Loading...
Minutes June 6, 1995037 CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 6, 1995 The Council convened into Closed Meeting on Tuesday, June 6, 1995 at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Chew, Cott, and Krueger. ABSENT: Council Members Miller and Biles. 1. The Council considered the following in Closed Meeting: A. Legal Matters -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.071 1. Considered action in Frances Rodqers v. City of Denton. 2. Considered action in Disheroon v. Scott, et.al. B. Real Estate -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.072 C. Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.074 1. Discussed the appointment process fOr part-time Municipal Judge. Council Members Miller and Biles arrived during the Closed Meeting. ~The Council convened into a Work Session on Tuesday, June 6, 1995 at 6:00 p.m. in the city Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Biles, Chew, Cott, Krueger and Miller. ABSENT: None 1. The Council received a report regarding the city's request for proposals for delinquent tax collection services and gave staff direction. Jon Fortune, Chief Finance officer, stated that each October the City billed taxes for that year. Those taxes became delinquent as of February 1st of the preceding year. Those citizens not paying their taxes as of that date received a letter in February, March and May in an attempt to collect the money due. As of July i those accounts still not paid were turned over to a delinquent tax collection firm for collection. The current contract with McCreary, Veselka, Bragg & Allen would expire as of June 30, 1995. It was standard procedure to request new bids for delinquent tax collection services when the delinquent tax collection attorney contract expired. Six firms responded to the request for proposal. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 2 Selected firms would make presentations at the next Council meeting. The back-up information contained a summary of each of the responding firms. Final selection of a firm was scheduled for June 13th and contract approval was scheduled for June 20th. A history of the City's actual collection rate as of September 30th was provided to the Council. The City's collection rate had increased during the last five years which meant that the amount of money which remained at the end of each year was decreasing. A summary of each firm which had responded to the request for proposal was noted. The summary included information such as whether the firm met the general requirements of the request for proposal, whether the firm had adequate software for the job, number of staff on each firm, closest office location, whether the firm was affiliated with local counsel, extent of the practice, total number of current clients, and EEO employer status. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that recent legislation was passed concerning anti-affirmative action and asked if that applied only to State contracts. Acting City Attorney Mike Bucek stated that he would research that information for Council. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that part of the contract indicated that the City would pay 15% of the amount of delinquent taxes. Fortune stated that the taxes collected would have a 15% penalty and interest clause plus a monthly interest charge. When a citizen paid the taxes to the City, he paid that penalty and interest and the City would then reimburse the particular collection attorney for that amount. Council Member Biles stated that Council had a memorandum which indicated that over the last six years there was an increasing collection rate. Which of those six years had the City been represented by the McCreary firm. Fortune replied that the City had been represented for the years 1992-93. 1992 was only half of a year as that was the year the City changed firms. The prior firm had six months to collect on accounts in suit at the time the firms were changed. Council Member Biles asked who was the firm presently representing the DISD. Fortune stated that it was Blair, Goggan, Sampson & Meeks. City of Denton City Counci~inu~es ~ ~ June 6, 1995 Page 3 Council Member Biles asked if when the DISD filed a suit in its tax collection procedure, were other taxing entities notified of that suit or by statute, would the other taxing entities be involved in the same law suit. Fortune replied correct. Council Member Biles stated that the numbers might not reflect total service as there might be a cross of the two entities. Fortune stated that when the DISD firm filed a suit and if the account was also delinquent for City taxes, the city would automatically be joined in the suit. Council Member Biles stated that the case might be that one or other of the two firms which had been representing the city might have taken the lead either by representing the City or the DISD. The numbers would be a composite as a result of joining of forces. Council Member Cott stated that there were three entities from which taxes were collected in the City of Denton. One had nothing to do with the other at a given point in time because the factors were different and were not coordinated. The fact that a firm could collect in another city had nothing to do here. The City had a firm which had improved every day with that tax collection. There was no method of direct comparison and such a comparison should not be done. He felt that the City should stay with the current firm. Council Member Miller stated that the Council went through this two years ago and felt at that time that it would be in the best interest to review this contract on a regular basis. Miller motioned, Chew seconded to ask the firms of Blair, Goggan, Sampson & Meeks; M¢Creary, Veselka, Bragg & Allen; and Sawko & Burroughs to make presentations to Council on June 13th. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. 2. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the proposed 1996-2000 Capital Improvements Program. Jon Fortune, Chief Finance Officer, stated that the capital improvements process began each February with the distribution of a budget priorities questionnaire to the Council. At that same time, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Public Utilities Board held a joint public hearing to receive citizen input and 04O city of Denton city Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 4 comments regarding a proposed capital improvements program. This information was used by staff to make a recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission for the General Government portion and by the Public Utilities Board for the utilities portion of the CIP. Final recommendations were made by the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 31, 1995. The recommendation was to recommend the CIP as recommended to the Planning and zoning Commission by the Executive Team for the general government and by the Public Utilities Board on the utilities side with the condition that all of the comments made in regards to the discussion of the program be included with the capital improvements. Council typically adopted the first year of the five year plan. As the years proceeded, staff could recommend new projects for the fifth year. This year the following projects needed to be restructured: Myrtle Street paving and drainage, Collin Street paving and drainage, and Eagle Drive drainage. These projects did not change the funding scenarios of any of the early years. The second change in this CIP from the previous CIP was the purchase of Loop 288 right-of- way/Phase I and Phase II. This project was placed in the plan due to a slight growth in property values plus a minor restructuring of the debt for the first two years. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that in a memorandum to the Planning and Zoning Commission from Kathy DuBose it was indicated that the additional funding was made possible by the increase in property values with a change in debt repayment structure. She asked for an explanation in the change of the debt repayment structure. Kathy DuBose, Executive Director for Finance, stated that the possibility of issuing debt later in the year was considered. The debt could be structured so that only an interest payment was due the first year and not a principle payment. With that slight savings, it was possible to open up enough funding. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that the remainder of the additional money would come from the increase in property values. DuBose stated that there was a slight increase. The figures were based on an estimated 2% growth and last year there was an approximate 4 1/2% growth. Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if because more money might be available would more extensive work be done on Eagle Drive. DuBose replied no. Only the phasing was ~hanged and not any of the figures. Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if Eagle Drive needed to be done first. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 5 Jerry Clark, City Engineer, stated that the exiting system was half the size which was needed. There was bad flooding in the area and the need was to do the drainage first. Council Member Miller asked if there was money from prior bond issues for the Loop 288 project. Clark replied that funds were originally passed for the section from U. S. 380 to I35. City Manager Harrell stated that the City had bond authority for that section of road. Council Member Biles stated that based on the May 31st minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission, individual comments were listed. No where in the minutes did it contain a motion and a vote on the CIP. Fortune stated that on page 14 of the minutes, Commissioner Schertz motioned that the Commission present to the City Council each Commissioner's comments and their recommendation regarding the CIP stated by each individual member. Council Member Biles stated that the Commissioners did not adopt the CIP program. DuBose stated that the Commission recommendation was to approve the CIP and attach with that their comments to the Council. Council Member Biles stated that the minutes did not reflect that. The thoughts of the Commissioners, as indicated in the minutes, did not substantiate the position of the CIP. Repeatedly in their comments, the Commissions felt that they had inadequate preparation time, backup and documentation to consider the CIP. Their second concern was drainage. No where in the minutes was there a motion or a vote to accept the CIP. What the Commissioners did indicate was that they wanted their comments heard by Council. Those comments stated that the Commissioners were inadequately informed and what they wanted was drainage. He asked if he was misreading the minutes. DuBose stated that he might not have all the information from the minutes. She clarified three times at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting that the document would go forward, incorporating their comments. Council Member Biles stated that he had talked with three Commissioners regarding the CIP. On page 3 of the 1995-96 CIP, the '042 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 6 last line item was Loop 288 by-pass right-of-way. That was the only place where that item appeared. Three Commissioners had indicated to him that the CIP book presented to Council was not what they thought they were getting. He had a problem with what was being presented to Council. City Manager Harrell stated that the Charter requirement indicated that the Planning and Zoning Commission had to submit to the City Manager a CIP program 90 days prior to the start of the fiscal year. That requirement had been made. It was staff's understanding that although individuals were still having concerns regarding the CIP which were expressed to the Council, the Charter obligation had been met in the recommendation of the CIP submitted to Council. If that was not the case, then it needed to be clarified and the Planning and Zoning Commission needed to make changes necessary to the document to be comfortable as a group on what was being submitted to the Council. If necessary, the document needed to be referred back the Planning and Zoning Commission for reconsideration. Council Member Krueger felt that the Planning and Zoning Commission did not approve the document. What was indicated was that a motion was made to approve the CIP as recommended by the Executive Team and the Public Utilities Board. He had also talked with two Planning and Zoning Commissioners who related their frustration regarding a lack of time to look at each line item. He felt that the report was difficult to follow and was concerned about the priorities. DuBose stated that the discussions also indicated that at this point, the City did not have the bond authority to go forward with this CIP. The Council would probably appoint a Blue Ribbon Committee similar to the 1986 bond election. That committee made recommendations to the Council regarding particular projects and the timing of the projects. Council Member Krueger suggested referring the document back to the Planning and Zoning Commission and to request specific recontmendation~ where they approve or disapprove the item~. Mayor Pro Tem Brock suggested that since there were some questions regarding the CIP and as there was time to refer it back to the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Commission should take another look at the document. In effect, theory was being discussed as the City had no money to ~pend on capital improvements until there was a bond election. That bond election had to be approved by the public. There would be many opportunities to rearrange priorities and to accept public input. 043 City of Denton City Council~Minutes i~.~? June 6, 1995 Page 7 DuBose pointed out that at the request of the Commission, an additional meeting was held to review the CIP. Council Member Miller felt that the document should be returned to the Commission for further consideration. If there was some confusion, it should be clarified. He suggested a summary of those capital improvements which already had bond funds as it would be helpful to know what had already been authorized. Council Member Biles felt that the Commissioners did not have enough time to review the documents in order to make decisions regarding the CIP. DuBose stated that Commissioners Norton and Cochran had made some of the statements assuming that something had been deleted from the CIP. They felt that something had been taken out of the CIP to allow something else to be placed in. That was not correct. Every year, the fifth year of the CIP was added and not the entire documents. Much of the information was not new information but merely the fifth year was new. City Manager Harrell stated that the first page under the General Government tab indicated bond money already sold and with existing funds. A second column indicated authorized but unissued bonds which were bonds which the citizens had given approval to issue but had not been sold yet. The last column was a long list of unauthorized unissued projects. Those projects needed citizen approval. Council Member Cott noted that there were many absentees during the Commission procedure which might have caused some of the confusion. Mayor Castleberry stated that the consensus of the Council was to return the CIP document to the Planning and zoning Commission for reconsideration. 3. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding possible purchase of Denton's cable television system. This item was considered during the Regular Session under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager. The Council convened Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, June 6, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. 04; city of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 8 PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Council Members Chew, Cott, and Miller. ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Biles and Krueger 1. Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Pro Tem Brock joined the meeting. 2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of May 9 and May 16, 1995. Miller motioned, Chew seconded to approve the minutes as presented. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Chew "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Council Members Krueger and Biles joined the meeting. Mayor Castleberry presented the following proclamation: National Garden Week 3. Resolutions of Appreciation A. The Council considered a resolution of appreciation for Virginia Bruce. The following resolution was considered: NO. RA95-014 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR VIRGINIA BRUCE Cott motioned, Chew seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Bil~ "aye", and Mayor Castleberr¥ "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Castleberry presented the Yard of the Month awards to: La Colina Apartments A1 and Darlene M~Natt Herb and Mutt Ferrill Caitlyn, Brenda and Nim Ashley Roshaun and Sheilah Bell City of Denton city Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 9 B. The Council considered a resolution of appreciation for Eldon Lew Hawes. The following resolution was considered: NO. RA95-015 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR ELDON LEW HAWES Chew motioned, Cott seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 4. Citizen Reports A. The Council received a report from Wilbert Bryant regarding the lighting for the basketball courts at the North Lakes Recreation Center. Mr. Bryant was not at the meeting. B. The Council received a report from Nell Lights regarding the flood plain and her property located at 514/516 E. Prairie and 509 Maddox. Ms. Lights was not at the meeting. 5. Citizen Requests A. The Council considered a request from Julia LoSoya for an exception to the noise ordinance for a band concert at the North Texas Fairgrounds until 12:00 midnight on Friday, June 30, 1995. Veronica Rolen, Administrative Assistant, stated that Ms. LoSoya had requested an exception to the noise ordinance. The City Council had granted a prior exception to Ms. LoSoya with only one call received during the event. Ms. LoSoya had other concerts at the Fairground with no exceptions to the noise ordinance. Those concerts had several complaints. Council Member Cott asked if the noise complaints were identified or anonymous. Rolen replied that the calls were received at Central Dispatch with no indication of a name from the caller. The calls were well documented regarding type of call, time of dispatch and response. 046 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 10 Council Member Cott felt that the organization should be given another chance as some times the calls were false. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that at times when citizens had called her about disturbances at the Fairgrounds, she had gone out and found that they were not false calls. Some calls were legitimate and were concerns. Krueger motioned, Brock seconded to approve the exception. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 6. Public Hearings A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance rezoning .6148 acres to a General Retail (GR) zoning district, from an Agriculture (A) district. The site, contiguous with an existing GR district, fronted on the southbound 1-35E service road, approximately 280 feet northwest of Teasley Lane. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval, 7- 0.) Frank Robbins, Director of Planning and Development, stated that this was an addition to the general retail district. The anticipated use would be for a hotel but was not the explicit use indicated. There was no site plan presented but the motel was the anticipated use. The proposal was located in moderate activity area as shown on the Denton Development Plan. Zoning was consistent with the policies associated with a moderate activity area. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Jim Dewey stated that the anticipated use of the property was for a motel on the site. He was available for questions from Council. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked about exits and entrances for the proposal. Jerry Clark, City Engineer, stated that there would be a shared access on I35 with a vacant lot and a shared access with the Shell Station on Teasley Lane. City of Denton City Council Minutes~ ~- June 6, 1995 Page 11 047 Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if the access would only go on Teasley with the rebuilding. Clark replied correct. Mayor Pro Tem Brock expressed concern regarding adequate access. Clark replied that the shared drives would eliminate the need to have three driveways in a row in the area. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-103 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM AGRICULTURAL (A) TO GENERAL RETAIL (GR) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR A 0.6148 ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35E, APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET NORTHWEST OF ITS INTERSECTION WITH TEASLEY LANE (FM 2181); PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Cott seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. B. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance rezoning 38.429 acres from the Planned Development (PD-70) and Agriculture (A) zoning districts to the Commercial Conditioned [C(c)] zoning district on property located on the southeast corner of Loop 288 and Spencer Road. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 7-0.) Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that this would be a conditioned zoning with no associated site plan. There would be a number of uses allowed with the zoning but it was anticipated that the site would be used for a Walmart SuperStore. The proposal was located in the southeast urban center according to the Denton Development Plan's concept map. An urban center was an area which was planned for the highest concentration of commercial and employment centers. The use was consistent with the Denton Development Plan. The conditions listed limited the uses in the district but the allowed uses were consistent with commercial zoning south of the location. The Mayor opened the public hearing. 048 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 12 Tom Galbreath indicated that he was representing the existing owner of the property. Walmart was proposing to develop the property for a superstore. This larger Walmart would add a grocery store with a larger store area for general merchandise. He reviewed the details of the dimensions and layout of the proposed store plus the traffic flow for ingress and egress to the property. The proposed layout of the property would save several large oak trees on the property. Water and sewer service would have to be extended to the property. Drainage would flow from a small area on the road system to the west of the property to a pipe system into dedicated retention ponds. He felt that the proposal would present no problems with the surrounding property owners. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that the water line would be extended at city expense and the streets would be at the builder's expense. Galbreath replied correct. Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked about a reference to a Mrs. Myers who had concerns regarding the proposal. Galbreath stated that Ms. Myers was made aware of the zoning and had called Walmart directly. She had expressed concerns with the uses of the property. Uses which were restricted included sexually oriented businesses, go cart tracks, dance halls when the primary business was the sale of alcohol, etc. Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked how long Walmart had been dealing with the City in this development. Galbreath stated that they had started looking at the site in October/November. The Walmart executives wanted to make sure that this was the right site and took a longer period of time to evaluate the site and other sites. Once they had settled on the site, Denton had been one of the faster cities they had worked with in terms of what could be done to help, what meetings were necessary, etc. Council Member Co%t asked about the possible expansion of the super store. Galbreath replied that in the past Walmart had always reserved property in the rear or side of the store for possible expansion. Walmart had since stopped allocating that area for future development. No one spoke in opposition. City of Denton City Council MihUt~S'~ June 6, 1995 Page 13 The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-104 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 70 (PD-70) AND AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS AND USE DESIGNATIONS TO COMMERCIAL-CONDITIONED (C(c)) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATIONS AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 38.429 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF LOOP 288 AND SPENCER ROAD; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FORAN EFFECTIVE DATE. Cott motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. C. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance rezoning 2.004 acres to a Single-Family Seven (SF- 7) zoning district, from an Agriculture (A) district. The site was located on the northwest corner of Hinkle Drive and Haggard Lane. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval, 7-0.) Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that this would be a single family development which would adjoin an existing single family development. The intensity allocation would be less with this development. The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one spoke in favor. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Miller left the meeting. The following ordinance was considered: O5O City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 14 NO. 95-105 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM AGRICULTURAL (A) TO SINGLE FAMILY - 7 (SF-7) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATIONAND USE DESIGNATION FOR A 2.004 ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HINKLE DRIVE AND HAGGARD LAND; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Biles motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 7. Variances A. The Council considered a variance to Section 34-124 (f) 3 of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations concerning drainage for the proposed Diamond H Ranch. The 41.241 acre tract was located on the south side of Jim Christal Road, at Egan Road. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 7-0 with the condition that adequate easements be dedicated on the associated plat.) Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that the next five items on the agenda dealt with exaction variances associated with the subdivision and land regulations. An exaction was a standard in the subdivision ordinance which required a developer to build certain infrastructure or dedicate easements or right-of-way for certain public improvements. There was a specific and separate variance process which the Council was associated with. This dealt with tax payers dollars and who should build the improvement. Council Member Miller returned to the meeting and Council Member Cott left the meeting. Robbins continued that the first variance dealt with a very large lot subdlvi~ion with only one house to be d~veloped on the lot. The first variance was to the requirement to build underground or piped drainage improvements. The standard was that if water could be carried in a 48 inch pipe, then piping had to be built. Understanding that only one house could be built in the agricultural zoning, the Planning and Zoning Commission felt that it would be beyond reasonable benefit to require that the underground piping be provided and recommended the variance. The standards for approval of an exaction variance were that the imposition of the standards were so excessive as to be confiscatory City of Denton City Council Minutes.~ June 6, 1995 Page 15 051 or that it exceeded any reasonable benefit to the property owner. Brock motioned, Miller seconded to approve the variance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. B. The Council considered a variance to Section 34-114 (5) and (17) of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations concerning perimeter paving and sidewalks for the proposed Diamond H Ranch. The 41.241 acre tract was located on the south side of Jim Christal Road, at Egan Road. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 7-0.) Council Member Cott returned to the meeting. Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that exactions dealt with the perimeter street paving of Jim Christal Road and associated sidewalk improvements. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended a complete variance. Improvements for the street were estimated to be $66,000 and $11,000 for the sidewalks. In previous cases, a figure had been estimated for the cost of street perimeter paving on an average lot with 60' of frontage. Staff had recommended $5400 of improvements be made. The Planning and Zoning Commission decided that that would not be appropriate in this case. They amended a general development plan which was associated with property to the east of this proposal. The amendment to that general development which would apply to the rest of the development was that the developers of the rest of the land would be responsible for the improvements along Jim Christal Road. Council Member Cott expressed a concern regarding the variance relating to the sidewalks. The City needed to make up its mind if it wanted sidewalks or not. Robbins replied that the regulations did not require a fee but required that the improvement be made or fees in lieu. That was a developer option. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that in this case it would not be practicable to have sidewalks on this site. Brock motioned, Krueger seconded to approve the variance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. 052 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 16 C. The Council considered a variance to Section 34-124 (f) 3 of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations concerning underground drainage improvements for the proposed Happy Valley Addition. The addition was located on the IH-35E frontage road, between Teasley and Sam Bass Roads. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended a partial variance 6-0.) Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that a development plat was being processed for this location. A development plat was a different form of platting than a subdivision plat. A development plat included a site plan. Conditions associated with the request were that two drainage easements would carry the runoff. The drainage improvements would be made in the easements rather than in the pipe system. Council Member Biles left the meeting. Brock motioned, Chew seconded to approve the Planning and Zoning recommendations. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. D. The Council considered a variance to Section 34-114 (17) of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations concerning sidewalks'for the proposed Happy Valley Addition. The addition was located on the southbound IH-35E frontage Road, between Teasley Lane and Sam Bass Roads. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial 7-0.) Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that this was a variance for sidewalks which were required to be built along I35. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of the variance and to construct the sidewalks. The cost was $3,000 for the sidewalks and the Commission felt that was not in excess of the cost for the property. There was a sidewalk currently adjoining the property and two associated properties would be probably be developed in the near future which would allow the sidewalks to link up. Brock motioned, Chew seconded to follow the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny the request for a variance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. City of Denton City Council~Minutes ~.~ June 6, 1995 Page 17 053 E. The Council considered a variance to Section 34-114 (17) of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations concerning sidewalks for the proposed Milam Creek Ranch, Phase One. The 26.1 acre site was located on the south side of Milam Road (F.M. 3163) east of Interstate 35. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 6-1.) Council Member Biles returned to the meeting. Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that this was a request for a sidewalk variance to the internal street. Under current regulations, because the proposed subdivision was further than 8,000 feet from an existing City of Denton water line, perimeter street paving along Milam Road and the perimeter sidewalk in the same area was not required. But perimeter sidewalks were required on one internal street. The Planning and Zoning Commission considered the facts that the sidewalks would not connect on the perimeter, that the lots were very large, that it was a considerable distance from any existing pedestrian destinations and felt that it exceeded the reasonable benefit to the' development. At the same time, the Commission directed staff to consider those same variables in an amendment to the Subdivision Regulations which might not require any development under those kinds of conditions to have to build internal sidewalks. Mayor Castleberry noted that the property was in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction and not in the City limits. Krueger motioned, Biles seconded to approve the variance. Council Member Miller asked if there were any conditions associated with this variance. Robbins replied that there were no conditions associated with this variance. There was an issue which the Planning and Zoning Commission had discussed with the developer which dealt with deed restrictions. That restriction would convey information to potential buyers and owners that the City of Denton would not build a sidewalk. Council Member Miller asked how that was included in the variance. Robbins replied that it was not included in the variance and was not a condition of the variance. The Planning and Zoning Commission had an understanding that rather than an ordinance requirement that would occur and anticipated that it would be included on a plat which would be later reviewed by the Commission. There was no legal binding for that condition. O54 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 18 On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 8. Consent Agenda Brock motioned, Chew seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. A. Bids and Purchase Orders: Bid #1736 - Annual Solid Waste Analytical Testing Interlocal Agreement - Houston-Galveston Area Council of Governments Contract - Alan Plummer and Associates 9. Consent Agenda ordinances The Council considered Consent Agenda ordinances 9A. - 9C. Biles motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinances. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. A. NO. 95-106 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. (7.A.1. - Bid #1736) B. NO. 95-107 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE HOUSTON-GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE PARTICIPATION IN VARIOUS HOUSTON-GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL CONTRACTS FOR THE PURCHASE OF VARIOUS GOODS AND SERVICES; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (7.A.2. - Interlocal Agreement) C. NO. 96-108 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTONAND ALAN PLUMMERAND ASSOCIATES TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REQUIRED RELATING TO THE PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A COMPOST FACILITY AT THE CITY'S PECAN CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT; PROVIDING OF THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (7.A.3.) City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 19 055 10. Ordinances A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and providing for the award of contracts for public works or improvements. (Bid #1706) City Manager Harrell stated that this item normally would have appeared on the Consent Agenda but since it was complex, it was listed alone. Tom Shaw, Purchasing Agent, stated that this bid was for the renovation of City Hall West. It was recommended that the award be given to the lowest bidder of OWC Construction Company in the amount of $375,745. The bids did exceed the original estimates but funds were available for the full project as presented. City Manager Harrell stated that this was the second major building scheduled for renovation as listed in the City's space plan. The first was the Denton Municipal Complex which provided for changes in space allocation for the city departments. It was hoped that the bid for the fire sprinkler would come in at a lower cost than what was received. It was the intent to try and negotiate with the bidder to make modifications to the system to reduce the cost of the sprinkler system. Council Member Miller stated that all the renovations would be internal and would not deal with the exterior of the building. Shaw replied that there would be nothing exterior other than additional landscaping. Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that the Historical Landmark Commission had reviewed and approved exterior alternatives to the building. Certificates of appropriateness had been issued for windows which might be installed. Those might not be part of this particular package. Council Member Cott asked if the cost over run was in the sprinkler system. Shaw indicated that the total bid was $375,745. It was anticipated that $262,000 would be for the base bid but was received at $303,000. The fire sprinkler bid was anticipated to be $55,000 and was received at $72,000. Council Member Cott asked if the sprinklers were included in the bid. '05 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 20 Shaw replied that originally there was $317,000 for the project including the sprinklers and the bid came in at $375,000. Council Member Cott asked why the sprinklers were needed. City Manager Harrell stated that the building had a great historic value and the philosophy of the City was to sprinkle when improvements were done to such a building. Mayor Castleberry stated that the purpose of approaching this in this manner was to be able to negotiate the fire sprinkler system. City Manager Harrell stated that it was anticipated that the cost should be lowered through negotiations with the supplier. It also appeared that there was much construction activity going on at this time and bids seemed to be coming in higher than originally estimated. Council Member Cott asked if the bids were too high, why not wait a year and rebid the project. City Manager Harrell stated that the bids would not be any better a year from now. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that it was the Council's policy that the City would conform to the requirements placed on private entities. One goal was to bring the building up to city code. It was an important principle to set an example for others in the City. Council Member Krueger stated that the City did not have to sprinkle this building but was doing so to show that the city was willing follow the requirements. The amount of money for the sprinkler system was equal to the cost of two fire fighters. He did not believe that it was necessary to spend that much money to make a point. Mayor Castleberry stated that it was not a case of making a point. The building did not have to b~ ~prinkl~red. It was a case of preserving and protecting an important City historic building. Prevention was much better than cures in some cases. The ordinance did not apply to this district but the City should follow the requirement. City Manager Harrell stated that if a privat~ party was doing the proposed renovations, they would not have to install the sprinkler system. If a private party was building a new structure, they would have to install the sprinklers. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 21 O57 Council Member Krueger felt that this was being done to make a point and the City could not afford to make such a point. Mayor Castleberry stated that other public buildings in Denton would be sprinklered in the future. Council Member Cott stated that he could see that the sprinkler system would protect the building but not the contents. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-109 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Miller seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Krueger "nay", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance prohibiting the parking of vehicles on certain portions of North Elm Street. (The Traffic Safety Commission recommended approval.) Jerry Clark, City Engineer, stated that this was a request from Larry Harberson who had a business in the area. The intent of the ordinance was to not have cars opening doors into the lanes of traffic. Council Member Cott asked where parking would be once restricted from the street. Clark replied that there was adequate on-site parking in the rear of the building. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-110 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROHIBITING THE PARKING OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF NORTH ELM STREET; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PEN;LLT¥ NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARINGAN EFFECTIVE DATE. City of Denton city Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 22 Chew motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance prohibiting the parking of vehicles on certain portions of Londonderry Lane. (The Traffic Safety Commission recommended approval.) Jerry Clark, city Engineer, stated that this was an existing policy zone in which the no parking was enforced by policy rather than by ordinance. All the area landowners were contacted regarding the no parking and no one was in opposition to the signage. Council Member Cott asked where the parking would be. Clark replied that this was an existing no parking zone and that there was good on-site parking in the area. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-111 AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE PARKING OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF LONDONDERRY LANE; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF A FINE NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00); PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance prohibiting the parking of vehicles on certain portions of West Oak Street. (The Traffic Safety Commission recommended approval.) Jerry Clark, City Engineer, stated that this was also an old policy zone put into place without an ordinance to enforce the no parking. Both property owners approved the existing no parking zone. The following ordinance was considered: City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 23 NO. 95-112 AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE PARKING OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF WEST OAK STREET; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF A FINE NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00); PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Biles seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance prohibiting the parking of vehicles on certain portions of Avenue B. (The Traffic Safety Commission recommended approval.) Jerry Clark, City Engineer, stated that this was an old policy zone in place without the existence of an enforcement ordinance. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-113 AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE PARKING OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF AVENUE B; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF A FINE NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00); PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Krueger motioned, Biles seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 11. Resolutions A. The Council considered approval of a resolution adopting Policy No. 106.06 "Response Time and On-Call Duty". Tom Klinck, Director of Human Resources, stated that this resolution would authorize implementation of a new policy for employees to respond and be available after normal duty hours. The policy would formalige the current practices and policies within the City and would ensure that the City was in compliance with State and Federal regulations. The policy set minimum response times and on-call responsibilities, particularly in emergency 06O City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 24 situations. The policy would ensure that employees with the proper knowledge and expertise would be available for response. The policy provided that each department director would set procedures based on the nature of the service provided and to ensure fairness and consistency across organizational lines. The city would be required to pay overtime for any work extended beyond 40 hours per week. There would be no budget impact as the overtime hours were already included in department budgets. Council Member Miller asked if this was the current policy and the resolution would formalize that policy. Klinck replied correct especially with current regulations. Council Member Biles asked why a minimum of two hours was being provided instead of perhaps one hour. Klinck replied that that was a balance with people being restricted by phone. Research showed that most calls took more than two hours when called out. Rather than paying someone to sit and wait to be called, it was preferred to pay about what the minimum call out would be. That would allow the employee to leave home and still respond in an effective manner. Council Member Biles stated that in most circumstances, if someone had to unlock a door for an event and it could be done in a much shorter period of time, why not pay for an hour of work instead of two hours of work. Klinck replied that those were normally scheduled activities which were already anticipated in advance. Department directors would have the opportunity to schedule people for some events which would eliminate some overtime work. This policy was referring to emergency situations when there would be a need to respond to a power outage, etc. city Manager Harrell stated that this was a trade-off, recognizing that when an employee was assigned to an on-call status there were ~om~ re~triction~ on that employee and his activities. Having a minimum period which was not excessive would be a recognition that if the employee had to go out on a call, he would be compensated for that work. Council Member Cott suggested deferring this item for a week to work out a base budget and what the contingency would be. This would provide what the policy would cost the City. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 25 Klinck replied that the overtime contingency had already been built into the budget and this policy would formalize what currently was done. There would be no budgetary impact as the dollars were already built into budget. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-029 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING POLICY NO. 106.06 "RESPONSE TIME AND ON- CALL DUTY"; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Miller motioned, Brock seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. Council considered Item #12. 12. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance canvassing the results of the run-off election held for District One on June 3, 1995. City Secretary Jennifer Walters presented the returns of the election. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-114 AN ORDINANCE CANVASSING THE RETURNS AND DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE RUNOFF MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD IN THE CITY OF DENTON ON JUNE 3, 1995. Chew motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Chew "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 13. 'Oath of Office for District One Council Member. Jennifer Walters, City Secretary, administered the Oath of Office to Carl Gene Young, Sr. - District One. 14. Election of a Mayor Pro Tempore. Cott nominated, Young seconded David Biles for Mayor Pro Tempore. 062 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 26 Brock nominated Jack Miller for Mayor Pro Tempore. On roll vote for Biles for Mayor Pro Tempore, Miller "nay", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "nay", Brock "nay", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 4-3 vote. Council returned to the regular agenda order. B. The Council considered approval of a resolution approving an ordinance format to be used in granting to persons responsible for annual events which had demonstrated a history of past responsible compliance with the City's noise ordinance, exceptions to the limitations imposed by Section 20-1 (c) (2) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, with respect to hours of operation of an amplified loudspeaker system, pursuant the provisions of that section. Veronica Rolen, Administrative Assistant, stated that on an annual basis several organizations came before the Council to request exceptions to the noise ordinance for the use of amplified sound. At the March 28, 1995 work session staff presented a draft ordinance which would allow for multiple year exceptions to the noise ordinance to organizations which consistently served the public interest and demonstrated responsible use of amplified sound. The ordinance format included in the back-up materials would have to be adopted for each organization or event requesting the special exception. The resolution would adopt the policy to allow for these multiple year exceptions. Council Member Krueger asked for the definition of multiple years. Rolen stated that multiple years as outlined in the ordinance format was defined as granting the exception for no more than 3-5 years. Council Member Krueger stated that he wanted a specific number of years. Rolen replied that that would be a decision of Council. The ordinance was a format. For each organization requesting an exception, the Council would use the format to set limitations such as specific weekends, the number of years, etc. Council Member Krueger asked what would be the criteria for setting the number of years for ~he exception. Rolen stated that the ordinance prepared for Council was a draft. Council could decide to grant exceptions for a specific number of City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 27 063: years for each organization requesting the exception. The format provided the flexibility to place qualifications/criteria on each organization. Mayor Castleberry stated that the purpose of the ordinance was to allow annual events to not have to come to Council each year for an exception which made it easier on the organizations. Mike Bucke, Acting city Attorney, stated that the ordinance was drafted following the direction of Council. If an organization had only been to Council for three previous years, the Council might be concerned about providing a five year exception. If an organization had been to Council for six years, the Council might want to give that organization a five year exception. The format gave the Council the flexibility to deal with different types of situations with various organizations. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated the Council would be requiring an organization to request single exceptions for three years. After that, they would be eligible for this type of exception. He had a concern with flexibility in the wrong area. A 3-5 year time period might be sending out a wrong message if not all organizations received the same amount of time for the exception. He felt there needed to be a fixed period of time. Mayor Castleberry stated that the number of prior years were considered for the request. The proposal helped organizations which would not have to spend time for this type of request. Council Member Miller stated that the ordinance did not talk about setting the hours for the events and felt that parts of the ordinance needed to be clarified. Sunday hours were different and should be included in the ordinance. A specific period of time would be beneficial. Council Member Krueger noted a section in the ordinance indicating a time frame. Council Member Miller stated that some exceptions had multiple days and nights with different hours. He felt that it was not the intent of the ordinance to give blank authority to go to midnight. Council Member Biles stated that the indicated times in the ordinance were merely suggestions and not set limits. Acting City Attorney Bucke stated that the entire ordinance was merely an example for Council consideration. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 28 The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-030 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVING AN ORDINANCE FORMAT TO BE USED IN GRANTING TO PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANNUAL EVENTS WHICH HAVE DEMONSTRATED A HISTORY OF PAST RESPONSIBLE COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S NOISE ORDINANCE, EXCEPTIONS TO THE LIMITATIONS IMPOSED BY SECTION 20-1 (c) (2) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, WITH RESPECT TO HOURS OF OPERATION OF AN AMPLIFIED LOUDSPEAKER SYSTEM, PURSUANT THE PROVISIONS OF THAT SECTION. Young motioned, Krueger seconded to approve the resolution. Mayor Pro Tem Biles asked if Young would consider amending his motion to include changing the times listed in the ordinance to blanks. Acting City Attorney Bucek stated that the Council was only voting on the resolution and not on the ordinance. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that he was trying to clarify the format of the ordinance. He asked Young to consider amending his motion to change the number of years for the exception to three years. Council Members Young and Krueger agreed to the changes. Council Member Miller suggested changing the wording to state "a format to be approved by the Council". The resolution could be approved subject to Council approving a format at a future meeting. Council Member Young did not agree with that amendment as suggested by Council Member Miller. Miller motioned to amend the main motion to change Section Three of the format to state" a format to be approved by the Council" taking out the wording of "attached hereto". Council Member Biles felt that everything in parenthesis was not part of the format but were examples which would be changed by Council when considered for a specific example. Brock seconded the amendment to the main motion. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "nay", Cott "aye", Krueg~r "nay", Brock "aye", Biles "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion failed with a 3-4 vote. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 29 065 On roll vote of the main motion, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 15. Vision Update Council Member Brock stated that the recent Cabinet meeting scheduled presentations for the action teams to be made in July/August. This meant that concrete proposals were close to being completed. 16. Miscellaneous matters from the city Manager. Mayor Pro Tem Biles left the meeting. Council considered the Work Session items not discussed earlier. 3. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding possible purchase of Denton's cable television system. Richard Foster, Public Information Officer, stated that the cable television ordinance indicated that the City had the right-of-first refusal to purchase the system at or above a certified offering price being made by a third party when the system was on the market for sale. The City had 90 days from date of notification to exercise that right. Sammons Communications had entered into an agreement to sell its North Texas Area Cable Systems to Marcus Cable of Dallas. A letter from Sammons Communications indicated that the value of the Denton cable system was approximately $27,931,160. Council had the right to match the price offered by Marcus for the system. Council Member Cott asked what the City could sell the system for. Foster replied that he did not know. Council Member Cott felt that it might be good to see what other potential offers could be gotten for the system. Miller motioned, Krueger seconded to decline the offer of right- of-first refusal. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "nay", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 4-2 vote. 066 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 30 City Manager Harrell continued with Miscellaneous Matters: A. COG was hosting its 29th annual general assembly meeting on June 23rd. The meeting consisted of two parts - the general luncheon plus a work session for newly elected Council Members. This was a good general session for newly election officials to attend to receive information. B. The first meeting in July was July 4th and Council needed to consider postponing the meeting to possibly July 5th. The time frame was such in the budget that a meeting was needed. Consensus of the Council was to change the July 4th meeting to July 5th. 17. There was no official action taken on Closed Meeting Items discussed during the Work Session. 18. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: A. Council Member Brock asked for an item on the July 13th work session to discuss whether or not to appoint a Blue Ribbon Committee for the bond election issue. B. Council Member Brock asked for an update on new legislation regarding controls on the local level such as property rights laws. C. Council Member Brock asked for information regarding the Council's Adopt-A- Spot. D. Council Member Krueger requested a work session item regarding a change in the noise ordinance policy regarding construction work. council Member Young stated that he was not in favor of a Blue Ribbon Committee as there were no projects indicated for District One. Council Member Brock stated that the Committee would be looking at projects and holding public hearings regarding the proposed projects. E. Council Member Young asked for a report on the curfew hours at Fred Moore Park and the ban on alcohol at Fred Moore Park. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 31 087 F. Council Member Young asked for a report on removing the COPS program from southeast Denton and transferring it to Southridge. G. Council Member Miller asked for a study session on the proposed storm water district. 19. The Council returned to the Closed Meeting to discuss: A. Legal Matters -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.071 1. Considered action in Frances Rodgers v. City of Denton. 2. Considered action in Disheroon v. Scott, et.al. B. Real Estate -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.072 C. Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.074 1. Discussed the appointment process for part-time Municipal Judge. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. FE~ WAL~.RS S~CRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ACC00288