Loading...
Minutes January 22, 1990354 CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 22, 1991 The Council convened into the Work Session at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Boyd; Council Members Alexander, Ayer, Gorton, Hopkins and Trent. ABSENT: None 1. The Council convened into Executive Session to discuss legal matters (considered action in Dyson v. City of Denton and considered action in County vs. City), real estate and personnel/board appointments (considered appointments to the Building Code Board, Community Development Block Grant Committee, the Electrical Code Board, the Historic Landmark Commission, the Human Services Committee, the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee, the Blue Ribbon Committee for Storm Water Utility and the Sign Board of Appeals). 2. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the potential sale of the City's commercial solid waste system and consider possible alternatives. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that a number of months ago, the Council received a recommendation from a Solid Waste Advisory Committee that the Council had appointed to look into all aspects of the City's solid waste system. That Committee reviewed the alternatives and recommended to Council three recommendations (1) residential collection service had competitive rates and was well received by the general population.of the City and recommended no change in residential solid waste collection, (2) the landfill, was filling up at a rapid rate and the Council should move to acquire additional property and expand the landfill, and (3) the commercial service should be a system where the City provided exclusive service. Following that recommendation from the Committee and after a public hearing and Council discussion, the Council tabled the issue until staff could prepare specifications and go out for bid to see how much the commercial solid waste system would be worth to the City if the City sold the system. Council Member Gorton asked for the recommendation from the Solid Waste Alternatives Committee. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that the recommendation was that the City be the exclusive provider. Council Member Trent felt that the recommendation from the Committee had since changed. -'~ City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 2 City Manager Harrell replied that the Committee had not changed its recommendation. What had changed was that the Council took the recommendation, had public hearings and then decided to take bids on the system before making any decision regarding the system. The Committee never changed its recommendation. Council Member Trent replied that he had heard comments from members of the Committee that they did not have all of the information when they arrived at their recommendation. Council Member Hopkins stated that a member of the Committee had stated that he concurred with the report as it came then but because they knew nothing was going to be undertaken immediately that that was the position for that time. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, reviewed details concerning the current operation of the City's solid waste system. There was the residential system, the commercial system and the landfill operation. Nelson detailed the number of employees, number of routes, annual revenue, annual volume and customers of each system. He stated that if the commercial system were sold and some of the funds not directed back to the residential system, the rates for residential service would be greatly increased. Council Member Gorton asked about EPA guidelines and long-term commitment/liability. If the landfill were closed in 2005, was the City's commitment/liability until the year 2035. Nelson replied yes that the City would have responsibility until 2035 and was one of the major considerations in the overall look at the situation. Council Member Gorton asked if there were environmental issues imposed today that would be retroactive to the day the landfill was opened. Nelson replied that the new regulations were to have been out in January. It was understood that there would be an eighteen month grace period. If a landfill were closed in that eighteen month time frame, the thirty year liability did not apply. There was a five year post-closure responsibility. Council Member Gorton expressed concern that a decision could be made which would be good for Denton today but may not be good in the future. Nelson continued that if the landfill were filled at the existing rate, a new landfill would be needed or additional permitted area by 1996. With just the City's commercial volume and Texas Waste Management's volume, escalating at the rate of the City's population growth, the year would be 2001 or 2002. 3:5 5 356 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 3 There was approximately 3.5 million cubic yards of space available around the landfill for additional space. Nelson reviewed the bids received regarding the sale of the system. The best bid was from Texas Waste Management, Inc. at, $1.9 million. Various options included either selling or retaining the system, increasing the volume at the landfill, maintaining the volume at the landfill or decreasing the volume at the landfill. Some of the assumptions included effect on the employees and their transfer and the fact that competition would keep the commercial rates low. Main concerns were to keep the residential rates reasonably low, the availability of a local disposal site and the landfill liability. The distribution of the $1.9 million for the system would include setting aside $500,000 to cover a present negative in Restricted Assets which would be recovered when the landfill closed; $180,000 to cover 1991 contingencies; $40,000 to cover accrued vacations: $1,180,000 would be invested at 8% interest and $118,000 plus interest on the balance would be credited to residential customers. The first basic scenario included: sell the system, get out of the landfill operation as soon as possible, but still provide a local transfer station via contract or provide a local convenience dump station, and retain the residential collection . system. This would limit the landfill liability as the City would no longer be in the landfill business. It did not solve the thirty year post-closure responsibility. With this scenario, it would take about two and a half years to totally fill the landfill. The rates would stay level for the next two-three years and then would increase by about 5% per year. Option iA included that if the landfill were closed prior to the eighteen months and Texas Waste Management were allowed to set up a transfer station in Denton, Texas Waste Management would be willing to pay the City another $1.2 million. This scenario was the same as Option 1 except the landfill would be closed prior to the thirty year post-closure responsibility. The $1.2 million would be received in 1993 and Texas Waste Management would install a transfer station and sign a fifteen year tipping fee contract with a starting figure around $6.00. In Scenario 6, the City could continue in the present mode, competing with private haulers in the commercial collection system, continue to provide residential collection service, continue to operate the landfill and, via competitive rates, continue to bring in 70,000 cubic yards of volume and then plan to expand the landfill in 1996. Advantages would be that Denton would keep on status quo, would provide a competitive factor in the setting of landfill rates and commercial rates in the area and residential rates would remain lower in later years. Disadvantages included the City would continue to be liable for the landfill and a new landfill would be needed by the year 2003. City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 4 Scenario City would become waste collection. residential solid approximately 1996 needed by 2003. 8 was essentially the SWAC recommendation, where the the exclusive provider of commercial solid The City would continue to collect waste and would expand the landfill in with additional landfill/disposal options Council Member Gorton asked if the Publi~ Utilities Board had made a final recommendation to Council. Nelson replied that the Public Utilities Board had not made a recommendation to Council. Council Member Gorton asked if, by law, there was a necessity to report back to a State agency. Nelson replied no that there was a requirement on other utility functions but not on this function. Council Member Gorton stated that he wanted to be sure that all legal notices required were taken care of so that there were no last minute hitches. Council Member Alexander asked if with Scenario iA which involved the sale of the landfill, would that mean that Waste Management would close the landfill at that date and would assume the responsibility of it and operate it until it was full. Nelson replied that the City would continue with the responsibility but they would assure the City that the City would have enough volume to close the current pit. Council Member Hopkins asked if Texas Waste Management was willing to use the landfill and help close the landfill. Nelson replied yes that they were willing to put enough waste into the landfill at $3.00-$3.50 per yard for the next 18 months to fill the pit. Council Member Trent asked about the location of the transfer station. Nelson stated that the City would like a site near the current landfill. They had indicated that they may want a site north of the City closer to I35. 3. The Council was to receive a report and hold a discussion amending Article 11. Planned Developments. of the Zoning Ordinance. 357 358 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 5 This item was held for the Regular Session. 4. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding proposed amendments to the concept map of the Denton Development Plan to provide for the expansion of the Special Purpose Activity Center and amending the boundaries of Intensity Areas ~1, 9, 10, 95, 105, 107, 109, 110 and 111 of Appendix A. Harry Persuad, Senior Planner, stated that in September 1988, Council adopted the Denton Development Plan. That Plan showed a 3,500 acres Special Purpose'Activity Center by the airport. It was intended that that area would attract industry and create an economic base to provide a hub for economic activity and employment in the City. In 1990-1991, the circumstances had changed with relation to the Special Purpose Activity Center. In June 1990, the Texas Department of Commerce approved two enterprise zones for Denton. The boundaries of Zone I extended south along I35W to include a large site between I35W and Hwy 77. The owners of these tracts had petitioned the City for annexation of approximately 1,397 acres at this location with the objective of establishing zoning on the tracts. With Enterprise Zone designation and given the strategic location of this site in the I35W corridor, it was the expectation of the City and the land owners that a major economic development project may be attracted to locate here. In order to establish the appropriate zoning classification and aggressively market the site, staff was proposing to add approximately 2,744 acres to the Special Purpose Activity Center. In a related matter, Persuad stated that the western portion of the Denton Planning Area was characterized by large flood plains and large tracts under one ownership. Some of the large land owners had approached the Planning staff to discuss the future planning and development of their tracts. The Perot Group and the Henry S. Miller Trust had submitted general concept plans and were currently pursuing annexation and zoning of 1,367 acres east of I35W. The New Market Group Southwest Inc. had met with staff about a large tract west of the TPG property north of Crawford Road. RMB Realty had been pursuing a General Development Plan for a 91Z acre tract located in the southeast corner of Highway 156 and US Highway 380. The inclusion of these tracts into designated intensity areas was essential in order to implement the policies of the Denton Development Plan. Staff was proposing to extend the western boundaries of the Denton Planing Area. The proposed amendments to the intensity area boundaries would promote the planning and development of lands in that area in accordance with the policies in the Denton Development Plan. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with staff recommendations. City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 6 The Council then convened into the Regular Session at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Boyd; Council Members Alexander, Ayer, Gorton, Hopkins and Trent. ABSENT: None Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Council Member Trent left the meeting. 2. The Council received a citizen report from Carl young regarding how Blacks felt about the City of Denton and policies towards Blacks especially employment practices. Mr. Young stated that there were no Blacks on the Council for the first time in twelve years. He stated that the City election districts were designed to keep Blacks out of City government. He felt that Blacks had only a 25% chance of being elected to the City Council. To further divide the Black political strength, the City split the Black community by using the Denton Housing Authority. This was done by building low rent apartments west of the University of North Texas - Concrete City. Other Blacks moved to apartments provided by the Housing Authority in the north part of Denton - Village East. At the same time, it was impossible for a Black to rent an apartment at the Phoenix Apartments. He felt that if the City of Denton's intentions were honorable, then the Housing Authority would have made low rent housing available instead of creating little ghettos all over Denton. Next, the Housing Authority put up signs saying anyone not living in the Phoenix would be arrested for criminal trespassing. He felt that was to keep Blacks out. All of the people arrested for trespassing had been Blacks. He stated that the City told people that it had a program for fixing houses and destroying old houses in southeast Denton. But in reality, the City destroyed ten houses and repaired two. Zoning in this area of town prohibited the building of a new home. He favored a 6-1 xedistricting plan. This would allow a Black a fair chance of being elected. The City was receiving grants and federal money. All that could be stopped as the City government did not meet federal guidelines regarding the hiring of minorities. There were no Blacks on the Fire Department and only two Blacks on the Police Department with none over the rank of Sergeant. There were no Blacks at the Electrical Plant or a Black in a supervisory position higher than crew chief on a truck. The City set up hand picked groups to meet in southeast Denton for the COPS 359 360 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 7 programs. Some of these meeting had been secret meetings attended by police officers wearing guns which intimidated people to attend. These meetings were controlled by people who worked for the City and who did not live in southeast Denton. These meetings started at 6:00 p.m. for an hour which did not allow the working people who live in southeast Denton to attend. A police review board was needed with subpoena power as there were many cases of police brutality. He felt that the minorities in Denton needed to feel that the City of Denton was giving real consideration to minority hiring. Council Member Hopkins stated that the City had been trying to redistrict and could not proceed as the County was waiting until the census figures were available. A committee had been formed to look at the boundaries and now that the census information was available could proceed with that task. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that Young's objection to Black representation seemed to be that integration had been succeeding. He did not feel that seeking a segregated community was appropriate. Young replied that he felt the City had diluted the Black political strength with the district lines and with the Housing Authority. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd asked Young who he felt drew the district lines. Young replied he felt Boyd did as it ended at Boyd's house and that the lines were drawn the year before he was elected. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd replied that it was the plantiff's in a law suit and that the lines were drawn the year before Mark Chew was elected. Public Hearings A. The Council held a public hearing and considered approval of preliminary and final replats from Lot 41 and additional unplatted land to Lots 4lA and 4lB, Block B, Bellaire Heights Subdivision, Phase V located at the end of Howard Court, east of Mockingbird Lane. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval). The Mayor opened the public hearing. City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 8 Bud Hauptman, Metroplex Engineering, spoke for the petitioners. He stated that behind Howard Court there was a lot which as platted was an odd shape for development. Additional property was purchased next to this lot which was unplatted. In order to create a buildable lot, the owner decided to replat and divide the property into two lots. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission had unanimously approved the request. Gorton motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the preliminary and final replat of the property. On roll vote, Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. B. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance approving a Detailed Plan on Planned Development 16 and a portion of Planned Development 19 for the purpose of a mixed use development consisting of a public library, fire station, and shopping center on ~an 11.20 acre tract of land located at the southwest corner of Lillian Miller Parkway and Teasley Lane. Z-90-016 (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval). The Mayor opened the public hearing. William Kaufer, NCNB Bank, stated that a number of years ago, PD16 included a retail development with Teasley Lane curving through the development. Since that time, Teasley Lane had been straightened out with an intersection with Lillian Miller Parkway. This had left the City of Denton with a small rectangular piece of property. The proposal would take the same development right, originally approved for PD 16, and put it in a somewhat different configuration. The triangular piece that was owned by the City of Denton was part of PD19. The plan before the Council would move to the north, taking in the abandoned street in the triangle as part of PD16, the shopping center development approved a number of years ago. There was ,Do request for an increase in the number of square foot of space allowed. However, it would be on a slightly differently configured piece of property. The southern end of the tract would be swapped to the City of Denton where a new fire station and a new library would be built. This appeared to .be a win-win . ~ituation for everyone. It utilized a piece of property, the triangular piece and abandoned roadway, as part of his development which gave him a square piece of property which made it work better. It took a piece of property which 361 362 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 9 would be very difficult for the City of Denton to work with particularly with a fire station on that corner. How to get in and out of there with the access and no median cuts. It also provided a buffer between the retail center and the residences to the south. He pointed out that what they were asking for was to reconfigure the shape of the property, no increase in development rights, the request was still the same as a number of years ago, and was as compatible now as it ever was with the surrounding land and in fact was buffered now than it was then. It also provided a piece of property that was in a size and shape that the City of Denton could use much better. The swap of the land was about eight tenths of an acre in favor of the City of Denton. It had been recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that a considerable amount of time had been spent working on this project. The City had about an acre of land to begin with. There was about nine-tenths acres of land which was in the old right-of-way. The Highway Department agreed to deed that property back to the City after the Bank and Trust fund relinquished the access to it. Under this scenario, the City would trade the 1.9 acres of property for 2.8 acres of property. The good points of the proposal were that it moved the facility away from the corner, it provided more flexibility and enough room to get in and out of the station, and cleaned up the intersection so that the driveways were away from the intersection and large configured driveways were not needed to accommodate turning fire trucks. It also eliminated some median cuts and provided a site not only for the fire station but also for a new library. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that the Council was considering a concept plan only. The funds for the library had not been appropriated and there had been no decision to build a library there. Svehla replied that was correct. Basically, it allowed the City enough room that if the Council chose to build a library on the site, it could be built there. If the Council chose to build some other facility, it would have to come back and change or amend the PD. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that there had been no bond funds or any other funds appropriated for the library construction. Svehla replied that initially there were part of the library bonds that had been sold. There had been authorization from the voters for $1 million and about $400,000 of the bonds had been sold. The only money spent out of the $400,000 was the authorization made by Council to hire a consultant to determine future needs and/or locations. City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 10 Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that today the Council was not voting to build a library. Svehla replied correct. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that the Library Board had looked at various sites and it was their recommendation that this site be utilized to build the library which was identified for the southern part of the community in the consultant's study. The Library Board further recommended that a small portion of the $400,000 be utilized to do some of the public improvements on the site that would be needed to do at a later date. Technically, no firm decision had been made. But on the other hand, some recommendations had been made and recommendations would be coming to the Council very shortly to commit some funds which would indicate that in all likelihood that would be the site of the library. Svehla stated that the '91 Committee had also reviewed the site and would be making a recommendation to the Council as the land swap came before Council. Council Member Gorton stated that the issue before Council was the detailed plan allowing for a portion of the plan to be designated to the City of Denton for its own use and determination at a later date. Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, replied that this was a detailed plan which would allow the library and fire station to be constructed should Council so determine. Nothing else could be built on the site without being changed. Council Member Gorton stated that a change in the PD would be on the City's request or the developer's request. Svehla replied that if the City chose to do the zoning and the land trade were made, then the City would be the land owner. Normally, the owner was the one who would request a change. City Attorney Drayovitch stated that staff would probably recommend to the Council that the City initiate a zoning change even though the City was not legally bound to that regulation. Mayor Castleberry stated that the City was at the point and had the funds to build the fire station. It was not the same criteria as the library. 363 Svehla replied yes that the funds were available for the fire - station. 364 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22. 1991 Page 11 Bill Claiborne, representing homeowner's of Indian Ridge Subdivision, questioned that there were no numbers in the backup material regarding intensity. He trusted that they were within the guidelines of the Denton Development Plan. He asked about additional retail acreages in an area which already had the Golden Triangle Mall and the Southridge Shopping Center. In PD19 there was sufficient acreage for retail development on the east side of Lillian Miller Parkway. He questioned retail establishments next to a school He favored office-type uses. He stated that City staff recommended not having a funeral parlor at the location but he felt that such a business would not be a bad land use for the intersection. He favored office use or medical facility use at the location. As a neighborhood, they were opposed to any auto repair business of any kind in the area. He asked that any references to auto repair be stricken from the PD. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that the current PD was not office. Claiborne stated that that was possible, it could be general retail. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd asked which alternative Claiborne would be in favor of choosing between the current or proposed uses. Claiborne stated that he could accept general retail but not auto repair shops of any nature. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd restated that the major objection was the automobile service authorization in the PD. Claiborne stated that in the neighborhood meeting, there was some concern that the retail sale of gasoline would be appropriate even at the intersection. However, realizing that this type of development usually attracts a quick-shop type of development with retail gas sales, that would be acceptable but not to their liking. Automobile repair stores at this location would be completely out of character as less than a mile away there was a complex for auto repair service. Jerry Cott, Sundown Ranch, stated that the concept of cumulative zoning and the concept of too much density and too many traffic counts did not stop before four sides around Sundown Ranch were zoned so intensely that there was no possibility for him to consider living in the area with all the cars and all of the homes and multifamily homes. In 1986 the Council allowed that when PD19 started, a wall eight feet tall of stone or brick would be built down the entire southern part of PD19 and that would, he felt, screen his property to the north. He was concerned about the language in the PD so he spent quite a bit of time getting a specific verbatim translation of the City Council minutes of that evening and of the Planning and Zoning City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 12 minutes of that evening. There was clearly no doubt from those, that as soon as PD19 was built in any shape, manner or form, Sundown Ranch would have its screen. Lillian Miller was not there at the time and PD19 at that time, went across what was then Teasley Lane. In 1986, the zoning was changed and he was never notified. He had no idea until about two weeks ago that the zoning had been changed to create this current kind of situation. The City Attorney and Assistant City Attorney had told him that if it was not in the PD and his attorney concurred, that there was a different kind of situation. Now, that Bluebonnet owned the property rather than Dimension Development, it was not in their PD. He believed he had a strong case on the issue that because of the trouble he went to to see that City Council approve the verbatim translation of the minutes and approve the PD as soon as it would be built, it was Council's responsibility, not his, to see to it that it got into the PD. Council Member Gorton questioned what it was Mr. Cott was asking for. Cott replied that he wanted the Council to build the wall. Council Member Gorton replied that Cott wanted the Council to request the petitioner to build the wall. Cott replied whoever was PD19 he wanted them to build the wall. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that PD16 was. the shopping center and PD19 was the City of Denton. The ~est of PD19 was across Lillian Miller and not owned by the City. What Cott was asking was that the wall be built on both sides of Lillian Miller. Cott replied no, that the only way he could determine how to get someone to do this was to either get Bluebonnet to put it in their PD or get the City to put in their PD. Council Member Gorton stated that a portion of Sundown Ranch was issued a specific use permit for circuit race ..... Cott replied a race track. Council Member Gorton continued for a race track not for betting but for training. He asked the rest of the Council if they recalled the restrictions as far as fencing, set back, etc. He felt that it all dove-tailed. To whom were they asking to build the wall between which portions. 365 Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that he failed to understand ..... 366 City of Denton City Council Minutes January ZZ, 1991 Page 13 Cott stated that it was at one time one PD with no road through between it. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd continued that he understood that. Was Cott asking the City of Denton, on its triangle, to build a wall. Cott replied no that what he was saying was the City's PD19 was considered part of the whole PD. And he was asking for one of two things. Either include in the City's PD the construction of the wall or cause Bluebonnet who should have when they purchased the property known that they had to build the wall as it was in the Council's minutes and notes. That should be something that they were required to do. Council Member Hopkins asked if that was still not PD19 and PD 19 on the east side of the Highway would still have the requirements that were in the minutes. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd replied .that what he felt Cott was saying was that it was not in ordinance form and was just in the minutes. City Manager Harrell stated that if the minutes were read, there was reference to a detailed development plan that would be filed. When that detailed development plan was filed, at that point, the wall would be shown on that detailed development plan. The property had since changed hands and was not developed, and a detailed development had not been filed. That was the purpose of the verbatim minutes to make sure a record was made so as not to loose track of that at any point. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd asked if this was something that had to be dealt with at this time or should it be dealt with when the rest of PD19 was developed, City Manager Harrell replied that he felt it was really Council's option. He understood that one of the options was the possibility of proceeding with this rezoning and putting it in this particular PD. But then, institute some kind of rezoning application for the remaining portion of the PD19 and putting that in the document at this time rather than waiting for the detailed development plan. ,City Attorney Drayovitch stated that there was a part in the minutes of 1987 Council meeting that stated, which was McAdams' motion, that at the time the detailed site plan for PD19 was brought before Council, that the matter would be addressed. She felt that the problem was that everyone thought it 'would come in one plan. This portion was across the right-of-way and it would be very difficult to address and impose this requirement on property that was not here to be discussed before the Council today. She would recommend against it being imposed at this meeting. City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 14 Council Member Alexander stated he understood Cott's position was that based on Council minutes and based on the previous process, that Cott had a legal property right to have the wall built as PD19 was completed. Cott corrected "was started" Council Member Alexander continued that his question for Cott was would Cott be satisfied, at this point, if Cott was confident that if the rest of PD19 was started that the wall would be constructed even if the wall were not constructed at this point in time while the rest of PD19 was constructed'. Cott stated if the wall were constructed all at once. Not portions at a time. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd felt that it needed to be done at a later date when the rest of the development was considered. He felt it might be a bit unfair to whoever was the owner of the rest of PD19 to impose this restriction without at least giving them the opportunity to comment. Cott asked Mayor Pro Tem Boyd if he had to wait until the second and third phases of the development. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd replied that he understood the City Attorney to say that the City could initiate a zoning matter right a way to resolve the issue. He felt it needed to be handled prior to development of the property but after notice to the interested parties. Cott felt that it needed to be in some. ordinance within the next thirty to sixty days. Council Member Hopkins asked if the Council could instruct staff or make a motion to place on the agenda a City initiated consideration of the land adjoining Cott which would show what was done in the minutes and make it a part of the zoning. City Attorney Drayovitch replied that Council could direct staff to place such a matter on an agenda for Council consideration and at that time or before that time, she could provide Council with a legal update regarding the legal issues surrounding the matter. The petitioner was allowed a five minutes rebuttal. 367 368 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 15 Kaufer stated that the intensity and us before. There was no change in the nature a slight shifting around of the legal boundaries of the PD. He felt that by d provided a better buffering of the retail family homes were than it did before, q was not involved in the current PD16 ex swap which was needed more for the benefit them, it brought them in to the fringes of never had such a requirement in the PD procedure would be to reconfigure the swap. The City had a legal right then hearing on any piece of property in the proper zoning. He felt the way everyone to approve the request as presented to City facilities to be built and the shopp with the same intensity and same uses J follow-up action, instruct staff to plac6 an item which allow a public hearing on Pf discussing the condition dealing with the Mayor Pro Tem Boyd asked if the peri' objection to the deletion of the specific Kaufer replied that it was not the numk wanted to have but that it was an al included in the PD. He felt that in or swap work and for them to get no addition~ the use needed to remain. It had been time and would rather keep in but also matter tonight. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Karen Feshari, Urban Planner, stated t! Council passed and approved an ordin~ Ordinance 73-25 and 73-27 by amending provide for the correct designation of th~ Planned Development Zoning District PDll use. In 1986, the Council passed an ordi£ revised concept plan for Planned Developm6 a mixed use development. PD16 as it was shopping center could at this point in permit for general retail type uses. actually narrowed down the types of permitted on the pmoperty, The property intensity area. The majority of the s zoned for general retail type uses. Th~ Commission considered the proposal at its 1991 and voted unanimously to approve the see a reasonable connection between concerning the wall issue and did not feel addresses at that time. es were the same as of the PD other than description of the )ing the shifting, it from where the single he issue of the wall =ept for by the land of the City than for the issue. They had He felt the proper D and make the land to initiate a public 2ity to determine the could leave happy was ~ouncil, to allow the ng center to be built .t always had. As a on a future agenda, 19 for the purpose of ~all. loner would have an [se for auto repair. ~r one use that they lowed use which was ~er to make the land 1 development rights, in the PD for a long ~anted to resolve the at in 1988 the City nee which corrected those ordinances to 9.2 acre tract as a for General Retail ~nce which approved a nt 19 which reflected approved as a retail e, receive a building The applicant had uses that would be was located in a low .re had already been Planning and Zoning meeting of January 9, request. It did not he two developments that it needed to be City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22. 1991 Page 16 Council Member Ayer stated that it was his understanding that the plan was for the ingress to the fire station to be on the north side of the library. Did the owners of lot B of the shopping area have any objections to the City sharing their driveway. Would that same driveway be used for entrance and exit of the shopping area. Svehla replied that when the trucks were leaving, they would use the driveway on the south. There would be ingress to the library and/or the fire station to the back side. Staff had already spoken to the owners. When the land swap was made, there would be a provision that would allow the City to jointly use the driveway for the access. It would also detail a cost sharing arrangement. Council Member Trent returned to the meeting. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-007 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING THE DETAILED PLAN FOR 11.20 ACRES OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LILLIAN MILLER PARK-WAY AND TEASLEY LAND; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Alexander motioned Hopkins seconded to adopt the ordinance excluding auto repair as one of the permitted uses. On roll vote, Trent "nay," Alexander "aye," HoPkins "aye," Gorton "nay," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. Hopkins motioned, Alexander seconded to direct staff to prepare the necessary documents for Council to redefine the zoning on PD19. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. C. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance approving a Detailed Plan for the purpose of constructing a fast food restaurant on a 0.6941 acre tract of land located north of Colorado Boulevard and west of Loop 288 and in front of the Target store. Z-90-012 (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval). 369 370 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 17 The Mayor opened the public hearing. Jim Coker, architect for the project, stated that the plan exceeded zoning requirements with respect to land use. Council Member Gorton asked the distance from the interchange of Loop 288 curbside to ingress curbside. Earl Mardeno assured that the Arby's to be built on the site would be well maintained and landscaping to exceed all of the requirements by the City. It will be well maintained and well run as the existing Arby's already located in Denton. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Karen Feshari, Urban Planner, stated that the proposal requested approval of a detailed plan for the purpose of constructing a fast food restaurant located at the northwest corner of Colorado Blvd. and Loop 288. The proposed development was located in a Ma~or Activity Center. According to the Denton Development Plan, these were the largest center strategically located to encourage the concentration of commercial retail, office, light industrial and multi-family housing. The submitted Detailed Plan reflected a fast food restaurant in an area that had been approved for retail/commercial type uses. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd felt that the ingress off of Colorado Blvd. might be too close to Loop 288 in terms of safety and agreed that the distances Council Member Gorton asked for were important. Council Member Trent asked Gorton to restate his question. Council Member Gorton asked what was the distance from Loop 288 off of Colorado to the ingress into the proposed site. Council Member Trent stated that the backup materials stated the distance was 80' Council Member Gorton asked what was that equivalent to in car lengths. Council Member Trent replied about five car lengths. Council discussion continued regarding the ingress into the site and concern regarding safety of movement at the site. Council was also concerned with the sharing of the main entrance to Target with the proposed Arby's and cars cutting across traffic to exit/enter Arby's. City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 18 Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that the traffic flow was designed so that the stacking of cars would occur within the Arby's parking lot and not in the street. The entrance on Colorado was strictly an entrance. This was designed so as to better facilitate movement of the traffic off of the street. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-008 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION AND DETAILED PLAN FOR 0.6941 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF COLORADO BOULEVARD AND LOOP 288; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, Trent seconded to adopt the ordinance. Council Member Gorton stated that a number of months ago, the Council had denied a pad site in the mall area for internal traffic reasons as well as external compounding of the traffic around the mall. He felt there was a better solution to the traffic pattern than what was presented. He could not support anything which would compound the current traffic problem around the mall. He was not concerned with the use but was concerned with the traffic pattern. On roll vote, Trent "aye." Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "nay," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. D. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance designating the property located at 305 Mounts Street a historic landmark under Article 28A of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (H 90 - 001). (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval). The Mayor opened the public hearing. Brian Morrison, property owner, stated that the home was worthy of the preservation due to its age, style and history. He felt · it would be a benefit to the City by providing solidity to the neighborhood and appeal to potential newcomers. He and some of his neighbors were interested in the future seeking to extend the historic district into their neighborhood. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. 371- 372 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 19 Harry Persuad, Senior Planner, stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Historic Landmark Commission had reviewed the request and both felt it deserved to be designated a historic site. Persuad reviewed the history of the home. After receiving historic designation, the owner of the property would be entitled to a 50% reduction in City taxes. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-009 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 305 MOUNTS STREET AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK UNDER ARTICLE 28A OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Gorton motioned, Boyd seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. Consent Agenda Hopkins motioned, Ayer seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Motion carried unanimously. A. Bids and Purchase Orders: 1. Bid 91191 - Fleet Vehicle 2. Bid 91193 - Truck and Dump Bodies 3. Bid 91194 - Digger Derrick and Truck 4. Bid 91198 - High Pressure Hose Assemblies 5. Bid 91204 - 69 KV Circuit Breakers 6. P.C. 911704 - Advance Control Systems 7. P.C. 911705 - Motorola B. Plats and Replats Considered the preliminary replat of Lot 1 and additional unplatted land to Lot iR, Block A, Denton Bible Church Addition located on the south side of University Drive near its intersection with Nottingham. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval). City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 20 Consider the preliminary plat of the R.N.W. Addition, Lots A, B, and C, Block 1 located at the southwest corner of Lillian Miller and Teasley Lane. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval). 5. Ordinances A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and providing for the award of contracts for the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies or services. (3.B.1. - Bid ~1191, 3.B.2. - Bid ~1193, 3.B.3. - Bid ~1194, 3.B.4. - Bid %1198, 3.B.5. - Bid ~1204) The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-010 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Ayer motioned, Gorton seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance providing for the expenditure of funds for purchases of materials or equipment which are available from one source in accordance with the provisions of state law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids. (3.B.6. - PC ~11704, 3.B.7. - PC ~11705) The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-011 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR PURCHASES OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Ayer motioned, Gorton seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Cagtleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. 373 374 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 21 C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing publication of Notice of Intention to issue Certificates of Obligation of the City of Denton, Texas. John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, stated that the ordinance authorized publication of notice of the City's intent to sell $590,000 worth of Certificates of Obligation. $200,000 of those Certificates would be for roof repair at City Hall and Central Fire Station. The remaining portion would be the City's annual vehicle purchase which was similar to a lease purchase where the City issued the Certificates and the departments paid back on a three period to the motor pool for those funds. The notice of intention was for March 5, 1991. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-012 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS. Hopkins motioned, Gorton seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. D. The Council considered adoption an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, approving a Planned Development District Detailed Plan for 1.727 acres of land located on the 1-35 service road, adjacent to Wolfe Nursery. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-013 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DETAILED PLAN FOR 1.727 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE 1-35 SERVICE ROAD, ADJACENT TO WOLFE NURSERY; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF SZ,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, Trent seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer "nay," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving an interlocal agreement between the City of Denton and the Texas Municipal Power Agency. City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 22 Tom Shaw, Purchasing Agent, stated that this was an interlocal agreement between the City of Denton and the Texas Municipal Power Agency for the purchase of a large circuit breaker. The breaker would be installed at the Arco Substation. TMPA had drawn up the specifications and bid for a larger number of the breakers. There would be a 15% savings by purchasing the breaker from TMPA. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-014 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY FOR THE PURCHASE 138 KV CIRCUIT BREAKERS FOR THE ARCO SUBSTATION: AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Ayer motioned, Gorton seconded to adopt the ordinance. vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," "aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry Motion carried unanimously. On roll Gorton "aye." Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that the only item he had was the Work Session item ~3 not discussed earlier. The Council considered Work Session Item #3 - received a report and held a discussion amending Article 11, Planned Developments, of the Zoning Ordinance. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that the Planning Department had been working with the Planning and Zoning Commission in an attempt to streamline the planned development process and make it more applicable and easier to use. Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that in May of 1990, staff discussed with the Planning and Zoning Commission, an amendment to Article 11 which would not require detailed building footprints in the first step of the PD process. There was a consensus then, that the provision of that very detailed information years in advance of actual construction was very problematic; that many PD's were often amended several times because of minor site plan amendments; and that in many cases, requiring building footprint and like data of such fine detail was not necessary during the first steps of the PD process. The Zoning Ordinance Task .Force eon~id~d th~ amondm~nt in November. They took t~timony from some large landowners and from local developers familiar with PD's. 375 376 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 23 With the existing system for tracts of 10 acres or more, there was a two step process involving a concept plan and a detailed plan. The current requirements for the conceptual phase of a PD were extremely detailed in nature. Sites of less than 10 acres were currently required to submit a detailed plan. If the pro~ect were approved at the concept stage, then the detailed plan had to be approved later by the Planning and zoning Commission. The proposed system had a three step process. The ma~or difference between the proposed process and the current process was that very detailed building footprints, landscape layouts would not be shown in the first two steps. The first step would be a general concept stage. It would include a showing of broad land use categories on a map, a table of less broadly defined uses, and development standards for each use. A site analysis of existing land use and environmental characteristics would be required. The General Concept Plan would be adopted by ordinance after first seen by the Planning and Zoning Commission. There would be public hearings at both the Planning and Zoning Commission and at the City Council. The second step was the development plan and would include all of the information required in the General Concept Plan but would have further details about the specific land uses on the ground and would have a more detailed table of permitted uses. Again, the Planning and Zoning Commission would see the Development Plan first and make a recommendation to the Council with public hearings at both meetings. Additional conditions could be added at both steps. Notice to landowners within 200' of the proposed development would be give at both of these steps. The developer had the option to propose any one of the three steps. Council Member Ayer stated that in the proposed system, the 10 acre rule would not apply. Robbins replied correct. There would be no limit on the size of the property that would like to take advantage of the zoning system. There would not be a development schedule either. The detailed plan's approval would be valid for 24 months, with Planning and Zoning granting an extension up to one year. The third step was the detailed plan. There was no change from the existing informational requirements as the current system. It was approvable Dy the Planning and Zoning Commission with appeal by the developer to the Council if denied. If 20% of land within 200' was protested, Council must approve by a majority vote. 200' notice would be given and public hearing before consideration. The Zoning Task Force recommended adoption of an ordinance allowing three steps, not requiring "footprints" in the first two steps, and eliminated the development schedule. The task force also recommended that there be no minimum development size that could be reviewed with the three step process. City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 24 Robbins continued that there was a concern regarding the number of public hearings required during the process. There was a potential of five or six public hearings. There were three 200' notice provisions in the process if started with the General Concept Plan. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that if the developer wanted to short cut that he could go to the detailed stage. Robbins replied he could go either skip step one and have the development plan approved or he could skip to step three. Many of the larger tracts could not directly skip to step three as they wouldn't know what would be on the tract a number of years from now. The process was generally what was wanted to do with the land, then the development plan with more specific ideas and then the detailed plan. Ron White and Don Dillard addressed the Council concerning the proposed plan. White reviewed the proposed requirements and approval requirements at each stage. He and Dillard felt that public hearings at stage three would be restricting development. Step three was an administration stage - a compliance matter because all the other details would have been worked out in steps one and two. White felt that the existing PD system was too restrictive and cumbersome to get through. Council Member Alexander suggested time lines for the public hearings. For example, if ten years passed, without development, then another public hearing might be required. Consensus of the Council was recommendations of the proposal. to proceed with staff 7. There was no official action taken on Executive Session items discussed during the Work Session. 8. New Business The following items of new business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: A. Council Member Alexander suggested returning to a former practice of taking a break at 9:00 p.m. during the Council meeting regardless of what the agenda indicated. B. COUnCil Member Gorton requested a staff report regarding the issues raised by Carl Young. He would like staff to look at the issues Young addressed and provide individuals with those facts. 377 378 City of Denton City Council Minutes January 22, 1991 Page 25 9. The Council then convened into Executive Session to discuss legal matters (considered action in Dyson v. City of Denton and considered action in County vs. City), real estate and personnel/board appointments (considered appointments to the Building Code Board, Community Development Block Grant Committee, the Electrical Code Board, the Historic Landmark Commission, the Human Services Committee, the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee, the Blue Ribbon Committee for Storm Water Utility and the Sign Board of Appeals). No official action was taken. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS / 3343C