Minutes March 24, 1992157
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MARCH 24, 1992
The Council convened into the Special Call Session at 5:15 p.m. in
the Civil Defense Room.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins; Council Members
Alexander, Chew, Perry, Smith and Trent.
ABSENT: None
1. The Council received a report and held a discussion with the
Parks and Recreation Board and the '91 Committee regarding
implementation of the 1986 bond program.
Steve Brinkman, Director of Parks and Recreation, detailed several
of the options dealing the with 1986 bond program.
Option One would build two new district recreation centers in the
northeast and southeast part of the community. Included in that
option would be money to purchase land for the sites. A
disadvantage of this option was the operation and maintenance costs
associated with new facilities, approximately $300,000 for both
facilities. These facilities would be low revenue producing
facilities due to the size of the facilities. The facilities would
be approximately the size of North Lakes and Denia which was half
the size of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center.
Option Two would expand the two existing centers and would add
approximately 10,000 square feet on to North Lakes and Denia. It
would allow for the purchase of a new community park somewhere in
the community for approximately $500,000. This would bring North
Lakes and Denia up to the size of MLk or 20,000 square feet. The
operation and maintenance costs for the expansion would add
approximately $150,000 for both facilities.
Option Three would build a new district recreation center the same
size as Martin Luther King, Jr. Center. Land would be purchased
for the facility and remaining funds would allow for a small
addition to North Lakes and Denia. All of the options used the
$2.7 million which was available and all of the options included
$500,000 for the purchase of land except for options one and three.
Option Four would create a community center at the North Lakes
Recreation Center. This would add approximately 20,000 square feet
to the current 10,000 square feet at the facility. The new
operation and maintenance costs would be approximately $100,000 and
the revenue increase would be approximately $30,000. Land would be
considered in this option and $100,000'would be used at Denia for
renovation of the existing building.
158
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 24, 1992
Page 2
Option Five would use approximately $2 million of the available
money and build a natatorium adjacent to the North Lakes Recreation
Center. Because there would be no funds for expansion, it would
not be possible, design wise, to create one building. There would
be the recreation center and a pool next to it as two separate
buildings.
Option Six would be a joint venture with the Denton Independent
School Board. This was the option which the Park Board and the '91
Committee felt was the most desirable option. The option would
include an additional 10,000 square feet onto North Lakes
Recreation Center, a 20,000 square foot indoor/outdoor swimming
pool with one half of the cost of the pool being covered by the
DISD. The DISD would be involved with a portion of the
operation/maintenance costs. The operation and maintenance costs
for the facility would be approximately $150,000 per year with
approximately $80,000 of potential revenue. Brinkman reviewed the
cost comparisons of the three primary options which were shown in
the agenda back-up.
Norman Hatfield, architect with Hatfield Crookless Architects,
detailed the plans for option six. The proposed structure would
include a new large gym with dressing rooms, a renovated center
with a fitness facility where the current gym was plus meeting
rooms. They had visited a number of pool facilities which were
jointly owned by a city and a school district and found that the
competitive pools were very heavily oriented toward competition and
very little done with recreation. It had been discussed that a
pool needed to be competitive but was heavily oriented towards the
recreation and community activities. A youth center would be
designed which would be separate from the rest of the Center. The
addition would involve approximately 10,000 square feet which would
double the present capacity of the Center. The natatorium would
include a 25 meter competition pool but a final decision had not
been made on the size of the pool. This option included a $1
million participation by the DISD. The pool would included eight
lanes with a large recreation pool. There was the possibility of
developing a water slide which would generate possible revenue.
The proposal would also include a spa.
Mayor Castleberry asked if a 25 meter pool was equivalent to an
olympic size pool.
Hatfield replied that an outdoor olympic size pool was 50 meters.
Competition for high school was run at 25 yards or 25 meters.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 24, 1992
Page 3
159
Council Member Perry asked what percentage of the pool use would be
for competition and what percentage would be for recreational
swimming.
Hatfield replied that scheduling would determine how it would be
used. The competitive pool could be used for recreation and
competition. The competitive pool had a minimum depth of four feet
which would limit some activities. There would also be a
recreation pool at the facility.
Brinkman stated that the competitive pool would be used primarily
for events such as swim teams. When the general public was in the
facility, both the competitive pool and the recreation pool would
be used by the recreational swimmers. The water temperature in the
recreational pool would be warmer than the competitive pool for
therapeutic functions.
Council Member Perry did not want to see the City subsidize a
private operation with competition.
Brinkman replied that the competitive meets would be DISD meets and
for City meets. There might be occasions where the facility would
be rented as any of the other city facilities.
Hatfield detailed option four which would not require DISD
participation. Option four would include similar renovation of the
North Lakes Recreation Center but would not include a pool. There
would be a new gym and additional meeting rooms. The design would
include future pool use. Option six was approximately $3.1 million
and option four was approximately $2.1 million.
Dalton Gregory, Chair-Parks and Recreation Board, stated that in
1986 when the bond package was passed, the vision for Denton was to
have more increase the park facilities in Denton. At that time,
three new recreations centers were envisioned. One center had been
built, the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center. As time went on, it was
hard to justify the two new centers with rising operation and
maintenance costs making it hard to keep the current centers open.
Another change was the park land donation policy. That policy
relied on the donation of land for park facilities. Now, however,
most of the developers who had been involved in the establishing of
that policy were no longer developing property in Denton and the
land possibilities were gone. If two new centers were to be built
now, they would have to be the size of North Lanes and Denia which
really were inadequate. The Parks Board would like the Council to
pursue other option~ to the building of two new centers. They
suggested creating better recreation facilities but not overburden
with operation and maintenance costs. Option six allowed
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 24, 1992
Page 4
participation with the DISD. The Board recognized that there may
be problems with the DISD and wanted more than one option. Option
four added an additional recreational facility which also had the
potential for a future pool expansion.
Council Member Trent asked that if the DISD participated, they
would pick up the cost of the pool.
Gregory replied that the DISD would pick up half of the cost of the
pool.
Council Member Trent asked if the Board had received any public
input on these options.
Gregory indicated that these had been preliminary discussions. The
strategy was to narrow the options before public hearings. Various
sites in the City had been contacted to hold the public hearings.
Council Member Perry suggested holding one of the public hearings
at the North Lakes Center as there was a strong neighborhood group
there and the Board could get good input from those individuals.
North Lakes would be impacted no matter which option was chosen.
Gregory replied that one of the first meetings was at the North
Lakes Center when the Board first started considering the idea.
Council Member Chew suggested holding one of the hearings at the
Senior Center as many of those individuals voted for the bond
program back in 1986 and needed the opportunity to participate.
Jack Miller, Chair-'91 Committee, stated that the purpose of the
'91 Committee was to keep check on the bond funds so that they were
spent as designated in 1986. He stated that conditions had changed
since 1986 and that the Committee had looked at the expenditures of
the funds over the years to see if that was the intent of the
voters. The Committee felt that the proposed options remained in
the intent of the voters. The options had the endorsement of the
'91 Committee and felt that it did not violate the trust of the
voters. The Committee supported option six as the primary option
with option four as a secondary option.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins stated that she was supportive of both groups
in taking the initiative in this issue. She felt it was better to
have several facilities which could offer more than four smaller
facilities which could offer less. She requested a refinement in
the options which would allow money for repair and renovation of
the Civic Center Pool. She suggested using bond funds for the
Civic Center Pool and perhaps interest money to fund land
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 24, 1992
Page 5
161
purchases. She was very supportive of the options but did not want
to neglect the Civic Center Pool.
Council Member Chew agreed.
Council Member Smith stated that the City needed to repair what it
already had and keep it in good condition.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that the staff should look into the
renovation of the Civic Center Pool after this season and include
it in the 1992-93 budget.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that staff would work with the
Park Board to determine the needs of the Civic Center Pool and
modify options six and four to accommodate those renovations. The
item would be placed on the next Council agenda for consideration.
2. The Council received a report from the Highway Department
regarding litter and sweeping activities on the I35E right-of-way.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that Buz Elsom of the
Highway Department was present to brief Council on what the
Department did on the I35 corridor.
Buz Elsom, Highway Department, stated that the Highway Department's
responsibilities on 35E and 35 were from the outside curbs in on
the frontage roads and jointly with the City from the outside curbs
to the right-of-way line. Currently mowing and litter the
Department had personnel to handle emergency/safety situations.
The remainder was contracted. The current litter contract had five
cycles per year. A cycle was one pick-up over a given area and
were spaced out over a 10 week interval. The number of cycles was
determined by the amount of litter picked up each time. An
acceptable amount of litter was between 5 and 8 cubic feet per
acre. Mowing was done in four cycles on the Intersate. The mowing
was spaced as the need was perceived. The first mowing was done
after the wildflowers went to seed and the last mowing was done
after the first frost. There currently was no sweeping contract in
the City. The Department used its own sweepers as the maintenance
people saw a need.
Council Member Trent noted a number of areas where there was a lot
of trash.
Elsom indicated that the Department would work with the City if an
area had an above average amount of trash. The Department mainly
had the work contracted out as opposed to their own crews.
16'2
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 24, 1992
Page 6
The Mayor thanked Mr. Elsom for his presentation.
Item #4 was considered.
4. The Council considered approval of a resolution authorizing
the Mayor to sign a petition requesting a Certificate of Interim
Use from the Interstate Commerce Commission for Union Pacific
right-of-way.
Jesus Nava, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that a prior
presentation indicated that the Union Pacific would notify the City
when they had submitted a petition for abandonment to the
Interstate Commerce Commission which was the federal agency
responsible for giving permission for abandonment. At the same
time that the Union Pacific filed a petition for abandonment, the
City needed to file a petition for a Certificate of Interim Use
from the ICC. This certificate put the ICC on notice that the City
was interested in the right-of-way and if granted, prevented the
Union Pacific from exercising their abandonment rights. The City
was still in the process of negotiating a lease agreement with the
Railroad. The resolution would authorize the Mayor to sign a
petition to submit to the ICC.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if this entailed any financial support
from the City.
Nava replied no.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R92-016
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN A PETITION REQUESTING A
CERTIFICATE OF INTERIM USE FROM THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE
COMMISSION FOR UNION PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Perry motioned, Alexander seconded to approve the resolution. On
roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith
"aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
The Council returned to the regular agenda order.
3. The Council received a reDort and held a discussion regarding
the Storm Water Utility.
163
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 24, 1992
Page 7
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that on
Tuesday, March 10, 1992, Bob Coplen, Chairperson of the Council's
Storm Water Utility Committee, presented the Committee's report.
The Council accepted the report at that time and requested that the
issue of establishing a storm water utility be placed on a future
Council workshop for additional discussion. The next phase in the
process of establishing a storm water utility, if the Council
decided to do so, would be to develop an Action Plan which would
include the necessary public hearings. The Committee recommended
that the storm water utility be established, but left the
implementation of the utility fees as an issue for Council's later
deliberations. To establish the utility would require (1)
preparation of an ordinance, (2) giving appropriate legal notice to
the public, and (3) hold public hearings. If, after these steps
were taken, the Council adopted the ordinance and established the
storm water utility, the utility could either continue to be funded
by ad valorem taxes, or the Council would decide to take the next
step and develop and set storm water fees. Nelson reviewed the
schedule necessary for an October 1, 1993 implementation of
establishing a storm water utility.
Council Member Perry indicated that he would like a comprehensive
lay out of what actually was involved, including current structures
and what might be proposed. Was there a five year plan or would it
involve only the existing drainage structures.
Nelson replied that staff could make a presentation on what the
City's long range system. He stated that the way the drainage
system currently operated would not be changed a great deal once
the utility was established.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins indicated that she was comfortable
establishing the utility without establishing the rates. She did
not want to move from the current situation until the City received
State or EPA requirements. She was comfortable initiating the
storm water utility but did not want to see any fees established at
this time.
Council Member Alexander agreed that the City needed to establish
the utility but was not ready to set any rate. He was concerned
with the structure of the rates. He was against establishing a
regressive rate structure and using it in any way to replace the
regressive property tax.
Council Member Trent asked about the size of staff needed to
administer a storm water utility. If more personnel were needed,
it would impact the budget. The recommendation from the Chairman
of the Committee was that if there were a fee, a corresponding
1.64
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 24, 1992
Page 8
reduction would occur in the ad valorem taxes. He agreed with that
point and also agreed that the fee did not have to implemented at
this point in time. He asked why a 25% exemption was given for
government properties which would include schools, universities and
the City.
Nelson replied that it was a compromise on the part of the
Committee. The universities and schools did not currently pay ad
valorem taxes and the effect of the utility would be a round robin
effect.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that he did not see the
implementation of the storm water utility having an effect on the
staff. There would be no more staff to run that utility. The
philosophy of the Committee regarding the implementation of the fee
had been divided. One group wanted to wait until the EPA required
it, one group wanted to implement in the following year's budget,
and one group wanted to implement it at the next budget year. Once
the quality mandates were received, there would be no debate as
costs would increase greatly. A budget question which Council
needed to discuss was an equity question of funding storm water
charges. He agreed with Council Member Alexander that a fee on the
surface tended to be regressive. What Council needed to discuss
was the current community situation in that there was so much tax
exempt property in the community which did not pay property tax.
In that situation, the residents had to pay a much higher property
tax in order to generate the same income most communities of
Denton's size generated. When the Council decided to implement the
utility, it could broaden the base which would include more
entities to help pay the cost.
Council Member Perry felt that without the universities, the City
would not have to worry as much about the size and structure of the
drainage system. However, the universities contributed in another
fashion to the City. The University of North Texas contributed
approximately one third of the dollars that flowed into the Denton
economy and in that sense did contribute to the tax base.
Council Member Alexander felt that the fee should be structured in
an equitable fashion. He was concerned that the fee structure,
itself, was regressive. He wanted to see that corrected before it
was implemented. He felt there was some value, in an equity sense,
of replacing the existing property tax used in this area with fees.
He wanted to be sure that the fees .implemented were not more
regressive than the property tax.
Council Member Chew asked about an exemption for churches.
165
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 24, 1992
Page 9
Nelson replied that the state law prohibited totally exempting
churches. The Committee had recommended that staff continue to
search for ways to assist churches. That probably would have to be
done on the state level.
Council Member Perry stated that one would have to be very careful
about the equity of the fee. What might be taken away in ad
valorem tax might triple in fee.
City Manager Harrell stated that there were three elements
involved. One was the operation and maintenance of the current
system, one was the drainage improvements to take care of the storm
water quantity and one was the water quality problems versus water
quantity problems.
Council Member Trent asked about the effect on new subdivisions or
development and the effect during the development stage.
Nelson replied that there would not really be a problem during the
development stage as the fee involved impervious surfaces. The
streets would be dedicated to the City and unless there was a lot
of concrete slabs, a developer would not have a problem.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the set up of the
storm water utility but not to proceed with any fee structure.
5. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, presented the following item:
A. The School District had invited the Council for a joint
luncheon. They had proposed the following dates: April 21, April
22, April 27, April 29, April 30 and May 1. He asked the Council
which dates would accommodate their schedules. Consensus of
Council was to try and hold the luncheon on May 1.
6. New Business
The following items of New Business were suggested by Council
Members for future agendas:
A. Council Member Trent had had a call from a homeowner on
Fairfax who had a drainage problem. He asked staff to look into
the problem.
B. Council Member Trent stated that portions of sidewalks
had been replaced on East Hickory and were lower than the original
grade. He asked that be investigated.
1,66
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 24, 1992
Page 10
C. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked for a report on the
possibility of drafting an ordinance regulating pockets of acreage
in the City which could be developed similar to the Goldfield plat.
D. Council Member Perry asked for a better explanation of
the State ruling relating to the plat/replat issue.
E. Council Member Chew asked for an update on the bird roost
problem.
F. Mayor Castleberry asked for a redrafting of the letter
sent to homeowners concerning the bird roost problem to make it
more user friendly.
G. Council Member Perry asked for a description of the
bounds of the egret nesting places.
7. The Council convened into the Executive Session to discuss
legal matters, real estate, and personnel/board appointments
(considered appointments to the Building Code Board, the Electrical
Code Board, the Sign Board of Appeals, the Historic Landmark
Commission, and the Planning and Zoning Commission; considered an
appointment of an Assistant City Judge for the Municipal Court; and
consulted with the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the
Municipal Judge regarding goals and objectives for 1992 for
Municipal Court.
8. There was no official action taken on Executive Session items.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
JENN% R' W TERS
CITY~CRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR/
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS/
/
ACC00056