denton Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed amendment for the use of
the Tree Fund is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the City
of Denton, and accordingly is of the opinion and finds that said amendment is in the public
interest and should be granted as set forth herein; NOW THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTIwON 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are
incorporated herein by reference as true.
SECTION 2. Subchapter 35.13.7.A.7.e of the Denton Development Code is amended as
underlined to read as follows:
Section 35.13.7.A.7.e:
e. Tree Fund.
The City shall administer the Tree Fund. Tree Funds shall be used to purchase, plant,
and maintain trees ei4y, to preserve wooded property that remainsing in
a naturalistic state in perpetuity, to perform and maintain a City -wide tree inventory,
and to educate citizens and developers on the benefits and value of trees, all within
the City o Dcntoji. ThewwwTree Fund may also be used to sup,Port programs for the
Public I)(i......._._ l y it[iiri tli'its° of T ei toii. as Mli- )ve tra o c a m .ws,.. ...t., t e c r tl. -.__
by Ci1v Council.
Exhibit 1
ii. Proceeds from the Tree Fund not be used to meet any requirements for
rescry t ar3 1 at`;Ci at% 1< ¢ic c tpmn btiff"efirm. streetscap : hnilar
requirements in the Denton Development Code and the Denton Code of Ordinances.
iii. The applicant shall pay the fees established by City Council and published in the
Development Review Fee Schedule in the Application Criteria Manual. The fee shall
be based on the fair market value of materials and labor at the time of planting and
the reasonable estimated cost for maintenance and irrigation for a period of three (3)
years.
iv. Fees contributed to the Tree Fund shall be paid prior to the issuance of a Clearing and
Grading Permit on all Commercial, Industrial, or Multi- Family Residential
developments, prior to final approval of a Gas Well Development Plat and prior to
filing a Final Plat in the Denton County Clerk's Office for all Single - family
Residential Subdivisions.
v. Voluntary contributions for tree preservation shall be placed in the Tree Fund.
SECTION 3. Any person, firm, partnership, corporation or other entity violating any
provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and shall
be punished by a fine in a sum not exceeding $2,000.00 for each offense. Each day that a
provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense.
SECTION 4. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person
or circumstance is held invalid by any court, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of other
provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable.
SECTION 5. In compliance with Section 2.09(c) of the Denton Charter, this ordinance
shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is
hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton
Record - Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10)
days of the date of its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the y f '2015. da o
HI iS WATT -S„ MAYOR
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY:
Exhibit 1
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY
Exhibit 1
Texas-2017-HB7-Enrolled
An Act
relating to municipal regulation of the removal of trees on private property.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: SECTION 1.
Subchapter Z, Chapter 212, Local Government
Code, is amended by adding Section 212.905 to read as follows: Sec. 212.905.
REGULATION OF TREE REMOVAL. (a) In this
section:
(1) "Residential structure" means:
(A) a manufactured home as that term is defined by Section 1201.003, Occupations Code;
(B) a detached one-family or two-family dwelling, including the accessory structures
of the dwelling;
(C) a multiple single-family dwelling that is not more than three stories in height with a
separate means of entry for each dwelling, including the accessory structures of the
dwelling; or
(D) any other multifamily structure.
(2) "Tree mitigation fee" means:
(A) a fee or charge imposed by a municipality in connection with the removal of a tree
from private property.
(B) A municipality may not require a person to pay a tree mitigation fee for the removed
tree if the tree:
(1) is located on a property that is an existing one-family or two-family dwelling
that is the person's residence; and
(2) is less than 10 inches in diameter at the point on the trunk 4.5 feet above the
ground.
(C) A municipality that imposes a tree mitigation fee for tree removal on a person's
property must allow that person to apply for a credit for tree planting under this
section to offset the amount of the fee.
(D) An application for a credit under Subsection (c) must be in the form and manner
prescribed by the municipality. To qualify for a credit under this section, a tree must
be:
(1) planted on property:
(a) for which the tree mitigation fee was assessed; or
(b) mutually agreed upon by the municipality and the person; and
(2) at least two inches in diameter at the point on the trunk 4.5 feet above ground.
(E) For purposes of Subsection (d)(1)(B), the municipality and the person may consult with
an academic organization, state agency, or nonprofit organization to identify an area
for which tree planting will best address the science-based benefits of trees and
other reforestation needs of the municipality.
(F) The amount of a credit provided to a person under this section must be applied in the
same manner as the tree mitigation fee assessed against the person and:
(1) equal to the amount of the tree mitigation fee assessed against the
person if the property is an existing one-family or two-family dwelling
that is the person's residence;
(2) at least 50 percent of the amount of the tree mitigation fee assessed
against the person if:
(a) the property is a residential structure or pertains to the development,
construction, or renovation of a residential structure; and
(b) the person is developing, constructing, or renovating the property not
for use as the person's residence; or
(3) at least 40 percent of the amount of the tree mitigation fee assessed
against the person if:
(a) the property is not a residential structure;or
(b) the person is constructing or intends to
construct a structure on the property that is not a residential
structure.
Exhibit 2
Texas-2017-HB7-Enrolled
(G) As long as the municipality meets the requirement to provide a person a credit under
Subsection (c), this section does not affect the ability of or require a municipality to
determine:
(1) the type of trees that must be planted to receive a credit under this section,
except as provided by Subsection (d);
(2) the requirements for tree removal and corresponding tree
mitigation fees, if applicable;
(3) the requirements for tree-planting methods and best management
practices to ensure that the tree grows to the anticipated height at
maturity; or
(4) the amount of a tree mitigation fee.
(H) A municipality may not prohibit the removal of or impose a tree mitigation fee for the
removal of a tree that:
(1) is diseased or dead; or
(2) poses an imminent or immediate threat to persons
or property.
(I) This section does not apply to property within five miles of a federal military base in
active use as of December 1,2017
SECTION 2. The changes in law made by this Act apply only to a tree mitigation fee assessed by
a municipality on or after the effective date of this Act.
SECTION 3. This Act takes effect December 1, 2017.
President of the Senate Speaker of the House
I certify that H.B. No. 7 was passed by the House on July 28,
2017, by the following vote: Yeas 130, Nays 9, 1 present, not voting; and
that the House concurred in Senate amendments to H.B.
No. 7 on August 15, 2017, by the following vote: Yeas 119,
Nays 23,1 present, not voting.
Chief Clerk of the House
I certify that H.B. No. 7 was passed by the Senate, with amendments, on
August 15, 2017, by the following vote: Yeas 17, Nays 14.
APPROVED: Date
Secretary of the Senate
Governor
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 3
House Bill 7
Enrolled
Current Tree
Code
Proposed Tree
Code
Residential (owner occupied)
Mitigation Fee for removal of a <10” DBH Tree No No No
Mitigation Fee for removal of a >10” DBH Tree Yes No No
Percent of Fee that can be offset through
Planting 100 N/A N/A
Mitigation required for Hazard/Diseased or
Dead Removal No N/A N/A
Replacement Tree Size 2" diameter at 4.5'
above ground N/A N/A
Residential and Multi-Family Development
Percent of Fee that can be offset through
Planting 50 100 100
Mitigation required for Hazard/Diseased or
Dead Removal No No No
Replacement Tree Size 2" diameter at 4.5'
above ground
2” diameter at 6”
above ground
3” diameter at 6”
above ground
Non-Residential Development
Percent of Fee that can be offset through
Planting 40 100 100
Mitigation required for Hazard/Diseased or
Dead Removal No No No
Replacement Tree Size 2" diameter at 4.5'
above ground
2” diameter at 6”
above ground
3” diameter at 6”
above ground
The impact of House Bill 7 on Denton's Current and Proposed Tree Code
No Impact on Tree Code
Neutral Impact on Tree Code
Exhibit 4
Tree Fund Deposits and Expenditures
Year Tree Fund Deposits Expenditures
2004-05 $ 13,000.00
2005-06 $ 136,125.00
2006-07 $ 194,890.00
2007-08 $ 214,842.20
2008-09 $ 102,877.29
2009-10 $ 92,651.48 $ 32,494.32
2010-11 $ 112,769.72 $ 2,896.11
2011-12 $ 260,663.72
2012-13 $ 39,149.65
2013-14 $ 1,173,507.75
2014-15 $ 317,996.99 $ 174,210.89
2015-16 $ 393,402.02 $ 467,259.61
2016-17 $ 122,768.70 $ 294,407.83
Average Annual Deposits $ 244,203.42
Total Expenditures $ 971,268.76
Total Deposits $ 3,174,644.52
Current Balance $ 2,203,375.76
Page 1 of 12
ORDINANCE NO. ____________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CI TY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING SUBSECTIONS
35.23 AND 35.13 OF THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE, PERTAINING TO TREE
PRESERVATION AND LANDS CAPE REQUIREMENTS AND REL ATED
DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PE NALTY CLAUSE WITH A MAXIMUM
AMOUNT OF $500.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY
DATE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2002-040, the City Council of the City of Denton,
Texas adopted the Denton Development Code (the “Development Code”); and
WHEREAS, Section 35.13.7.A of the Devel opment Code provides for requirem ents for
the preservation of Trees in the City of Denton, and the City desires to amend this section within
Subchapter 35.13 in order to make a more understandable and efficient tree preservation code for
the citizens of the City of Denton (the “amendment”); and
WHEREAS, Subchapter 35.23 of th e Development Code provides definitions for use in
the Development Code, and the am endment contemplates a change in s ome of the pre-existing
definitions which will remain in Section 35.23.2, as well as new definiti ons which will be added
to Section 35.13.7.A; and
WHEREAS, after providing notice and afte r conducting a public hearing as required by
law, the Planning and Zoning Co mmission recommended approval of changes to Subchapters
35.23 and 35.13 of the Development Code as described herein; and
WHEREAS, after providing notice and afte r conducting a public hearing as required by
law, the City Council finds that the subject change s to the Development Code are consistent with
the Denton Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determ ined that the proposed am endment to the
requirements for the preservation of trees in the City of Denton is in the best interest of the health,
safety, morals, and general welfare of the City of Denton, and accordingly is of the opinion and
finds that said amendment is in the public interest and should be granted as set forth herein; NOW
THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are
incorporated herein by reference as true.
SECTION 2. Subchapter 35.23, S ection 35.23.2 of the Denton Developm ent Code is
amended as underlined, to read as follows:
Section 35.23.2:
Exhibit 5
Page 2 of 12
Clearing: An intentional act to cut down or to damage a tree and/or understory vegetation,
to the extent that the tr ee and/or understory vegetation will decline or die. Clearing
includes, but is not limited to: the use of herbicide or similar chemical treatment to destroy
trees and/or understory vegetation; physical removal; da mage from soil compaction; or
damage due to grading.
Critical Root Zone (CRZ): The area of undisturbed natural soil around a tree defined by a
concentric circle with a radius equal to the distance from the trunk to the outermost portion
of the drip line but not less than one (1) foot radi us for each one (1) inch dbh. The area of
soil around a tree where the minimum amount of roots considered critical to the structural
stability or health of the tree are located, as identified in the Tree Preservation Plan.
Diameter Breast Height (DBH): The outside diameter of the trunk of a tree, measured four
and one-half (4½) feet above ground level. If a tree splits into multiple trunks below the
four and one-half (4½) feet level, DBH will be defined as the sum of each individual trunk
measured at four and one-half (4½) feet above ground level, or the single trunk at its most
narrow dimension, whichever is greater.The tree trunk diameter measured in inches at a
height of 4.5 feet above ground level. For m ulti-trunk trees, combine the diameter of the
largest stem or trunk with one-half (0.5) of th e diameter of each additional stem or trunk,
all measured at four and one-half 4.5 feet above ground level.
Grubbing: The mechanical or physical act of removing stumps, underbrush, and rocks,
prior to clearing and grading. Grubbing doe s not allow for any grade changes, only
vegetation removal down to bare soil. A Tree Removal Permit is required for all trees with
a three (3)-inch or greater diam eter, measured at four and a half (4.5) feet above natural
grade.
Landscape Area: See "Landscaping." Refers to the pervious portion of a site that contains
plantings.
Public Utilities: For the purposes of tree preser vation provisions of the Denton
Development Code, the term Public Utilities means:
A. Entities franchised by the City to use public rights-of-way for the conduct of their
business;
B. Entities that are "public utilities" under pertinent provisions of the Texas Utilities
Code or Texas Water Code but are speci fically exempted by state law from the
requirement that they receive a franchise from the City for the use of public rights-
of-way;
C. Public sanitary sewers;
D. Public water mains;
E. Public streets;
F. Public storm sewers;
G. Public detention ponds;
H. Municipally-owned electric utilities; and
Exhibit 5
Page 3 of 12
I. Any contractor hired by these entities.
Qualified Professional: For the purposes of tree pres ervation provisions of the Denton
Development Code, a qualified professional is a person with a minimum of a Bachelor of
Science Degree in any of the following disciplines: Forestry, Horticulture, Botany and/or
Plant/Soil Science or, an Arborist that has been certified by the International Society for
Arboriculture, a Texas Certified Nursery Professional, a Texas Master Certified Nursery
Professional certified by the Texas Nursery and Landscape Association or a Licensed
Landscape Architect.
Tree Topping: The severe cutting back of limbs to stubs larger than three (3) inches in
diameter within the tree's crown to such a degree that removal of the top canopy disfigures
and invites probable disease or death to the tree. Tree topping is prohibited. An
inappropriate pruning technique that da mages the health of the Tree, to reduce tree size
that involves cutting a tree to a predetermined crown limit, often at internodes.
Tree Protection, Permanent. Structural measures, such as reta ining walls/wells or
aeration devices, that are designe d to protect the tree and its root systems throughout its
lifetime.
Tree Protection Barrier, Temporary: Physical barriers installed prior to any clearing and
grading activity and/or construction for the purpose of preventing damage to existing trees
and understory vegetation. These barriers are that is set outside of the critical root zone of
such vegetation during site for the life of the development and construction.
Tree Protection Sign: A sign furnished by the developer upon approval of a tree survey or
Tree Permit Tree Preservation Plan that descri bes prohibited conduct detrimental to trees
on site.
SECTION 3. Subchapter 35.13, Section 35.13.7.A of the Denton Developm ent Code is
amended by removing and replacing the entire language as follows:
35.13.7. - Tree Preservation and Landscape Requirements.
A. Tree Preservation.
1. Definitions.
Cross Timbers Forest: An ecosystem that consists of a swath of trees and
prairie stretching from Kansas to Central Texas that is rich with an understory
of shrubs, vines, brambles, prairie grasses, and wildflowers.
Developer. A person who owns property su bject to this Section o r a
representative of the owner.
Exempt Trees: Any Trees on the City’s Exempt Tree List, as set forth in the
Site Design Criteria Manual.
Heritage Trees: All healthy trees with a dbh of 18 inches or greater.
Exhibit 5
Page 4 of 12
International Society of Arboriculture (ISA): A non-profit organization that
through research, technology, and edu cation promotes the professional
practice of arboriculture and fosters a greater worldwide awareness o f the
benefits of trees.
ISA Certified Arborist: An individual who has achieved a level of knowledge
in the art and science of tree car e through experience and by passing a
comprehensive examination developed by some of the nation’s leading experts
on tree care. Certified Arborists must also continue their education to maintain
their certification and adhere to a Code of Ethics.
Landscape architect: a professional who applie s artistic and scie ntific
principles to the resear ch, planning, design and management of both natural
and built environments and whose qualifications are acceptable to the City’s
Urban Forester. Such qualifications shall be based on a combination of college
degree, licensure and experience.
Protected Trees: All healthy trees with a dbh less than 18 inches.
Pruning: Removing branches or o ccasionally roots from a tree or other
vegetation using approved practices, to ach ieve a specified objective, such as
reducing the risk of failure, providing cl earance, or maintaining the health of
the tree.
Structural Value, Urban Forest: A value based on the tree itself that includes
compensatory value and carbon storage value.
Tree: A woody perennial usually having one dominant trunk and a mature
height greater than 16 feet.
Tree Canopy: Refers to the collective branches and foliage of a tree crown or
a group of tree crowns.
Tree Preservation Plan: A submission made by the developer of land to the
City, which lists the retention, protection, management, and mitigation of trees
on a construction or development site.
Tree Protection Zone: An area defined by the City ’s Urban Forester within
which certain activities are prohibited or restricted to prevent or m inimize
potential injury to d esignated trees, especially during construction or
development, based on features unique to each individual site.
Tree Survey: A map or plan that includes a list and description of trees located
within all or a portion of the project area and/or adjacent areas. The tree survey
is based on criteria, such as location, species, or tree size, defined in the Site
Design Criteria Manual.
Urban Forester. An individual who is trained in or is practicing urban forestry
and whose qualifications are acceptable to the City’s Urban Forester. Such
qualifications shall be based on a combination of college degree, licensure and
experience.
Urban Forestry: The management of naturally occurring and planted trees and
associated plants in urban areas.
Exhibit 5
Page 5 of 12
2. Purpose and Intent.
The City’s Comprehensive Plan identifies the importance o f environmental
management, while allowing reasonable and responsible development of land
within the City. Towar ds this end, the purpose of these regulations is to
promote the preservation and expansi on of tree canopy, facilit ate site design
and construction that contri butes to the long term viab ility of existing trees,
and to establish a process to manage the removal of tree canopy. Further, it is
the purpose of this Subchapter to achieve the following broader objectives:
a. Protect trees and promote the ecol ogical, environmental and aesthetic
values of the City;
b. Maintain and enhance a positiv e image of the City through the
preservation, mitigation and planting of trees;
c. Promote the preservation of the remnants of the Cross Timbers Forest;
d. Prevent the untimely and indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees;
e. Provide for a permitting and enforcement procedure; and
f. Preserve the public health, safety, and general welfare of citizens.
3. Applicability
a. This Subchapter shall apply to all of the following property:
i. Non-governmental property that is located within the City limits unless
it is considered an agricultural ope ration under Tex. Agric. Code Sec.
251.002(1), as amended, and has continued agricultural operations for
a period of one year or more prio r to development and has not been
actively marketed for a nonagricultura l use within two years prior to
development;
ii. Governmental property that is located within the City limits unless the
property is as follows:
a. City Airport;
b. Municipal Solid Waste Facilities;
c. Any development or Capital Improvement Project awarded prior
to November 2004; or
d. Public utilities an d infrastructure constructed during new
development but not reconstruction must comply with street tree
requirements only.
b. Exempt Trees are not subject to these requirements.
Exhibit 5
Page 6 of 12
c. To the extent that there is a conflict between this Subchapter and any other
City Code of Ordinances or approved plans or regulations, the m ore
restrictive requirement shall apply that preserves the largest square footage
of tree canopy.
4. Preservation Requirements and Incentives
a. Preservation Requirements.
i. A developer must preserve a minimum of thirty percent (30%) of the
square footage of the pre-deve lopment tree canopy on all property
regulated by this Subchapter. This square footage shall be the
“preserved tree canopy.”
ii. A developer must preserve a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the
square footage of the pre-development tree canopy on all property used
for new agricu ltural activity. This square f ootage shall be the
“preserved tree canopy” for that limited purpose.
iii. On property curren tly used f or agricultural activity but has a n
application for development filed, the tree can opy amount will be
determined by using aeria l images from the last twenty-f our (24)
months prior to the application.
iv. A developer must submit a Tree Survey and a Tree Preservation Plan
to the City prior to dev elopment of a lot or p arcel regulated by this
Subchapter. The percentage relating to preservation stated within this
section must be based on the initial Tree Survey. Any s ubsequent
redevelopment of property must preserve the minimum percentage of
square footage of the predevelopm ent tree canopy as indicated by the
initial tree survey.
v. A notation must be placed on the Fi nal Plat, Site Plan and Building
Permit identifying the square foot age of the predevelop ment tree
canopy and the m inimum square footage of tree canopy to preserve
based on the percentage stated within this section. The notation shall
limit any future unauthorized land di sturbing activity or construction
that would impact and/or damage the tree(s) to be preserved.
b. Preservation Incentives:
i. Credit for Preserved Tree Canopy.
The preserved tree canopy may be counted towards the total landscape
canopy requirement outlined in Sec. 35.13.7. B. A developer m ay
receive credits for preserved Tree Canopy. For Heritage Trees, two
square feet of credits will be giv en for every square f oot of Tree
Canopy preserved (1:2). For Protected Trees, one square foot of credit
will be given for every square foot of Tree Canopy preserved (1:1).
ii. Parking Lot Design.
The Director of Development Services or designee may allow parking
lot design and parking lot landscapi ng requirements to vary from
adopted design standards to preserve existing trees.
Exhibit 5
Page 7 of 12
5. Mitigation.
If preservation cannot be reasonably achieved, then mitigation may be
provided through replanting or pa yment into the Tree F und. The
following mitigation standards shall apply:
i. Up to ten percent (10%) of the pre-development Tree Canopy square
footage of Heritage or Protected trees required to be preserved may be
removed if the removal is mitigated by the replanting of new trees at a
1:6 ratio or by payment into the Tr ee Fund. The ratio will require six
new Trees to be planted for every one Tree’s worth of canopy removed
at a square footage rate, determined by the City’s Site Design Criteria
Manual. The required Tree Fund payment shall be based on the square
footage of canopy removed.
ii. Mitigation of Tree Canopy square footage may be counted towards the
total landscape canopy requirement at a 1:1 ratio..
iii. Each mitigation tree must be a minimum of 3 caliper inches measured
6 inches above grade and meet the standards of the City’s Tree Care
criteria as set forth in the Site Design Criteria Manual. Any Tree that
does not meet these standards m ay be rejected by the City ’s Urban
Forester.
iv. Exception: Removal of trees to f acilitate installation of gas wells
(including roads, pad sites, and gathering lines), gas transmission lines,
or to facilitate installation of communications infrastructure or utilities
which do not otherwise meet this code’s definition of a Public Utility,
the following mitigation standard shall apply instead, without regard to
tree designation. The applicant shall mitigate the removal by paying
the established tree mitigation fee for thirty-five percent (35%) of the
total square footage of c anopy removed. Fees must be paid prior to
Tree removal, pursuant to the p rocedures established by S ubsection
35.13.7.A.6.c.v.
v. Tree Fund.
a. The City shall administer the Tree Fund. Funds shall be used
to purchase, plant, and maintain trees; to preserve wooded
property remaining in a natu ralistic state in perpetuity; to
perform and m aintain a City-wide tree inventory; and to
educate citizens and developers on the preservation, care,
maintenance, benefits and value of trees within the City of
Denton. The Tree Fund may also be used to support programs
for the public purpose of increasing the tree canopy within
the City of Denton as approved by City Council.
b. Proceeds from the Tree Fund shall not be used to m eet any
requirements for preservation, mitigation, landscaping,
Exhibit 5
Page 8 of 12
buffering, street-scaping, or similar requirements in the
Denton Development Code and the Denton Code of
Ordinances.
c. The applicant shall pay the f ees established by City Council
and published in the Developm ent Review Fee Schedule in
the Application Criteria Manual, which m ay from time to
time be amended.
d. The applicant must pay the fees contributed to the Tree Fund
prior to the issuance of a Gas Well Development Plat or Gas
Well Site Plan or the filing of a Final Pla t in the Denton
County Clerk’s Office for all single-fam ily residential
subdivisions. Clearing and Gr ading permit, Clearing and
Grubbing permit or Building perm it on all commercial,
industrial, or Multi-Family residential developments will not
be issued prior to this payment..
e. Voluntary contributions for tree planting may be placed in the
Tree Fund.
6. Removal of Trees.
a. Tree Removal Permit Required
i. Any person must obtain a Tree Remova l Permit from the City prior to
the removal of any Tree in the City.
ii. A Tree Removal Permit is not required for Exempt Trees listed on the
exempt tree list in the Site Design Criteria Manual.
iii. A Tree Removal Permit is no t required for Trees less than five (5)
inches DBH, that are located on lots or parcels 2 acres or less where an
occupied single-family or two-family dwelling exists.
b. Tree Removal Permit Review and Approval Process.
i. A developer m ust submit a com plete application along with the
applicable fees as determined by the most recent fee ordinance.
ii. A developer must submit a Tree Survey and Tree Preservation Plan, if
required as stated herein, with th e Tree Removal Permit application,
and the Tree Survey or Tree Preser vation Plan must be prepared or
certified by a Qualified Tree Professional.
iii. A Tree Removal Permit is valid for one hundred eighty (180) days, or
for the duration of a Building Permit, Site Plan, Clearing and Grading
Permit, Clear and Grubbing Permit, or Gas Well Development Plat or
Gas Well Site Plan iss ued in conjunction with the Tree Rem oval
Permit, whichever is longer.
iv. After the Tree Removal Permit is i ssued, the developer must obtain a
Tree Protection Sign from the City and post it, at a ny location, on the
lot or parcel subject to this Subchapter, which is designated in the Tree
Removal Permit. The sign shall be in the form approved by the City’s
Urban Forester and as described in the Site Design Criteria Manual.
Exhibit 5
Page 9 of 12
c. Administrative Remedy
i. Any person who removes or intentionally destroys a Tree preserved or
planted under Subchapter 35.13.7., while the Tree is alive, shall
mitigate each Tree at two (2) times the rate stated in Subchapte r
35.13.7. Each replacement Tree shall meet the standards as stated in
this Section and as approved by the City’s Urban Forester.
ii. Each tree preserved under Subchapter 35.13.7 that dies within three (3)
years of approval shall be mitigated by the property owner as stated in
Subchapter 35.13.7.
iii. Each tree planted under Subchapter 35.13.7 that dies shall be replanted
with an approved tree in the appropriate planting season by the property
owner.
iv. These mitigation remedies are in addition to the en forcement
provisions of Sec. 9 of this Subchapter.
v. Each replacement Tree m ust be a m inimum of 3 caliper inch es
measured 6 inches above grade and m eet the standards as set forth in
the Site Design Criteria Manual. Any Tree that does not m eet these
standards may be rejected by the City’s Urban Forester or designee.
7. Tree Preservation Plan and Amendments.
a. The Tree Preservation Plan Criteria.
i. The Tree Preservation P lan shall consist of a tree survey and such
information required by the item s on the Tree Preservation Plan
Checklist, as m aintained for inspection in the Depa rtment of
Development Services during regular business hours.
ii. The City’s Urban Forester, unde r the direction of the Director of
Development Services, must review the Tree Preservation Plan or any
amendments thereto in order to determine whether it complies with the
standards of this Subchapter, the Denton Development Code, and other
applicable laws.
b. Administrative Modification.
The City’s Urban Forester, with approval of the Director of
Development Services, has the authority to approve amendments to a
Tree Preservation Plan so long as it meets the purpose and intent of this
Ordinance and applicant has made a good faith effort to comply with
this Ordinance.
c. Appeal.
The approval or denial of a Tree Pr eservation Plan by the City’s Urban
Forester, under the Director of Deve lopment Services, is an official
determination that may be appealed by the app licant to the Zoning
Board of Adjustm ent pursuant to Subsection 35.3.6 of the Denton
Development Code as contemplated by Sec. 211.009 of the Texas Local
Government Code, or subsequent amendments thereto.
Exhibit 5
Page 10 of 12
8. Tree Protection Requirements during Construction.
i. A Tree Protection P lan must be sub mitted with the Pre liminary Plat,
Final Plat, Site Plan or Building Permit application, and must be prepared
or certified by a Qualified Tree Professional.
ii. Tree protection standards shall be in accordance with the standards in the
City’s Tree Care Criteria Manual, as amended from time to time and as
required by the City’s Urban Forester and with the Site Design Criteria
Manual.
iii. The developer must place a Tree P rotection Barrier around the entire
Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) as stated in the Site Design Criteria Manual
and as approved by the City’s Urban Forester.
iv. The developer must not engage in construction activities until the City’s
Urban Forester v erifies the instal lation of a T ree Protection Barrier
around the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ ) for all trees designated for
preservation.
9. Enforcement
i. The City’s Urban Forester and the Building Official shall have the
authority to place a stop work order on any activity involving the removal
of any Heritage or Protected Tree, or on any activity that may otherwise
endanger any Tree contrary to the provisions of Subchapter 35.13.7 and
applicable criteria manuals. The Building Official may deny all permits
and Certificates of Occ upancy for any site which is not in com pliance
with Subchapter 35.13.7 and applicable Criteria Manuals. For the
purposes of enforcement, Section 35.1.10 of the Denton Development
Code is incorporated by reference herein, and as amended in the future.
ii. If a person removes, cuts down, tops, destroys or moves, or assists in the
removal, cutting down, topping, d estroying or moving, or causes the
removal, cutting down, topping, destroying, or moving of a Tree without
complying with the requirements of th is subsection, or owns part or all
of the land where the violation occu rs, this person shall be guilty, upon
conviction, of a misdemeanor.
iii. If a person perfor ms grading on, or m oves any heavy-duty vehicles
specially designed for executing construction tasks on, any undeveloped
property that contains Tr ees subject to this S ubchapter without first
obtaining a Tree Re moval Permit, this person shall be guilty, upon
conviction, of a misdemeanor.
Exhibit 5
Page 11 of 12
iv. If a person causes the death of a Tree that is preserved or planted in
compliance with this Subchapter through neglect of the Tree, this person
shall be guilty, upon conviction, of a misdemeanor.
v. The City’s Urban Forester and the Building Official m ay go on any
property subject to this Section, with or without notice to the owner, for
the purposes of verifying compliance with this Section or with any open
building permit.
vi. Each tree damaged, removed, cut down, topped, destroyed, or moved in
violation of Subchapter 35.13.7 shall c onstitute a distin ct and separate
offense.
vii. It shall be an affirmative defense to prosecution under this Section that
the injury or destruction of a Tree was caused by natural disasters or
other acts of God, including but not lim ited to tornadoes, straight-line
winds, ice storms, fire, floods, hail, or lightning strikes.
viii. It shall be an affirmative defense to prosecution under this Section that
the injury or destruction of a Tree was caused by the independent
unauthorized actions of third partie s who are not a developer of the
property subject to this Section.
SECTION 3. Any person, firm, partnership or corporation violating any provision of this
ordinance shall, upon conviction, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a
fine in a sum not exceeding $500.00 for each offense. Each day that a provision of this ordinance
is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense.
SECTION 4. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or
circumstance is held invalid by an y court, such invalidity shall no t affect the validity of other
provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable.
SECTION 5. In com pliance with Section 2.09(c) of the Denton Charter, this ordinance
shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, a nd the City Secretary is
hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-
Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the
date of its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the _______ day of _______________________, 2016.
______________________________
CHRIS WATTS, MAYOR
Exhibit 5
Page 12 of 12
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY: __________________________________
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY
BY: __________________________________
Exhibit 5
Date: December 22, 2017 Report No. 2017-092
INFORMAL STAFF REPORT
TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT:
2017 DME Transmission Cost of Service (TCOS) Rate Filing
BACKGROUND:
Consistent with past practice, staff is finalizing the 2017 TCOS rate filing for submittal prior to
year-end with the Public Utility Commission of Texas. The filing contains supporting information
about Denton Municipal Electric’s transmission investments made on behalf of the ERCOT over
the 12 month period ending June 30, 2017. It enables DME to recover transmission investment
costs made during this period ($13,034,664) plus a nominal rate of return. The filing will be made
by the City’s outside legal (the Lloyd Gosslink Law Firm) who has handled this annual filing since
2003.
In the upcoming budget process, staff will be providing the City Council with additional
information regarding the costs and revenues related to the transmission system for DME, but we
wanted to provide the City Council with a copy of the rate filing in advance.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Denton Municipal Electric Application for Interim Update of Wholesale Transmission Rates and
Supporting Testimony (Nalepa and Langley)
STAFF CONTACT:
George F. Morrow, General Manager -- DME
940-349-8487
george.morrow@cityofdenton.com
DRAFT — 7489597
12/15/2017 12:46 PM
DOCKET NO.
APPLICATION OF DENTON
MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC FOR
INTERIM UPDATE OF
WHOLESALE TRANSMISSION
RATES PURSUANT TO
16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 25.192(h)
§
§
§
§
§
§
BEFORE THE
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
OF TEXAS
DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC APPLICATION FOR
INTERIM UPDATE OF WHOLESALE TRANSMISSION RATES
TO THE HONORABLE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF TEXAS:
The City of Denton, operating its municipally-owned utility under the name of Denton
Municipal Electric Utility (DME), files its Application for Interim Update of Wholesale
Transmission Rates pursuant to 16 Tex. Admin. Code § 25.192(h) (TAC), and in support of this
filing would respectfully show the following:
I. BACKGROUND AND AUTHORITY
In this docket, DME seeks an interim revision to its previously approved transmission
cost of service (TCOS) and wholesale transmission rate pursuant to, and consistent with, th e
requirements of the Public Utility Commission of Texas (Commission), 16 TAC § 25.192(h), and
the Filing Requirements for Interim Update of Wholesale Transmission Rates (the Interim TCOS
Filing Package).
Pursuant to 16 TAC § 25.192(h), each transmission service provider (TSP) in the ERCOT
region may on an annual basis update its transmission rates to reflect changes in its invested
capital. If the TSP elects to update its transmission rates, the new rates shall reflect the addition
and retirement of transmission facilities and include appropriate depreciation, federal income tax
and other associated taxes, and the Commission-allowed rate of return on such facilities as well
as changes in loads. Under 16 TAC § 25.192(h)(2), an interim update of transmission rates is
subject to reconciliation at the next complete review of the TSP’s transmission cost of service.
The Commission shall review whether the costs of transmission plant additions are reasonable
and necessary at that time. Thus, this proceeding to update wholesale transmission rates is not
intended to determine the reasonableness of these costs.
DME Application 2
II. DME’S FILING
Together with this Application, DME has filed the Direct Testimony of Bryan Langley,
the Direct Testimony of Karl Nalepa, and the Interim TCOS Filing Package Schedules and
Workpapers. As discussed in Section V. below, DME’s notice is attached as Attachment A.
III. COSTS INCLUDED IN DME’S INTERIM TCOS UPDATE
DME’s Application compares the actual June 30, 2017 transmission net plant balances,
and additional projects completed and energized but not yet classified, with the net plant
balances established in Docket No. 46348, Application of Denton Municipal Electric for Interim
Update of Wholesale Transmission Rates Pursuant to P.U.C. Subst. R. 25.192(h). The difference
between these two balances provides the increase in the rate base for DME in this Application.
IV. REQUESTED RELIEF
The requested increase in invested capital in this filing is $44,431,406. The
corresponding total annual wholesale transmission revenue requirement is $39,221,665, which
represents an increase of $13,034,664. The proposed interim revenue requirement increase
represents a 49.7753% increase in DME’s wholesale transmission revenue requirement. DME
further requests that by expedited process, the Commission approve an interim wholesale
transmission rate of $579.42895 per megawatt ($0.579429 per kilowatt). To facilitate this relief,
DME undertakes to provide any information pertinent to the processing of this Application by
prompt response to formal or informal Commission Staff data requests. For formal and statutory
purposes, DME designates the effective date for these proposed rate changes as January XX,
2018, which is 35 days after the filing of this Application.
V. NOTICE AND PROCESSING
Any consideration or determination of whether the costs included in DME’s Application
are reasonable and necessary is specifically removed from this proceeding by 16 TAC
§ 25.192(h)(2). Because such determinations are ultimately reserved for a later proceeding, the
issues in this docket are very limited and it should be processed expeditiously.
Within a reasonable period of time after the filing of this Application, DME will provide
written notice pursuant to 16 TAC § 25.192(4)(A) to all parties in the last interim update of
DME Application 3
DME’s TCOS (Docket No. 463481) and all of the distribution service providers listed in Docket
No. 46604, Commission Staff’s Application to Set 2017 Wholesale Transmission Service
Charges for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas in the form attached as Attachment “A.”
Upon completion of the notice described above, DME will file an affidavit attesting to the
provision of such notice within a reasonable time and by such date as may be established by the
presiding officer.
Pursuant to 16 TAC § 25.192(h)(4)(A), the intervention deadline is 21 days from the date
service of notice is completed.
To the extent the relief requested herein is contested in a manner that would prevent the
expedited implementation of DME’s request, DME respectfully requests an opportunity for
hearing, pursuant to 16 TAC § 22.125(c), to establish that good cause exists for the Commission
to grant DME interim relief. In such event, DME further requests expedited treatment of this
petition so as to permit the Commission to issue a final order expeditiously.
VI. PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, DME respectfully requests that the
Commission approve DME’s Application and expeditiously order an interim adjustment to
DME’s annual revenue requirement to $39,221,665, and approve an interim wholesale
transmission rate of $0.579429 per kilowatt. Additionally, DME requests all other and further
relief, general or special, at law or in equity, to which DME may show itself to be justly entitled.
1 Application of Denton Municipal Electric for Interim Update of Wholesale Transmission Rates
Pursuant to 16 Tex. Admin. Code § 25.192(h), Docket No. 46348, Order (Sept. 16, 2016).
DME Application 4
Respectfully submitted,
LLOYD, GOSSELINK,
ROCHELLE & TOWNSEND, P.C.
816 Congress Avenue, Suite 1900
Austin, Texas 78701
Telephone: (512) 322-5830
Facsimile: (512) 472-0532
LAMBETH TOWNSEND
State Bar No. 20167500
WILLIAM A. FAULK, III
State Bar No. 24075674
ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF DENTON
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Lambeth Townsend, attorney, certify that a copy of the Notice of Rate Change Request
was served on all parties in Docket No. 46348 and all distribution service providers listed in
Docket No. 46604, as listed on Attachment B hereto, on this the day of December, 2017,
the following manner: hand delivered, e-mailed, sent via facsimile, or mailed by U.S. First Class
Mail.
LAMBETH TOWNSEND
1060/43/7489597
DRAFT — 7496940
12/12/2017 3:25 PM
DOCKET NO.
APPLICATION OF DENTON
MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC FOR INTERIM
UPDATE OF WHOLESALE
TRANSMISSION RATES PURSUANT
TO 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 25.192(h)
§
§
§
§
§
BEFORE THE
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
OF TEXAS
DIRECT TESTIMONY
OF
KARL J. NALEPA
ON BEHALF OF
DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC
DECEMBER , 2017
DIRECT TESTIMONY 2 KARL J. NALEPA
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF
KARL J. NALEPA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS ...................................................................3
II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE .....................................................................................................4
III. COST OF SERVICE CALCULATIONS ............................................................................6
IV. REVENUE REQUIREMENT INCREASE .........................................................................7
V. UPDATED WHOLESALE TRANSMISSION RATE .......................................................9
VI. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................10
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A Statement of Qualifications
Attachment B Previously Filed Testimony
Attachment C Wholesale Transmission Service Tariff
SCHEDULES SPONSORED:
Schedule A Updated Wholesale Transmission Cost of Service
Schedule B Updated Wholesale Transmission Rate Base
Schedule B-1 Updated Wholesale Transmission Plant
Schedule B-5 Updated Wholesale Transmission Accumulated Depreciation
Schedule E-1 Updated Wholesale Transmission Depreciation Expense
WORKPAPERS SPONSORED:
WP / A-1 Notice of Approval (Docket No. 46348)
WP / A-2 Schedule A: Transmission Cost of Service (Docket No. 46348)
WP / B Schedule B: Summary of Rate Base Allocation (Docket No. 46348)
WP / B-1 Schedule B-1: Original Cost of Utility Plant (Docket No. 46348)
WP / B-5 Schedule B-5: Accumulated Depreciation (Docket No. 46348)
WP / E-1 Schedule E-1: Depreciation Expense (Docket No. 46348)
DIRECT TESTIMONY 3 KARL J. NALEPA
DOCKET NO.
APPLICATION OF DENTON
MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC FOR INTERIM
UPDATE OF WHOLESALE
TRANSMISSION RATES PURSUANT
TO 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 25.192(h)
§
§
§
§
§
BEFORE THE
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
OF TEXAS
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF
KARL J. NALEPA
I. INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS 1
Q. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, OCCUPATION, AND BUSINESS ADDRESS. 2
A. My name is Karl J. Nalepa. I am the President of ReSolved Energy Consulting, LLC, 3
an independent utility consulting company. My business address is 11044 Research 4
Blvd., Suite A-420, Austin, Texas 78759. 5
Q. ON WHOSE BEHALF ARE YOU PRESENTING TESTIMONY IN THIS 6
PROCEEDING? 7
A. I am presenting testimony on behalf of the City of Denton operating its municipally-8
owned utility under the name of Denton Municipal Electric Utility (“DME”). 9
Q. PLEASE OUTLINE YOUR EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL 10
BACKGROUND. 11
A. I hold a Bachelor of Science degree in Mineral Economics and a Master of Science 12
degree in Petroleum Engineering, and am a certified mediator. I have been a partner 13
in ReSolved Energy Consulting since July 2011, but joined R.J. Covington 14
Consulting, its predecessor firm, in June 2003. Before that, I served for more than 15
five years as an Assistant Director with the Texas Railroad Commission (“RRC”). In 16
that position, I was responsible for overseeing the economic regulation of natural gas 17
utilities in Texas. Prior to that, I spent five years with two different consulting firms, 18
DIRECT TESTIMONY 4 KARL J. NALEPA
providing expert advice regarding a broad range of electric and natural gas industry 1
issues. I also served four years as a Fuels Analyst with the Public Utility Commission 2
of Texas (“Commission”). My professional career began with eight years in the 3
reservoir engineering department of an exploration company affiliated with a major 4
interstate pipeline company. My Statement of Qualifications is included as 5
Attachment A. 6
Q. HAVE YOU PREVIOUSLY TESTIFIED BEFORE THIS COMMISSION? 7
A. Yes, I have testified many times before both the Commission and the RRC on a 8
variety of regulatory issues. A summary of my previously filed testimony is provided 9
in Attachment B. In addition, I supervised the RRC staff in proceedings before the 10
RRC and served as a Technical Rate Examiner on behalf of the RRC. I have also 11
provided analysis and recommendations in numerous city-level regulatory 12
proceedings that resulted in settlements without written testimony. 13
II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE 14
Q. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR TESTIMONY IN THIS PROCEEDING? 15
A. The purpose of my testimony is to support the interim update of DME’s wholesale 16
transmission service rate. DME has added transmission plant since its last interim 17
cost of service filing, Application of Denton Municipal Electric for Interim Update of 18
Wholesale Transmission Rates Pursuant to P.U.C. SUBST. R. § 25.192(h), Docket No. 19
46348. As set forth in the testimony of Bryan Langley filed with this application, the 20
transmission facilities included in this filing are in service and used and useful for 21
providing transmission service. 22
I adopt and support the schedules and workpapers included in this filing, 23
which are consistent with the Filing Requirements for Interim Update of Wholesale 24
DIRECT TESTIMONY 5 KARL J. NALEPA
Transmission Rates (“Interim TCOS Rate Filing Package”) and 16 TAC § 25.192(h). 1
Section 25.192(h)(1) states that a transmission service provider “may apply to update 2
its transmission rates on an interim basis not more than once per calendar year to 3
reflect changes in its invested capital.” Under the rule, “the new rates shall reflect the 4
addition and retirement of transmission facilities and include appropriate 5
depreciation, federal income tax and other associated taxes, and the commission-6
authorized rate of return on such facilities as well as changes in loads.” 7
Q. WHEN DID DME LAST CHANGE ITS RATES? 8
A. DME’s last interim rate case filing, Docket No. 46348, was filed on September 16, 9
2016 and was based on fiscal year plant balances as of June 30, 2016. The 10
Commission’s Notice of Approval dated November 10, 2016 established the current 11
Transmission Cost of Service (“TCOS”) rate. 12
Q. WERE THE SCHEDULES AND WORKPAPERS INCLUDED IN THIS 13
FILING PREPARED EITHER BY YOU OR UNDER YOUR DIRECTION? 14
A. Yes, the schedules and workpapers that I sponsor in this filing were prepared by me 15
or under my supervision. 16
Q. DOES THIS FILING COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE 17
COMMISSION’S RULES AND THE INTERIM TRANSMISSION COST OF 18
SERVICE RATE FILING PACKAGE INSTRUCTIONS? 19
A. Yes, where applicable, I have followed the Interim TCOS Rate Filing Package. In 20
cases where the rate filing package instructions did not address a particular cost of 21
service item or where any inconsistency seemed to exist, I relied on the 22
Commission’s rules. The filing package instructions do not track the rule in its 23
DIRECT TESTIMONY 6 KARL J. NALEPA
entirety. For example, the rate filing package instructions do not mention property 1
taxes or payments in lieu of taxes associated with the new plant. In cases of this 2
nature, I have followed the rule and adjusted my schedules accordingly. 3
Q. WHAT INTERIM INCREASE IS DME REQUESTING? 4
A. DME is requesting an annual increase in wholesale transmission revenue of 5
$13,034,664. This increase includes depreciation expense and return on DME’s net 6
investment in transmission assets added since June 30, 2016. The return component 7
is $12,461,833, as shown on Schedule B of the rate filing package. 8
III. COST OF SERVICE CALCULATIONS 9
Q. WHAT COSTS ARE INCLUDED IN THIS INTERIM UPDATE? 10
A. Section 25.192(h)(1) states that “the new rates shall reflect the addition and 11
retirement of transmission facilities and include appropriate depreciation, federal 12
income tax and other associated taxes, and the commission-authorized rate of return 13
on such facilities.” Pursuant to this rule, DME includes calculations for additions and 14
retirements, and rate of return. As a municipal utility, DME is not subject to federal 15
income taxes. 16
Q. PLEASE EXPLAIN DME’S ADDITIONAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT 17
INCLUDED IN THIS INTERIM UPDATE. 18
A. This interim update includes the capital investments for in-service transmission 19
facilities added since Docket No. 46348. Bryan Langley’s Direct Testimony in this 20
application describes the transmission projects comprising the additional capital 21
investment through test year ending June 30, 2017, and additional projects completed 22
and energized but not yet classified. DME also included all transmission facility 23
retirements and changes in accumulated depreciation for the same time period. 24
DIRECT TESTIMONY 7 KARL J. NALEPA
This results in the netting of plant additions and retirements in FERC accounts 1
350–359 through June 30, 2017, included in this interim update. The transmission net 2
plant value for additions and retirements is summarized on Schedule B-1 by FERC 3
account for the entire period. The transmission plant accumulated depreciation is 4
summarized on Schedule B-5 by FERC account for the entire period. Annual 5
depreciation expense is summarized on Schedule E-1 by FERC account for the entire 6
period. DME’s incremental transmission investment is detailed on Attachments BL-1 7
and BL-2 to the Direct Testimony of Bryan Langley. 8
IV. REVENUE REQUIREMENT INCREASE 9
Q. WHAT IS THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT INCREASE THAT RESULTS 10
FROM DME’S ADDITIONS TO TRANSMISSION PLANT? 11
A. The total interim TCOS increase that DME is requesting is $13,034,664. This 12
increase is comprised of: 13
Depreciation and Amortization $ 572,831 14
Return on Rate Base 12,461,833 15
$ 13,034,664 16
Q. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE CALCULATION OF DEPRECIATION EXPENSE 17
ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRANSMISSION FACILITIES INCLUDED IN 18
SCHEDULE E OF THIS FILING. 19
A. Annual depreciation expense is computed on the transmission plant in service on 20
June 30, 2017 using the depreciation rates approved in Application of Denton 21
Municipal Electric to Change Rates for Wholesale Transmission Service, Docket No. 22
30358, Final Order (June 15, 2005), DME’s last full transmission cost of service case 23
before this Commission. The resulting depreciation expense represents a $572,831 24
DIRECT TESTIMONY 8 KARL J. NALEPA
increase over the amount included in DME’s current wholesale transmission rate, as 1
shown on Schedule E-1. 2
Q. DOES THE DEPRECIATION EXPENSE COMPUTED USING THE 3
DEPRECIATION RATES APPROVED IN DOCKET NO. 30358 AGREE 4
WITH THE DME’S BOOKS AND RECORDS? 5
A. Yes, it does. 6
Q. PLEASE EXPLAIN DME’S RATE OF RETURN USED IN THIS INTERIM 7
UPDATE. 8
A. DME used a derived rate of return of 28.0474%. As determined in Docket No. 9
30358, DME’s annual transmission revenue requirement was calculated using the 10
cash flow methodology, an acceptable method recognized in the NON-IOU TCOS 11
Rate Filing Package. In Docket No. 30358, the Commission authorized transmission-12
related Capital Requirements in the amount of $2,939,476 which, when divided by 13
the transmission rate base of $10,480,403, imputes a rate of return on rate base of 14
28.0474%. 15
As shown on Schedule B in this filing, using this rate of return, DME’s return 16
on its rate base updated to include net transmission plant additions as of June 30, 17
2017, plus energized construction completed but not yet classified plant through 18
June 30, 2017, is $12,461,833 higher than the return established in DME’s last 19
interim increase in Docket No. 46348. 20
DIRECT TESTIMONY 9 KARL J. NALEPA
Q. HAS DME INCLUDED CHANGES TO FEDERAL INCOME TAX AND 1
OTHER ASSOCIATED TAXES IN THIS FILING? 2
A. As a municipal utility, DME does not pay federal income taxes. However, DME is 3
required to make payments in lieu of taxes. This transfer is analogous to what an 4
investor-owned utility would pay in franchise fees and property taxes. In its TCOS 5
filing in Docket No. 30358, DME included payments in lieu of taxes, referred to as 6
Return On Investment by DME, in its cash flow method.1 The cash flow method 7
determined DME’s capital requirements in Docket No. 30358, which, when divided 8
by rate base, provided the return on rate base utilized in this interim TCOS filing. 9
Therefore, the payments in lieu of taxes are included in this interim TCOS filing as a 10
component of DME’s capital requirements. 11
V. UPDATED WHOLESALE TRANSMISSION RATE 12
Q. HOW DID YOU DETERMINE DME’S UPDATED WHOLESALE 13
TRANSMISSION SERVICE RATE? 14
A. As I previously testified, DME’s revenue requirement has increased by $13,034,664 15
to a total interim revenue requirement of $39,221,665. Per § 25.192(b)(1), this 16
amount is then divided by the most recent average four coincident peak (“4-CP”) in 17
the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (“ERCOT”) to calculate the new DME 18
wholesale transmission service rate. 19
1 Reference Docket No. 30358, Workpaper C-3.6.
DIRECT TESTIMONY 10 KARL J. NALEPA
Q. WHAT MEGAWATT BILLING UNITS DID YOU USE IN THIS FILING’S 1
TRANSMISSION RATE CALCULATIONS? 2
A. This proposed transmission rate update uses 67,690.2056 MW, which is the 2016 3
average 4-CP established by the Commission in Docket No. 46604, Commission 4
Staff’s Application to Set 2017 Wholesale Transmission Service Charges for the 5
Electric Reliability Council of Texas. This is the most recent average 4-CP for 6
ERCOT. 7
Q. WHAT TRANSMISSION RATE WILL DME BILL AND COLLECT UPON 8
FINAL APPROVAL OF THIS INTERIM CAPITAL ADDITION FILING? 9
A. DME will bill and collect an annual rate of $579.42895 per MW upon approval of a 10
final order in this proceeding. 11
Q. WHAT IS THE PROPOSED EFFECTIVE DATE FOR THE REQUESTED 12
INTERIM WHOLESALE TRANSMISSION RATE? 13
A. DME proposes that this interim wholesale transmission rate become effective on 14
January XX, 2018. 15
VI. CONCLUSION 16
Q. PLEASE SUMMARIZE YOUR TESTIMONY. 17
A. DME has followed 16 TAC § 25.192 and the Interim TCOS Rate Filing Package 18
instructions in developing its updated wholesale transmission service revenue 19
requirement. The rate base included in DME’s interim TCOS update is used and 20
useful in providing electric service. The information contained in the Interim TCOS 21
Rate Filing Package schedules is true and correct. DME has correctly calculated its 22
new interim TCOS revenue requirement. DME’s proposed wholesale transmission 23
service rate of $579.42895 per MW has been calculated correctly. The Commission 24
DIRECT TESTIMONY 11 KARL J. NALEPA
should approve DME’s interim TCOS update as proposed and make it effective no 1
later than January XX, 2018. 2
Q. DOES THIS CONCLUDE YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY? 3
A. Yes, it does. 4
DIRECT TESTIMONY 12 KARL NALEPA
ATTACHMENT A
Statement of Qualifications
DIRECT TESTIMONY 13 KARL NALEPA
KARL J. NALEPA
Mr. Nalepa is an energy economist with more than 35 years of private and public sector experience
in the electric and natural gas industries. He has extensive experience analyzing utility rate filings
and resource plans with particular focus on fuel and power supply requirements, quality of fuel
supply management, and reasonableness of energy costs. Mr. Nalepa developed peak demand and
energy forecasts for municipal and electric cooperative utilities and has forecast the price of natural
gas in ratemaking and resource plan evaluations. He led a management and performance review of
the Texas Public Utility Commission, and has conducted performance reviews and valuation
studies of a number of municipal utility systems. Mr. Nalepa previously directed the Railroad
Commission of Texas’ Regulatory Analysis & Policy Section, with responsibility for preparing
timely natural gas industry analysis, managing ratemaking proceedings, mediating informal
complaints, and overseeing consumer complaint resolution. He has prepared and defended expert
testimony in both administrative and civil proceedings, and has served as a technical examiner in
natural gas rate proceedings.
EDUCATION
1998 Certificate of Mediation
Dispute Resolution Center, Austin
1989 NARUC Regulatory Studies Program
Michigan State University
1988 M.S. - Petroleum Engineering
University of Houston
1980 B.S. - Mineral Economics
Pennsylvania State University
PROFESSIONAL HISTORY
2003 - ReSolved Energy Consulting, LLC
President and Managing Director
1997 – 2003 Railroad Commission of Texas
Asst. Director, Regulatory Analysis & Policy
1995 – 1997 Karl J. Nalepa Consulting
Principal
1992 – 1995 Resource Management International, Inc.
Supervising Consultant
1988 – 1992 Public Utility Commission of Texas
Fuels Analyst
1980 – 1988 Transco Exploration Company
Reservoir and Evaluation Engineer
DIRECT TESTIMONY 14 KARL NALEPA
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
Regulatory Analysis
Electric Power: Analyzed electric utility rate, certification, and resource forecast filings. Assessed
the quality of fuel supply management, and reasonableness of costs recovered from ratepayers.
Projected the cost of fuel and purchased power. Estimated the impact of environmental costs on
utility resource selection. Participated in regulatory rulemaking activities. Provided expert staff
testimony in a number of proceedings before the Texas Public Utility Commission.
As consultant, represent interests of municipal clients intervening in large utility rate proceedings
through analysis of filings and presentation of testimony before the Public Utility Commission.
Also assist municipal utilities in preparing and defending requests to change rates and other
regulatory matters before the Public Utility Commission.
Natural Gas: Directed the economic regulation of gas utilities in Texas for the Railroad
Commission of Texas. Responsible for monitoring, analyzing and reporting on conditions and
events in the natural gas industry. Managed Commission staff representing the public interest in
contested rate proceedings before the Railroad Commission, and acted as technical examiner on
behalf of the Commission. Mediated informal disputes between industry participants and directed
handling of customer billing and service complaints. Oversaw utility compliance filings and staff
rulemaking initiatives. Served as a policy advisor to the Commissioners.
As consultant, represent interests of municipal clients intervening in large utility rate proceedings
through analysis of filings and presentation of testimony before the cities and Railroad
Commission. Also assist small utilities in preparing and defending requests to change rates and
other regulatory matters before the Railroad Commission.
Litigation Support
Retained to support litigation in natural gas contract disputes. Analyzed the results of contract
negotiations and competitiveness of gas supply proposals considering gas market conditions
contemporaneous with the period reviewed. Supported litigation related to alleged price
discrimination related to natural gas sales for regulated customers. Provided analysis of regulatory
and accounting issues related to ownership of certain natural gas distribution assets in support of
litigation against a natural gas utility. Supported independent power supplier in binding
arbitration regarding proper interpretation of a natural gas transportation contract. Provided
expert witness testimony in administrative and civil court proceedings.
DIRECT TESTIMONY 15 KARL NALEPA
Utility System Assessment
Led a management and performance review of the Public Utility Commission. Conducted
performance reviews and valuation studies of municipal utility systems. Assessed ability to
compete in the marketplace, and recommended specific actions to improve the competitive
position of the utilities. Provided comprehensive support in the potential sale of a municipal gas
system, including preparation of a valuation study and all activities leading to negotiation of
contract for sale and franchise agreements.
Energy Supply Analysis
Reviewed system requirements and prepared requests for proposals (RFPs) to obtain natural gas
and power supplies for both utility and non-utility clients. Evaluated submittals under alternative
demand and market conditions, and recommended cost-effective supply proposals. Assessed
supply strategies to determine optimum mix of available resources.
Econometric Forecasting
Prepared econometric forecasts of peak demand and energy for municipal and electric cooperative
utilities in support of system planning activities. Developed forecasts at the rate class and substation
levels. Projected price of natural gas by individual supplier for Texas electric and natural gas
utilities to support review of utility resource plans.
Reservoir Engineering
Managed certain reserves for a petroleum exploration and production company in Texas.
Responsible for field surveillance of producing oil and natural gas properties, including reserve
estimation, production forecasting, regulatory reporting, and performance optimization. Performed
evaluations of oil and natural gas exploration prospects in Texas and Louisiana.
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS
Society of Petroleum Engineers
United States Association for Energy Economics
International Association for Energy Economics
DIRECT TESTIMONY 16 KARL NALEPA
SELECT PUBLICATIONS, PRESENTATIONS, AND TESTIMONY
“Summary of the USAEE Central Texas Chapter’s Workshop entitled ‘EPA’s Proposed Clean Power Plan Rules:
Economic Modeling and Effects on the Electric Reliability of Texas Region,’” with Dr. Jay Zarnikau and Mr.
Neil McAndrews, USAEE Dialogue, May 2015
“Public Utility Ratemaking,” EBF 401: Strategic Corporate Finance, The Pennsylvania State University, Sept 2013
“What City Officials Need to Know About the Process of Ratemaking,” ABCs of Energy Workshop, Texas Municipal
League, December 2012
“What You Should Know About Public Utilities,” EBF 401: Strategic Corporate Finance, The Pennsylvania State
University, October 2011
“Natural Gas Markets and the Impact on Electricity Prices in ERCOT,” Texas Coalition of Cities for Fair Utility Issues,
Dallas, October 2008
“Natural Gas Regulatory Policy in Texas,” Hungarian Oil and Gas Policy Business Colloquium, U.S. Trade and
Development Agency, Houston, May 2003
“Railroad Commission Update,” Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants, Austin, April 2003
“Gas Utility Update,” Railroad Commission Regulatory Expo and Open House, October 2002
“Deregulation: A Work in Progress,” Interview by Karen Stidger, Gas Utility Manager, October 2002
“Regulatory Overview: An Industry Perspective,” Southern Gas Association’s Ratemaking Process Seminar, Houston,
February 2001
“Natural Gas Prices Could Get Squeezed,” with Comm. Charles R. Matthews, Natural Gas, December 2000
“Railroad Commission Update,” Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants, Austin, April 2000
“A New Approach to Electronic Tariff Access,” Association of Texas Intrastate Natural Gas Pipeline Annual Meeting,
Houston, January 1999
“A Texas Natural Gas Model,” United States Association for Energy Economics North American Conference,
Albuquerque, 1998
“Texas Railroad Commission Aiding Gas Industry by Updated Systems, Regulations,” Natural Gas, July 1998
“Current Trends in Texas Natural Gas Regulation,” Natural Gas Producers Association, Midland, 1998
“Overview of the American Petroleum Industry,” Institute of International Education Training Program, Austin, 1993
Direct testimony in PUC Docket No. 10400 summarized in Environmental Externality, Energy Research Group for the
Edison Electric Institute, 1992
“God’s Fuel - Natural Gas Exploration, Production, Transportation and Regulation,” with Danny Bivens, Public Utility
Commission of Texas Staff Seminar, 1992
“A Summary of Utilities’ Positions Regarding the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,” Industrial Energy Technology
Conference, Houston, 1992
“The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,” Public Utility Commission of Texas Staff Seminar, 1992
DIRECT TESTIMONY 17 KARL NALEPA
ATTACHMENT B
Previously Filed Testimony
DIRECT TESTIMONY 18 KARL NALEPA
KARL J. NALEPA
TESTIMONY FILED
DKT NO. DATE REPRESENTING UTILITY PHASE ISSUES Before the Public Utility Commission of Texas 47236 Jul 17 Cities AEP Texas EECRF EECRF Methodology 47235 Jul 17 Cities Oncor Electric Delivery EECRF EECRF Methodology 47217 Jul 17 Cities Texas-New Mexico Power EECRF EECRF Methodology 47032 May 17 Gulf Coast Coalition CenterPoint Energy Houston DCRF DCRF Methodology 46936 Oct 17 Cities Southwestern Public Service CCN Public Interest Review 46449 Apr 17 Cities SWEPCO Cost of Service Cost of Service 46238 Jan 17 Office of Public Counsel Oncor Electric Delivery STM Public Interest Review 46076 Dec 16 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. Fuel Reconciliation Fuel Cost 46050 Aug 16 Cities AEP Texas STM Public Interest Review 46014 Jul 16 Gulf Coast Coalition CenterPoint Energy Houston EECRF EECRF Methodology 45788 May 16 Cities AEP-TNC DCRF DCRF Methodology 45787 May 16 Cities AEP-TCC DCRF DCRF Methodology 45747 May 16 Gulf Coast Coalition CenterPoint Energy Houston DCRF DCRF Methodology 45712 Apr 16 Cities SWEPCO DCRF DCRF Methodology 45691 Jun 16 Cities SWEPCO TCRF TCRF Methodology 45414 Feb 17 Office of Public Counsel Sharyland Cost of Service Cost of Service 45248 May 16 City of Fritch City of Fritch Cost of Service (water) Cost of Service 45084 Nov 15 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. TCRF TCRF Methodology
DIRECT TESTIMONY 19 KARL NALEPA
DKT NO. DATE REPRESENTING UTILITY PHASE ISSUES 45083 Oct 15 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. DCRF DCRF Methodology 45071 Aug 15 Denton Municipal Electric Denton Municipal Electric Interim TCOS Wholesale Transmission Rate
44941 Dec 15 City of El Paso El Paso Electric Cost of Service CEP Adjustments 44677 Jul 15 City of El Paso El Paso Electric EECRF EECRF Methodology 44572 May 15 Gulf Coast Coalition CenterPoint Energy Houston DCRF DCRF Methodology 44060 May 15 City of Frisco Brazos Electric Coop CCN Transmission Cost Recovery 43695 May 15 Pioneer Natural Resources Southwestern Public Service Cost of Service Cost Allocation 43111 Oct 14 Cities Entergy Texas Inc. DCRF DCRF Methodology 42770 Aug 14 Denton Municipal Electric Denton Municipal Electric Interim TCOS Wholesale Transmission Rate 42485 Jul 14 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. EECRF EECRF Methodology 42449 Jul 14 City of El Paso El Paso Electric EECRF EECRF Methodology 42448 Jul 14 Cities SWEPCO TCRF Transmission Cost Recovery Factor 42370 Dec 14 Cities SWEPCO Rate Case Expenses Rate Case Expenses 41791 Jan 14 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. Cost of Service Cost of Service/Fuel 41539 Jul 13 Cities AEP Texas North EECRF EECRF Methodology 41538 Jul 13 Cities AEP Texas Central EECRF EECRF Methodology 41444 Jul 13 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. EECRF EECRF Methodology 41223 Apr 13 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. ITC Transfer Public Interest Review 40627 Nov 12 Austin Energy Austin Energy Cost of Service General Fund Transfers 40443 Dec 12 Office of Public Counsel SWEPCO Cost of Service Cost of Service/Fuel
DIRECT TESTIMONY 20 KARL NALEPA
DKT NO. DATE REPRESENTING UTILITY PHASE ISSUES 40346 Jul 12 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. Join MISO Public Interest Review 39896 Mar 12 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. Cost of Service/ Cost of Service/ Fuel Reconciliation Nat Gas/ Purch Power 39366 Jul 11 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. EECRF EECRF Methodology 38951 Feb 12 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. CGS Tariff CGS Costs 38815 Sep 10 Denton Municipal Electric Denton Municipal Electric Interim TCOS Wholesale Transmission Rate 38480 Nov 10 Cities Texas-New Mexico Power Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 37744 Jun 10 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. Cost of Service/ Cost of Service/ Fuel Reconciliation Nat Gas/ Purch Power/ Gen 37580 Dec 09 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. Fuel Refund Fuel Refund Methodology 36956 Jul 09 Cities Entergy Texas, Inc. EECRF EECRF Methodology 36392 Nov 08 Texas Municipal Power Texas Municipal Power Interim TCOS Wholesale Transmission Rate 35717 Nov 08 Cities Steering Committee Oncor Electric Delivery Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 34800 Apr 08 Cities Entergy Gulf States Fuel Reconciliation Natural Gas/Coal/Nuclear 16705 May 97 North Star Steel Entergy Texas Fuel Reconciliation Natural Gas/Fuel Oil 10694 Jan 92 PUC Staff Midwest Electric Coop Revenue Requirements Depreciation/ Quality of Service 10473 Sep 91 PUC Staff HL&P Notice of Intent Environmental Costs 10400 Aug 91 PUC Staff TU Electric Notice of Intent Environmental Costs 10092 Mar 91 PUC Staff HL&P Fuel Reconciliation Natural Gas/Fuel Oil 10035 Jun 91 PUC Staff West Texas Utilities Fuel Reconciliation Natural Gas Fuel Factor Natural Gas/Fuel Oil/Coal
DIRECT TESTIMONY 21 KARL NALEPA
DKT NO. DATE REPRESENTING UTILITY PHASE ISSUES 9850 Feb 91 PUC Staff HL&P Revenue Req. Natural Gas/Fuel Oil/ETSI Fuel Factor Natural Gas/Coal/Lignite 9561 Aug 90 PUC Staff Central Power & Light Fuel Reconciliation Natural Gas Revenue Requirements Natural Gas/Fuel Oil Fuel Factor Natural Gas 9427 Jul 90 PUC Staff LCRA Fuel Factor Natural Gas 9165 Feb 90 PUC Staff El Paso Electric Revenue Requirements Natural Gas/Fuel Oil Fuel Factor Natural Gas 8900 Jan 90 PUC Staff SWEPCO Fuel Reconciliation Natural Gas Fuel Factor Natural Gas 8702 Sep 89 PUC Staff Gulf States Utilities Fuel Reconciliation Natural Gas/Fuel Oil Jul 89 Revenue Requirements Natural Gas/Fuel Oil Fuel Factor Natural Gas/Fuel Oil 8646 May 89 PUC Staff Central Power & Light Fuel Reconciliation Natural Gas Jun 89 Revenue Requirements Natural Gas/Fuel Oil Fuel Factor Natural Gas 8588 Aug 89 PUC Staff El Paso Electric Fuel Reconciliation Natural Gas Before the Railroad Commission of Texas 10622 Apr 17 LDC, LLC LDC, LLC Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10617 Mar 17 Onalaska Water & Gas Onalaska Water & Gas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10580 Mar 17 Cities Steering Committee Atmos Pipeline Texas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10567 Feb 17 Gulf Coast Coalition CenterPoint Energy Entex Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10506 Jun 16 City of El Paso Texas Gas Service Cost of Service Cost of Service/Energy Efficiency 10498 Feb 16 NatGas, Inc. NatGas, Inc. Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design
DIRECT TESTIMONY 22 KARL NALEPA
DKT NO. DATE REPRESENTING UTILITY PHASE ISSUES 10359 Jul 14 Cities Steering Committee Atmos Energy Mid Tex Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10295 Oct 13 Cities Steering Committee Atmos Pipeline Texas Revenue Rider Rider Renewal 10242 Jan 13 Onalaska Water & Gas Onalaska Water & Gas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10196 Jul 12 Bluebonnet Natural Gas Bluebonnet Natural Gas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10190 Jan 13 City of Magnolia, Texas Hughes Natural Gas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10174 Aug 12 Steering Committee of Cities Atmos Energy West Texas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10170 Aug 12 Cities Steering Committee Atmos Energy Mid Tex Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10106 Oct 11 Gulf Coast Coalition CenterPoint Energy Entex Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10083 Aug 11 City of Magnolia, Texas Hughes Natural Gas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10038 Feb 11 Gulf Coast Coalition CenterPoint Energy Entex Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10021 Oct 10 AgriTex Gas, Inc. AgriTex Gas, Inc. Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 10000 Dec 10 Cities Steering Committee Atmos Pipeline Texas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 9902 Oct 09 Gulf Coast Coalition CenterPoint Energy Entex Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 9810 Jul 08 Bluebonnet Natural Gas Bluebonnet Natural Gas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 9797 Apr 08 Universal Natural Gas Universal Natural Gas Cost of Service Cost of Service/Rate Design 9732 Jul 08 Cities Steering Committee Atmos Energy Corp. Gas Cost Review Natural Gas Costs 9670 Oct 06 Cities Steering Committee Atmos Energy Corp. Cost of Service Affiliate Transactions/ O&M Expenses/GRIP 9667 Nov 06 Oneok Westex Transmission Oneok Westex Transmission Abandonment Abandonment 9598 Sep 05 Cities Steering Committee Atmos Energy Corp. GRIP Appeal GRIP Calculation 9530 Apr 05 Cities Steering Committee Atmos Energy Corp. Gas Cost Review Natural Gas Costs
DIRECT TESTIMONY 23 KARL NALEPA
DKT NO. DATE REPRESENTING UTILITY PHASE ISSUES 9400 Dec 03 Cities Steering Committee TXU Gas Company Cost of Service Affiliate Transactions/ O&M Expenses/Capital Costs
Before the Louisiana Public Service Commission U-33633 Nov 15 PSC Staff Entergy Louisiana, LLC/ Resource Certification Prudence Entergy Gulf States Louisiana U-33033 Jul 14 PSC Staff Entergy Louisiana, LLC/ Resource Certification Revenue Requirement Entergy Gulf States Louisiana U-31971 Nov 11 PSC Staff Entergy Louisiana, LLC/ Resource Certification Certification/Cost Recovery Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
Before the Arkansas Public Service Commission O7-105-U Mar 08 Arkansas Customers CenterPoint Energy, Inc. Gas Cost Complaint Prudence / Cost Recovery & pipelines serving CenterPoint
DIRECT TESTIMONY 24 KARL NALEPA
ATTACHMENT C
Wholesale Transmission Service Tariff
DRAFT — 7496939
12/15/2017 1:30 PM
DOCKET NO.
APPLICATION OF DENTON
MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC FOR INTERIM
UPDATE OF WHOLESALE
TRANSMISSION RATES PURSUANT
TO 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 25.192(h)
§
§
§
§
§
BEFORE THE
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
OF TEXAS
DIRECT TESTIMONY
OF
BRYAN LANGLEY
ON BEHALF OF
DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC
DECEMBER , 2017
DIRECT TESTIMONY 2 BRYAN LANGLEY
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF
BRYAN LANGLEY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS ...................................................................3
II. DESCRIPTION OF DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC .................................................4
III. PURPOSE OF TESTIMONY ..............................................................................................5
IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ........................................................................................5
V. PURPOSE AND SCOPE .....................................................................................................5
VI. TRANSMISSION FACILITIES, ADDITIONS, AND RETIREMENTS ...........................7
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment BL-1 Summary of Docket No. 46348 Transmission Plant in Service
Attachment BL-2 Construction Completed not Classified at June 30, 2017
WORKPAPERS SPONSORED:
WP/B-1.2 Listing of Transmission Projects Closed to EPIs July 1, 2016 through
June 30, 2017
WP/E-2 Electric Plant in Service & Accumulated Depreciation Balance at
June 30, 2017
DIRECT TESTIMONY 3 BRYAN LANGLEY
DOCKET NO.
APPLICATION OF DENTON
MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC FOR INTERIM
UPDATE OF WHOLESALE
TRANSMISSION RATES PURSUANT
TO 16 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 25.192(h)
§
§
§
§
§
BEFORE THE
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
OF TEXAS
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF
BRYAN LANGLEY
I. INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS 1
Q. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, OCCUPATION, AND BUSINESS ADDRESS. 2
A. My name is Bryan Langley. I am the Interim General Manager of the Denton 3
Municipal Electric Utility (“DME”). My business address is 1659 Spencer Road, 4
Denton, Texas 76205. 5
Q. ON WHOSE BEHALF ARE YOU PRESENTING TESTIMONY IN THIS 6
PROCEEDING? 7
A. I am presenting testimony on behalf of the City of Denton, operating its municipally-8
owned utility under the name of DME. DME is a municipal electric utility serving 9
customers within the DME certificated service area. 10
Q. PLEASE OUTLINE YOUR EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL 11
BACKGROUND. 12
A. I am the Deputy City Manager/Chief Operating Officer for the City of Denton. 13
Additionally, I served as the Interim General Manager for DME during the 14
preparation of the application. Previously, I served as Director of Finance, Chief 15
Financial Officer, and Assistant City Manager for the City of Denton. Prior to joining 16
Denton, I worked as Assistant Finance Director for the Town of Addison, and for the 17
City of Dallas in a variety of capacities in the Office of Financial Services. 18
DIRECT TESTIMONY 4 BRYAN LANGLEY
I earned a Bachelor of Business Administration and Master of Business 1
Administration degrees from the University of North Texas. In addition, I hold a 2
Master of Science in Accounting and Information Management from the University 3
of Texas at Dallas. I am a Certified Government Finance Officer, and a member of 4
the Government Finance Officers Association, the Government Finance Officers 5
Association of Texas. 6
Q. HAVE YOU PREVIOUSLY TESTIFIED BEFORE THIS COMMISSION? 7
A. No, I have not previously testified before this Commission. 8
II. DESCRIPTION OF DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC 9
Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE THE DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC UTILITY. 10
A. DME is a municipal electric utility serving approximately 51,000 customers within 11
the DME certificated service area. The highest system peak load for DME was 3 53 12
megawatts (“MWs”) recorded in the summer of 2016. Total sales for Fiscal Year 13
(“FY”) 2016 were 1,433,317 MWh. DME’s total revenues for FY 2016 were 14
$166,290,498. 15
During 2001, DME divested its production assets through the sale of these 16
assets to PG&E National Energy Group. DME currently obtains all of its power 17
supply through wholesale power contracts. 18
To serve our retail customers, DME owns and operates transmission and 19
distribution facilities within its certificated service area. The transmission system 20
includes approximately 30 miles of transmission line. DME owns, operates, and 21
maintains fifteen substations, one interchange, and one switch station. DME also 22
operated two interchanges and one substation for the Texas Municipal Power Agency. 23
DIRECT TESTIMONY 5 BRYAN LANGLEY
The electric distribution system includes approximately 470 miles of underground 1
distribution lines and 352 miles of overhead distribution lines. 2
III. PURPOSE OF TESTIMONY 3
Q. DOES DME HOLD A CERTIFICATE OF CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY 4
(“CCN”) TO CONSTRUCT TRANSMISSION FACILITIES IN TEXAS? 5
A. No. The Public Utility Regulatory Act (“PURA”)1 § 31.002(6)(A) exempts 6
municipally-owned utilities from the definition of “electric utilities.” Therefore, until 7
recently, DME was not required to obtain a CCN for the construction of transmission 8
lines under Chapter 37 of PURA. However, PURA § 37.051 was amended in 2015 to 9
require municipally-owned utilities to obtain a CCN for transmission facilities in 10
certain circumstances.2 11
IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 12
Q. ARE ANY OF DME’S ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO REGULATION BY THE 13
COMMISSION? 14
A. Yes. As a transmission service provider in ERCOT, DME is subject to the 15
Commission’s regulation under Chapter 35 of PURA. 16
V. PURPOSE AND SCOPE 17
Q. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR TESTIMONY IN THIS PROCEEDING? 18
A. My testimony supports DME’s application to update its wholesale transmission rate 19
pursuant to 16 TAC § 25.192(h)(1) and (2). Section 25.192(h)(1) states that 20
transmission service providers “may apply to update its transmission rates on an 21
1 Public Utility Regulatory Act, Tex. Util. Code Ann. §§ 11.001-66.017 (Vernon 2007 & Supp. 2008)
(“PURA”).
2 See PURA § 37.051(g) and (h).
DIRECT TESTIMONY 6 BRYAN LANGLEY
interim basis not more than once per calendar year to reflect changes in its invested 1
capital.” The rule further states, “the new rates shall reflect the addition and 2
retirement of transmission facilities and include appropriate depreciation, federal 3
income tax and other associated taxes, and the commission-authorized rate of return 4
on such facilities as well as changes in loads.” Section 25.192(h)(2) states that, “An 5
update of transmission rates under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall be subject to 6
reconciliation at the next complete review of the TSP’s transmission cost of service, 7
at which time the commission shall review the costs of the interim transmission plant 8
additions to determine if they were reasonable and necessary.” DME has added a 9
significant amount of transmission assets since its last interim rate case, Docket No. 10
46348. DME is requesting an interim update to its wholesale transmission rate to 11
recover increased costs associated with these additional assets. 12
Q. WHAT PORTIONS OF THE APPLICATION IN THIS DOCKET DO YOU 13
SPONSOR? 14
A. In addition to this testimony, I sponsor Attachments BL-1 and BL-2, and workpapers 15
WP/B-1.2 and WP/E-2. Attachment BL-1 summarizes the booked transmission plant 16
in service by FERC account and describes the completed transmission projects 17
installed since Docket No. 46348 through the test year ending June 30, 2017. 18
Attachment BL-2 provides details of additional facilities that have been placed in 19
service and energized that have been included as Construction Completed Not 20
Classified. I describe each of these projects later in this testimony. WP/B-1.2 21
identifies each of the transmission projects closed to electric plant in service. WP/E-2 22
provides a complete listing of all installed facilities and the calculation of 23
DIRECT TESTIMONY 7 BRYAN LANGLEY
depreciation expense and accumulated depreciation for the test year ending June 30, 1
2017. 2
Q. WHEN DID DME LAST CHANGE ITS RATES? 3
A. DME’s last interim rate case filing in Docket No. 46348 was filed on September 16, 4
2016, and was based on fiscal year plant balances as of June 30, 2016. The 5
Commission’s Notice of Approval dated November 10, 2016, established the current 6
Transmission Cost of Service (“TCOS”) rate. 7
Q. WERE THE SCHEDULES AND WORKPAPERS INCLUDED IN THIS 8
FILING PREPARED EITHER BY YOU OR UNDER YOUR DIRECTION? 9
A. Yes, the attachments and workpapers in the filing previously identified were prepared 10
by me or under my supervision. 11
VI. TRANSMISSION FACILITIES, ADDITIONS, AND RETIREMENTS 12
Q. WHAT TRANSMISSION FACILITY ADDITIONS ARE INCLUDED IN THIS 13
RATE FILING? 14
A. Attachment BL-1 provides a complete list and description of the facility additions 15
through the test year ending June 30, 2017, included in this interim update of DME’s 16
wholesale transmission rate. The listed facilities are in service and used and useful, 17
and the costs of the facility additions shown on Attachment BL-1 were not included 18
in the transmission plant in service in DME’s last interim rate case, Docket No. 19
46348. 20
DIRECT TESTIMONY 8 BRYAN LANGLEY
Q. PLEASE PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF EACH OF THE PROJECTS 1
INCLUDED IN THIS INTERIM TCOS FILING THAT ARE ENERGIZED 2
AND SHOWN AS CONSTRUCTION COMPLETED NOT CLASSIFIED. 3
A. Attachment BL-2 identifies those facilities that are used and useful and fully 4
energized and currently shown as “Completed Construction Not Classified”. These 5
projects are: 6
WOODROW–KING’S ROW TM—Reconstruct approximately 4.17 miles of 7
existing 69kV transmission line as 138kV along a new route to replace aging facilities 8
and provide capacity needed to meet contingency planning criteria. 9
DENTON NORTH–KINGS ROW—Reroute and reconstruct approximately 10
2.5 miles of existing 69kV transmission line to replace aging facilities and to provide 11
the capacity needed to meet contingency planning requirements. New route length 12
will be approximately 3.1 miles and reconstructed as 138kV. 13
US 380 TO NORTH LAKES TM LINE—Reconstruction of approximately 14
1.2 miles of existing 69kV transmission line to provide capacity needed to meet 15
contingency planning criteria and future conversion to 138kV. 16
NORTH LAKES–DENTON NORTH TM LINE—Reconductor 17
approximately 1.25 miles and reconstruct approximately 1 mile of existing 69kV line 18
to provide the capacity to meet the requirements of contingency planning criteria. 19
KINGS ROW SUBSTATION CONSTRUCTION—Construct new 69kV–20
13.2kV substation to replace existing Kings Row Substation which is 50 years old. 21
ARCO SUBSTATION—Reconstruct the Arco Substation on an adjacent site 22
to provide terminals to serve at least two additional transmission lines. 23
DIRECT TESTIMONY 9 BRYAN LANGLEY
NORTH LAKES SUBSTATION RECONSTRUCTION—Construct a new 1
69kV–13.2kV substation to replace the existing substation for future conversion to 2
138kV. The existing station does not have the capacity for contingency planning 3
criteria. 4
TEASLEY TO POCKRUS TML REBUILD—Reconstruct the 138kV 5
transmission line to provide the capacity required by contingency planning criteria. 6
DENTON NORTH INTERCHANGE—Terminate the existing TM line from 7
the 69kVportion of the station to the 138kV TMPA station in conjunction with 8
conversion of the 69kV loop to 138kV. 9
WOODROW–MCKINNEY TM LINE—Reconstruct approximately .9 miles 10
of aging existing 69kV transmission line and convert to 138kV. 11
MCKINNEY–COOPER CREEK TM LINE—Reconstruct approximately 1.5 12
miles of aging existing 69kV transmission line and convert to 138kV. 13
COOPER CREEK–KINGS ROW TM LINE—Reconstruct approximately 2.1 14
miles of aging existing 69kV transmission line and convert to 138kV. 15
WOODROW–SPI–N SPENCER TML—Construct approximately 1,735’ of 16
new 138kV transmission line to connect Woodrow Substation to the Spencer 17
Interchange. 18
ARCO TML TIE IN—Construct transmission facilities to connect the new 19
Arco Substation. 20
NORTH LAKES AUTO XFMR—Relocate existing decommissioned 21
autotransformer to allow 69kV transmission service to be maintained until conversion 22
to 138kV can be completed. 23
DIRECT TESTIMONY 10 BRYAN LANGLEY
Q. DID DME OBTAIN A CCN FOR THE PROJECTS INCLUDED IN THIS 1
APPLICATION? 2
A. No. As a municipal utility, DME was not required to obtain a CCN because the 3
facilities were either installed or extended inside the municipal boundaries; were 4
exempted because the facility upgrades did not require any additional land, right-of-5
way, easement, or other property not owned by DME; or the construction, 6
installation, or extension of the facilities were entirely located not more than 10 miles 7
outside of DME’s certificated service area. 8
Q. HAVE ANY OF THE PROJECTS BEEN REVIEWED OR APPROVED BY 9
ERCOT? 10
A. No, all of the transmission facility additions are “local” under Commission rules and 11
only local projects that have regional impacts require review, endorsement, or 12
approval by ERCOT. However, all of these local transmission projects address 13
ERCOT reliability requirements, and DME’s own planning criteria addressing 14
reliability and load growth, as well as safety and environmental requirements. 15
All projects requiring improvements to existing transmission facilities have 16
been included in the ERCOT informal review process through the annual filing of 17
load flow cases, data filings, and/or where applicable, worked through the ERCOT 18
Regional Planning Group. 19
Q. ARE ALL THE TRANSMISSION FACILITIES INCLUDED IN 20
ATTACHMENTS BL-1 AND BL-2 USED AND USEFUL? 21
A. Yes, they are. 22
DIRECT TESTIMONY 11 BRYAN LANGLEY
Q. PLEASE SUMMARIZE YOUR TESTIMONY. 1
A. The transmission facilities included in this filing are in service and used and useful, 2
and the interim TCOS rates should be approved as filed. 3
Q. DOES THIS CONCLUDE YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY? 4
A. Yes, it does. 5
Revision Date 12/22/17 Council Requests for Information Request Request Date Staff Responsible Status 1. Information on cost determination for curb rate vs drop-off rate at landfill 6/5/17 Cox A consultant for the staffing & operational analysis will be selected in the next couple weeks, with the goal to complete the analysis by late Feb. An RFP for a cost of service study is being prepared; the project is expected to last a few months into spring 2018. 2. Discussion of development code criteria for width of streets 6/6/17 Canizares Amendments to Transportation criteria manual are in process. Planned to be presented in Jan or Feb. 3. Survey and report of how other municipalities and school districts fund their School Resource Officers, as well as analysis of calls to school and efficiency 7/25/17 Howell A consultant has been hired to conduct an efficiency analysis of the Aquatics Center. 4. Work session on parking requirements in the Code 8/1/17 McDonald A work session is planned for Jan. 2018. 5. Info on landfill SUP requirement and a plan to replace or minimize trees that will be removed 8/15/17 Cox Update to Council planned for Jan. 23. 6. Work session on process for when a use category is not clearly defined in the DDC (incl. appeals process and communications to surrounding properties) 9/19/17 McDonald/Leal A work session is tentatively planned for Jan. 2018. 7. Work session on recycling for commercial and multi-family properties 10/17/17 Cox Per direction of COE, staff is surveying other communities and will report back to the COE. 8. Work session on public restrooms and/or first aid station on the Square 10/17/17 Rosendahl A work session is tentatively planned for January. 9. Work session on the Public Improvement District ordinance 11/7/17 Langley/Booth Will be included with a work session for Econ. Dev. tentatively planned for Jan. 9. 10. Work session on homelessness / tent city research 11/7/17 Kuechler/Shaw A work session is planned for late Jan or early Feb. 11. Update on the tree ordinance and on the tree fund 11/7/17 Langley/McDonald As ISR is included in the Friday Dec. 22 report. 12. Work session on program to convert aboveground electric utilities to underground 11/7/17 Langley A work session is tentatively planned for Jan. 2018. 13. Review or Update of Park Master Plan 12/5/17 Langley
12/22/2017 ◄ Nov 2017 December 2017 Jan 2018 ► Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 11:30 Joint Council/Denton Housing Authority Meeting 1:30 Committee on the Environment Canceled 5:30 Traffic Safety Commission- Canceled 6 p.m. Park Board 5 12:00 PM CC Work Session 6:30 CC Regular Session 6 7 4 p.m. Public Art Committee 8 9 10 11 9:00 Public Utilities Board 5:30 PM- Historic Landmark Commission 12 1:00 2nd Tuesday Session 13 9:00am Mobility Committee Canceled 11:00 Economic Development Partnerhsip Board 5:30 pm Airport Advisory Board Meeting 6:30 PM- Planning & Zoning Commission 14 15 16 17 18 4:00 PM- Zoning Board of Adjustment 19 1:00 Special Called Council Meeting 20 21 4:00pm HaBSCo Meeting 22 23 24 Christmas Eve 25 Christmas Day City Holiday 26 City Holiday 27 28 29 30 31 Notes:
12/22/2017 10:40 AM January 2018 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 No Council Luncheon New Year’s Day - City Holiday 2 No Council Meeting 3 4 4 p.m. Public Art Committee 5 6 7 8 9:00am Public Utilities Board 12:00pm Committee on the Environment Park Board 6 pm 9 2:00 pm CC Work Session 6:30 pm CC Regular Session 10 11 12 13 14 15 MLK Day - City Holiday 16 No Council Meeting 17 18 19 20 21 22 6:00pm Public Utilities Board 23 2:00 pm 4th Tuesday Session 24 25 26 27 9:00 am Council Meeting 28 29 30 No Council Meeting 31
12/22/2017 10:40 AM February 2018 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 4 p.m. Public Art Committee 2 3 4 511:30 am Council Luncheon 1:30pm Committee on the Environment 5:30pm Traffic Safety Commission Park Board 6 pm 6 2:00 pm CC Work Session 6:30 pm CC Regular Session 7 8 9 10 11 12 9:00am Public Utilities Board 13 2:00 pm 2nd Tuesday Session 14 15 2018 State of the City event 6pm -8:30pm 16 17 18 19 20 2:00 pm CC Work Session 6:30 pm CC Regular Session 21 22 23 24 25 26 6:00pm Public Utilities Board 27 2:00 pm 4th Tuesday Session 28
CA-Consent Agenda IC-Individual Consideration WS-Work Session
CM-Closed Meeting PH-Public Hearing
12/22/17
FUTURE CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
Note: This is a working draft of pending Council items and is subject to change without notice.
Meeting Date Deadlines Item
December 19 – Work Session – 1:00 p.m. Work Session on Ethics Ordinance
December 26 – No Meeting Christmas, 12/24-25City offices closed 12/25 & 12/26
January 1 – No Luncheon New Year’s Day observed – City Offices closed
January 2 – No Meeting
January 9 – Special Called Work/Regular
Session
Captions – December 22
Backup – January 5
WS – Bike Share
WS – PID/Incentive policy discussion
WS –DME update on undergrounding
WS - TxDOT projects and impact to mobility in the community.
January 16 – No Meeting
January 23 – 4th Tuesday Meeting Captions – January 8
Backup – January 19
USCM, Washington DC, 1/24-1/26
January 27 – Saturday – 9:00 a.m. Work Session on Ethics Ordinance
January 30 – No Meeting
February 5 – Luncheon Captions – January 22
Backup – February 1
February 6 – Work/Regular Session Captions – January 22
Backup – February 2
WS – Ethics Ordinance
WS – City Hall Master Plan
February 13 – 2nd Tuesday Session Captions – January 29
Backup – February 9
February 20 – Work/Regular Session Captions – February 5
Backup – February 16
WS – Ethics Ordinance
February 27 – 4th Tuesday Session Captions – February 12
Backup – February 23
March 5 – Luncheon Captions – February 19
Backup – March 1
March 6 – Work/Regular Session Captions – February 19
Backup = March 2
WS – Ethics Ordinance
March 13 – No Meeting NLC, Washington DC 3/11-3/14 | Spring Break 3/12-3/16
March 20 – Work/Regular Session Captions – March 5
Backup – March 16
WS – Ethics Ordinance
March 27 – 4th Tuesday Session Captions – March 12
Backup – March 23
April 2 – Luncheon Captions – March 19
Backup – March 29
CA-Consent Agenda IC-Individual Consideration WS-Work Session
CM-Closed Meeting PH-Public Hearing
Meeting Date Deadlines Item
April 3 – Work/Regular Session Captions – March 19
Backup – March 30
April 10 – 2nd Tuesday Session Captions – March 26
Backup – April 6
April 17 – Work/Regular Session Captions – April 2
Backup – April 13
April 24 – 4th Tuesday Session Captions – April 9
Backup – April 20
May 1 – Work/Regular Session Captions – April 16
Backup – April 27
May 7 – Luncheon Captions – April 23
Backup – May 3
May 8 – 2nd Tuesday Session Captions – April 23
Backup – May 4
May 15 – Election Meeting Captions – April 30
Backup – May 11 Installation of CC Members Only
May 22 – Work/Regular Session Captions – May 7
Backup – May 18
May 29 – No Meeting Memorial Day holiday observed- City Offices closed 5/28
June 4 – Luncheon Captions – May 21
Backup – May 31
June 5 – Work/Regular Session Captions – May 21
Backup – June 1
June 12 – 2nd Tuesday Session Captions – May 25
Backup – June 8
USCM, Boston, 6/8-6/11
June 19 – Work/Regular Session Captions – June 4
Backup – June 15
TCMA, Galveston, 6/21-24
June 26 – 4th Tuesday Session Captions – June 11
Backup – June 22
July 2 – No Luncheon
July 3 – No Meeting July 4th holiday observed – City Offices closed
July 10 – No Meeting
July 17 – Work/Regular Session Captions – July 2
Backup – July 13
July 24 – 4th Tuesday Session Captions – July 9
Backup July 20
July 31 – No Meeting
CA-Consent Agenda IC-Individual Consideration WS-Work Session
CM-Closed Meeting PH-Public Hearing
Meeting Date Deadlines Item
August 2 – Budget Workshop Captions – July 16
Backup – July 27
August 6 – Luncheon Captions – July 23
Backup – August 2
August 7 – Work/Regular Session Captions – July 23
Backup – August 3
August 14 – 2nd Tuesday Session Captions – July 30
Backup – August 10
August 21 – Work/Regular Session Captions – August 6
Backup – August 17
August 28 – 4th Tuesday Session Captions – August 13
Backup – August 24
September 3 – No Luncheon Labor Day holiday
September 4 – No Meeting
September 11–Special Called Work/Regular
Session
Captions – August 27
Backup – September 7
September 18 – Work/Regular Session Captions – August 31
Backup – September 14
September 25 – 4th Tuesday Session Captions – September 10
Backup – September 21
October 1 – Luncheon Captions – September 17
Backup – September 27
October 2 – No Meeting National Night Out
October 9 – 2nd Tuesday Meeting Captions – September 24
Backup – October 5
TML, Fort Worth, 10/9-10/12
October 16 – Work/Regular Session Captions – October 1
Backup – October 12
October 23 – 4th Tuesday Session Captions – October 8
Backup – October 19
October 30 – No Meeting
November 5 – Luncheon Captions – October 22
Backup – November 1
November 6 – Work/Regular Session Captions – October 22
Backup – November 2
NLC, Los Angeles, 11/7-11/10
November 13 – 2nd Tuesday Session Captions – October 29
Backup – November 9
November 20 – No Meeting Thanksgiving Holiday observed–City Offices Closed 11/22-23
CA-Consent Agenda IC-Individual Consideration WS-Work Session
CM-Closed Meeting PH-Public Hearing
Meeting Date Deadlines Item
November 27 – 4th Tuesday Session Captions – November 12
Backup – November 21 Tentative-Based on Need
December 3 – Luncheon Captions – November 19
Backup – November 29
December 4 – Work/Regular Session Captions – November 19
Backup – November 30
December 11 – 2nd Tuesday Session Captions – November 26
Backup – December 7
December 18 – Work/Regular Session Captions – December 3
Backup – December 14 Tentative-Based on Need
December 25 – No Meeting Christmas Holiday observed City Offices Closed 12/24-25
Construction Projects Report Starting Dec 25-31, 2017
Road Closures
Lane Closures
Street / Intersection Detour
Routes
Proposed Date
of
Construction
Proposed
Date of
Completion
Brief Description of Construction Contact Department Letters Door
Hangers
Message
Boards
Public
Meeting
UPCOMING PROJECTS
Canterbury
Hollyhill to I-35 still in design tbd Drainage Chad Allen-Eng
Fulton tbd tbd Water/WW/Streets
Drew Huffman-WW;
Casey Bowles-Wtr;
Dusty Draper-Streets
Hettie tbd tbd Water/ Waste Water/ Streets
Drew Huffman-WW;
Casey Bowles-Wtr;
Dusty Draper-Streets
Hinkle to be bid tbd Possibly bundling with Windsor, if so, it
will be Water/WW/Streets and Drainage
Drew Huffman-WW;
Casey Bowles-Wtr;
Dusty Draper-Streets
Holiday Park Phase 2 yes tbd tbd
Water Main Construction
Manhattan, Sierra, & Laguna from
Yellowstone to Sherman
Casey Bowles - Wtr
11/16/17 P
Londonderry yes Feb 1, 2018 Mar 1, 2018 Drainage Improvements Clark Rosendhal-
Drainage
10/16/17 P
Street / Intersection Detour
Routes
Proposed Date
of
Construction
Proposed
Date of
Completion
Brief Description of Construction Contact Department Letters Door
Hangers
Message
Boards
Public
Meeting
Malone yes Summer 2018 tbd Water Main Construction
Crescent to Westminster Water
Mimosa yes Jan 2, 2018 Feb 23, 2018 Street Reconstruction N
Carroll to Bolivar Streets
PEC 4 - Engineering still in design tbd
Engineering Project
Installing Underground Box Culvert to
Improve Downtown Drainage
Lee Perry-Eng
Smith-Johnson Summer 2018 tbd
Large Project: Drainage/ Streets/
Portions of Water and small point work
for WW
Chad Allen-Eng
Thomas tbd tbd Water/WW/Streets
Drew Huffman-WW;
Casey Bowles-Wtr;
Dusty Draper-Streets
Wayne tbd tbd Water/ WW/Streets
Drew Huffman-WW;
Casey Bowles-Wtr;
Dusty Draper-Streets
Windsor- Engineering tbd tbd Possibly bundling with Windsor, if so, it
will be Water/WW/Streets and Drainage
Drew Huffman-WW;
Casey Bowles-Wtr;
Dusty Draper-Streets
RESIDENTIAL CURRENT PROJECTS
Ave G yes Dec 18, 2017 Jan 5, 2018 Utility Construction
Oak St to Hickory St Engineering
Congress yes Jan 3, 2018 Feb 28, 2018 Utility Construction
Denton to N Carroll Engineering
Emerson Ln no Dec 27, 2017 Jan 26, 2018 Curb and Gutter Repairs
Rockwood Ln to Locksley Ln Streets
Street / Intersection Detour
Routes
Proposed Date
of
Construction
Proposed
Date of
Completion
Brief Description of Construction Contact Department Letters Door
Hangers
Message
Boards
Public
Meeting
Gaelic Ct no Nov 27, 2017 Jan 12, 2018 Street Reconstruction
Glengary Way to Western dead end Streets
11/13/17 P
Golden Rod yes Dec 4, 2017 Jan 5, 2018 Panel/Sidewalk Repair
Cattail to Heron Pond Streets
11/16/17 P
Heron Pond Lane no Jan 2, 2018 Feb 9, 2018 Concrete Street Panel Repairs
Sun Ray Dr to Marsh Rail Dr Streets
Holiday Park Phase 2 yes Nov 10-17 Dec 1, 2018 Wastewater Main Construction
Manhattan to Kings Row Wastewater
11/16/17 P
Kings Row no Aug 7, 2017 Jan 31, 2018 Curb and Gutter/Drive Approaches
WB Right Ln Wellington and Sherman Engineering
Lattimore no Oct 9, 2017 Feb 5, 2018 Street Reconstruction
Audra to Dead End Streets
9/22/17 P
Linden yes Dec 4, 2017 Dec 22, 2017 Curb and Gutter Repair
Ponder to Bryan Streets
11/29/17 P
Londonderry yes Dec 22, 2017 Mar 15, 2018 Wastewater Main Construction
Teasley to Westminster Wastewater
10/16/17 P
Lookout no Jan 2, 2018 tbd Sidewalk Repair
Windsor to Westward Streets-Roy
Mockingbird yes Oct 23, 2017 Jan 5, 2018 Street Reconstruction
Audra to Newport Streets
10/10/17 P P 18-Oct
Mockingbird yes Oct 23, 2017 Feb 20, 2018 Street Reconstruction
Mckinney to Paisley Streets
10/10/17 P P 18-Oct
Street / Intersection Detour
Routes
Proposed Date
of
Construction
Proposed
Date of
Completion
Brief Description of Construction Contact Department Letters Door
Hangers
Message
Boards
Public
Meeting
Montecito no Dec 27, 2017 Jan 26, 2018 Sidewalk Repair
Hazelwood to Mirror Rock Streets
Oak Park no Oct 9, 2017 Feb 5, 2018 Street Reconstruction
Oaktree to Oak Valley Streets
9/22/17
Oaktree no Oct 9, 2017 Feb 5, 2018 Street Reconstruction
Audra to Lattimore Streets
9/22/17
Overlook no Oct 2, 2017 Jan 19, 2018 Sidewalk and Panel Repairs
Windsor to Westward Streets
Paisley yes Oct 2, 2017 Dec 29, 2017 Wastewater Main Construction
Frame to Ruddell Wastewater
Paisley yes Dec 20, 2017 Feb 16, 2018 Water Main Construction
Frame to Ruddell Casey Bowles - Water
Panhandle no Dec 4, 2017 Jan 4, 2018 Mill Overlay
Bonie Brae to Ector Streets
11/27/17
Sagebrush Jan 2, 2018 tbd Water/WW/Streets
Water is almost complete
Drew Huffman-WW;
Casey Bowles-Wtr;
Dusty Draper-Streets
Stanley yes Nov 6, 2017 Jan 26, 2018 Mill Overlay/Curb and Gutter Work
Panhandle to Emery Streets
10/26/17
Vanderbuilt Ct no Dec 27, 2017 Jan 26, 2018 Curb and Gutter Repair
Bowling Green to Vanderbilt Ct Streets
Westward no Jan 2, 2018 Feb 9, 2018 Street Panel Repair
Lookout to Southway Streets
Street / Intersection Detour
Routes
Proposed Date
of
Construction
Proposed
Date of
Completion
Brief Description of Construction Contact Department Letters Door
Hangers
Message
Boards
Public
Meeting
Whispering Oaks no Oct 9, 2017 Feb 5, 2018 Street Reconstruction
Oak Valley to Oak Park Streets
9/22/17
MAJOR ROADS CURRENT PROJECTS
Bonnie Brae no Jul 1, 2017 Jul 31, 2019 Street Widening Engineering
Bonnie Brae no Jan 1, 2018 Jan 9, 2018 Curb and Gutter Repair
US380 to 1/2 mile N of US380 Engineering
McKinney St no Nov 14, 2017 Apr 29, 2018 Reconstruct Old Central Parking Lot
Bolivar to Cedar Engineering
Mayhill no Sep 1, 2017 Feb 28, 2020 Street Widening Project Engineering
Riney yes Sep 29, 2017 Jul 29, 2018 Road Removal and Replacement
N. Elm to Solona Engineering
Ryan Rd WB yes Dec 11, 2017 Jan 8, 2018 Street Construction
FM1830 to Forrestridge Streets
12/6/17
Note: This provides an Estimate of work to be done the next two weeks. Weather, equipment breakdowns, or other unforeseen problems could cause this schedule to change.
Drainage 349-7116 / Water Distribution 349-7181 / Wastewater 349-8489 / Traffic 349-7342 / Streets 349-7160, streets@cityofdenton.com
Engineering 349-8910, engineering@cityofdenton.com / TX DOT 387-1414, romulo.bahamon@txdot.gov / Denton County 349-3420
Street / Intersection Detour
Routes
Proposed Date
of
Construction
Proposed
Date of
Completion
Brief Description of Construction Contact Department Letters Door
Hangers
Message
Boards
Public
Meeting
COMPLETED PROJECTS
Acme yes Dec 4, 2017 Dec 8, 2017 Utility Construction
East side of Ft Worth Dr Engineering
Barthold yes Jun 12, 2017 Dec 18, 2017 Street Construction
I35 Svc Rd Intersection to 700' West Engineering
Bellemead yes Oct 19, 2017 Dec 15, 2017 Street Reconstruction
Thomas to Emery Streets
10/10/17 P P
Centre Place no Sep 25, 2017 Dec 4, 2017 Concrete Street Panel Repairs
I-35 Service Rd to Alegre Vista Streets
9/22/17
Emery yes Nov 27, 2017 Dec 11, 2017 Utility Construction
Bellemead to Hillcrest Engineering
Emery yes Nov 27, 2017 Dec 21, 2017 Utility Construction
Ector & S Entrance Aldi Food Center Utility Construction
Foxsedge no Oct 9, 2017 Dec 5, 2017 Panel Repair
Pockrus Page to Sunray Streets
Hickory yes Aug 23, 2017 Dec 22, 2017 Duct Bank Construction
Bonnie Brae to E of Ave H Engineering
8/29/17 P P P
Hickory yes Sep 8, 2017 Dec 22, 2017 Duct Bank Construction
Stella to Hickory Engineering
8/29/17 P P P
Londonderry yes Nov 13, 2017 Dec 22, 2017 Water Main Replacement
Teasley to Westminster Water
10/16/17 P
Street / Intersection Detour
Routes
Proposed Date
of
Construction
Proposed
Date of
Completion
Brief Description of Construction Contact Department Letters Door
Hangers
Message
Boards
Public
Meeting
Mimosa no Oct 2, 2017 Dec 8, 2017 Residential Fence Repairs
Bolivar to N Carroll Wastewater
P
Mimosa no Oct 23, 2017 Dec 8, 2017 Water Line Replacement
Bolivar to Carroll Water
P
Mulberry no Jan 8, 2018 Dec 1, 2017 Utility Construction
Hickory to Welch Engineering
Spencer yes Dec 2, 2017 Dec 3, 2017 Utility Construction
Bridges St to Mayhill Rd Engineering
Welch no Oct 30, 2017 Dec 1, 2017 Utility Construction
Chestnut to Mulberry Engineering
Wellington no Nov 8, 2017 Dec 22, 2017 Curb and Gutter Repair
Stratford to Heather Streets