Minutes July 19, 1997CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
July 19, 1997
The Council convened into a Work Session on Saturday, July 19, 1997 at 9:00 a.m. in the Central Jury
Room of the Denton Municipal Complex.
PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Beasley, Kristoferson,
Cochran, Durrance, and Young.
ABSENT: None
1. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding a review of
planning terms and concepts including: overlay district, scenic corridors, architectural/aesthetic
standards, park dedication, landscaping requirements, tree preservation, intensity area calculations,
development impact fees, public involvement procedures, consideration of school impacts,
transportation impacts, density with quality (new urbanism), cumulative impact of drainage variances,
public education, and neighborhood preservation.
City Manager Benavides stated that staff would take the lead on providing Council with
recommendations for the planning policies.
Dave Hill, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the development of a growth
management strategy was an important community objective but competing interests seemed to be
unable to reach some type of mutual agreement. He felt that the proposed plan might be mixing policy
statements with comprehensive types of planning issues. Policy statements needed to be expressed in
terms of geographical limitations. The Denton Development Plan needed to contain a set of policy
statements which limited the scope but not get involved with the mapping until the proposal was at the
comprehensive plan. Small area planning might be a consideration in order to more accurately meet
the needs of the community. When a look was taken at the items to be considered, some were
implementation tools and some were vision tools.
Council Member Beasley felt that there was some misunderstanding of what should be included in a
development plan. She questioned if the comprehensive plan was the Denton Development Plan as it
was now and another document be a vision document.
Hill suggested that part of the Denton Development Plan be taken out and put into a comprehensive
plan. There would then be a planning document and a policy document.
Council Member Young stated that there was a perception that his District did not receive as much as
other districts. It received only community block grant money. He asked if a new plan would be fair
to all areas of the community.
Hill replied that the Denton Development Plan had policies regarding affordable housing, etc. but
needed a plan for specific areas.
City Attorney Prouty stated that part of comprehensive plan was to determine how the City would
grow.
Hill stated that a small area plan allowed for infill sites to be considered and there was a need to
develop an infill strategy for those types of areas.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 19, 1997
Page 2
Overlay Di~qtrict~q - this was a tool to carry out specific objectives and could be used for sign control,
screening, landscaping, pedestrian amenities, etc. It was typically in ordinance format and required
formal adoption by Council. It provided an opportunity for a City to add regulations to address needs
or the appearance of a specific area of the community.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that overlay zoning was mandatory such as in a historic district. The
Denton Airport was also a separate zoning overlay district with its height restrictions.
Hill replied correct. As opposed to a special zoning district, an overlay district was over the current
regulations with specific rules for that particular area.
Council Member Beasley felt that she would like to see staff driven overlay districts and where they
should be placed for Council consideration.
Hill replied that if corridors (transportation) created area plans or district plans, there would be a need
to define the area concerned and go through policies and concerns for those areas.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock indicated that corridors would help with the Vision project for entranceways,
etc.
Mayor Miller asked if that would be changing the zoning in place or overlaying on an existing zoning.
Hill stated that it would be overlaying conditions over existing zoning.
Mayor Miller stated that the zoning in place would remain but would overlay that with other
requirements.
Hill replied correct.
~qcenic Corridor DeqignationNlillhoard Control - staff had been directed by Council to prepare an
ordinance that would designate Interstate 35E, 1-35W, U.S. 380, U.S. 377, U.S. 77, Loop 288, all
Farm to Market Roads, and all primary arterials as scenic corridors. The scenic corridor would extend
1,000 feet from the edge of the right-of-way on each side of the road. No off-premise signs would be
permitted in scenic corridors.
Council Member Young stated that he would be strongly against the ban of billboards. Billboards
attracted business and that was a consideration for this issue.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock felt that logo signs were helpful on the highway to give directions to facilities
rather than the billboards.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that there were problems with logo signs due to the way the
legislation was written. Logo signs were permitted for cities with less than 50,000 population. Fort
Worth had a special provision which allowed them to have logo signs. There was a need to have the
legislation changed.
Architectnral/Aeqthetic ~qtandardq - there was a need to be careful regarding site applications for these
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 19, 1997
Page 3
standards. These standards were generally used to promote and encourage a high quality of physical
development in specific areas of the City. There might be differences in opinions as to what was
aesthetically pleasing to others. Such standards might not have to be regulations but rather could be
voluntary rather than mandatory standards.
City Attorney Prouty stated that it was difficult to defend aesthetic standards unless it was relating to
public health or public purpose.
Mayor Miller stated that it could be done as an overlay for certain areas of the City for a specific
purpose.
Mandatory Park Dedication - Ed Hodney, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that this was a tool
to implement policy with regard to open space recreational opportunities. It was the practice to require
land developers to dedicate park land to the City as a precondition for subdivision plat approval.
Denton had a voluntary land and/or cash contribution policy from land developers rather than a
mandatory policy. There might be an equity issue with a mandatory policy.
Council Member Beasley asked if the Parks Board was considering this issue.
Hodney stated that the Board was still unsure of Council's direction. There was a strong interest from
the Council but Council had not asked the Board to do any research at this point in time.
Council Member Cochran suggested developing an equation for the amount of land to be dedicated.
Hodney stated that the current policy was to dedicate two acres per 1,000 population.
Council Member Durrance stated that he would like to see options from other cities. He suggested
having information on how the fee in lieu of dedication structure worked with the maintenance for the
parks dedicated.
Hodney stated that that was a good point. It was one thing to say that the land was wanted and
another to have the money to maintain that land.
Council Member Young asked if the same ratio would be maintained if the policy were mandatory
rather than voluntary.
Hodney stated that the current policy was very weak. It would be his recommendation to not keep the
same ratio.
Council Member Young stated that he would be against a mandatory policy as it would make it hard to
develop in Denton. Most developers would try to meet the City's requirements.
Mayor Miller asked if the Council wanted to ask the Parks Board to review this issue with staff and
survey other cities to see what was being done and provide Council with various options and
recommendations.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the Mayor's suggestion.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 19, 1997
Page 4
l,andqcaping Reo?irement~q - these items were related to the landscape requirements which were
already in place by ordinance for the City. Staff was in the process of reviewing those requirements for
possible amendments.
Tree Preqervation - Hill stated that the current ordinance was not doing what was required. It
protected all trees 10" in diameter and anything larger required a permit to remove. There was a need
for flexibility in the policy to allow the removal of a large tree which might not live in order to plant
smaller new trees.
Council Member Young felt that the policy should be flexible for the type of trees which could be
removed. The concept of vegetative buffer zones should be considered.
Council Member Cochran felt that there was a need to look at possible deficiencies in the current
policy in order to improve the requirements.
lntenqity Area Calcnlationq - this was a procedure to obtain a general idea of the impact of
development from a traffic standpoint. The calculations described an intensity area in terms of how
many more intensity trips may be allowed. There was a need to not use these calculations as they were
not being followed. This was designed to be a good guide but not a standard and was set up as a
system of first come-first served which was not fair to developers.
Council Member Durrance felt that the current regulations were too narrow in scope.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that a matrix could fit perfectly in the calculation but still could be a bad
development for a certain area. She felt there was a need for clusters of neighborhood services within a
reasonable distance of where people lived in order to promote neighborhood development.
Hill stated that there was a need to see each area as unique and to apply different standards to each of
those areas.
Council Member Young suggested that the Planning Department set up a tool for Council to follow.
Public Involvement Procednreq - this area dealt with creative ways to have public involvement in the
planning process. This might be through participation on a task force or a committee, by attendance at
a public hearing or a meeting, by posing questions, by writing comments or by stating an opinion. The
COPS program was an excellent example of a program to involve citizens in government.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock felt there was a need for the Council to receive the minutes of neighborhood
meetings in order to keep up on what their concerns were.
School lmpact~q - City Manager Benavides stated that at the last joint meeting with DISD a joint
committee was formed to deal with issues of mutual interest including planning, development and
zoning related matters.
Mayor Miller stated that it was important to do this jointly as two-thirds of the growth of the school
district was happening outside the City limits. The Council needed to be kept aware of what was
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 19, 1997
Page 5
happening outside the City limits in terms of school growth.
Tran?c~rtation lmpact~q - there were significant facets which effected the quality of life. There was a
need to design roads for the number of vehicles which were going to be travelling on them. There was
a pressing issue on how to evaluate transportation.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that it was good to support bike trails for recreation but they were also
needed for transportation. This would coordinate with the neighborhood concept.
Mayor Miller stated that Council needed to think about public policy relative to the funding of
transportation. There was probably going to be a shortfall of federal funds to take care of
transportation issues in upcoming years.
Council Member Young felt there was a need to talk with outlying businesses to try and reduce the
amount of cars on the streets by providing buses to these businesses. Work with larger businesses to
provide transportation for the employees and incentives for carpooling.
Council Member Durrance felt it would be good to look at regional projects which would benefit
Denton for transportation.
Denqity with Quality - this was probably a vision topic which refashioned subdMsions to resemble
traditional small towns or big-city neighborhoods. There would be a need to tailor it to Denton's
special needs.
Council Member Cochran suggested considering including language to allow for infill or distinct
development. This would return to the past development of neighborhoods.
Hill stated that the term "new urbanism "might be the way to express the diversity Denton was looking
for.
Svehla stated that often planned developments allowed for all kinds of diversity. The problem was the
process on the developer's side. A detailed plan was required which limited diversity in a development.
A certain amount of quality was needed with freedom to build.
Council Member Kristoferson stated that what might work as an infill and as a downtown might not
work in outlying areas.
Council Member Cochran stated that a fear of density was that high density was associated with low
quality. Stipulations would have to be made for higher quality with density.
Council Member Beasley felt that there would be a large public relations job needed if the make-up of
the developments was changed as this would be a large change in the zoning process. The public might
not want this type of zoning.
Mayor Miller stated that Denton had the opportunity to become a diverse community. Whatever was
done there was a need to emphasize and reinforce the downtown area.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 19, 1997
Page 6
Council Member Young suggested considering a Vision director to coordinate the program.
Cumulative Impact of' Drainage Varianceq - Jill Jordan, Acting Director of Water/Wastewater
Engineering, stated the kinds of characteristics which the Council wanted to have were the kind of
policy issues which might appear in a policy statement.
Council Member Young stated he would like to developers in the area pay for lining the creeks which
were causing problems.
PuNic Education - staff was directed to involve citizens in the process of the development of the city
and provide them with the information they needed to review topics or make recommendations on city
issues and related issues.
Neighborhood Preqervation - was critical in order to maintain property values and to preserve the
City's existing housing stock.
Hill stated that staff needed to know what Council was comfortable with in terms of future briefings.
Mayor Miller stated that Council would refer the issue of park land dedication to the Parks Board.
Hodney asked if the Council wanted the Parks Board to make recommendations.
Consensus of the Council was yes.
Council Member Young stated that many developers had volunteered to donate land but were refused
as the City did not accept pocket parks.
Hodney stated that in two years there was no instance where land was refused due to pocket parks.
Policy developer should give one acre for every 100 units created. Would not expect to dedicate any
land if not more than 500 dwelling units. None since policy established.
Council Member Young felt that the Council was leaning towards impact fees. If that was true, then
something needed to be done with drainage. If the developer paid the fee, then that should take care of
the drainage work.
Council Member Beasley felt that there was a need to look at the whole water/wastewater drainage
issue and how that would affect the City.
Council Member Durrance felt that there was a need for three tracks. One regarding a vision statement
and policies and a second regarding a comprehensive plan with information from staff and a third which
would implement those. This should be done as a committee as a whole.
Svehla suggested the following for Council consideration. Items 2, 3, 4, 8, 13, and 16 were vision
kinds of issues which Council would need to give staff feedback on which ultimately would go into the
Denton Development Plan. He suggested at the next meeting to begin further discussions on those
items. There was a Vision plan which helped with those issues. Item #5 would be sent to the Parks
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 19, 1997
Page 7
Board and staff would be returning with information on Items #6 and #7. Next was the whole area of
impact fees whether water and sewer or transportation or drainage. Those issues would be placed in a
separate category, which were items #9, 10, 12, and 14. There was probably a need for a meeting for
each of those issues. Item #15 and #11 would be sent to staff for options for Council consideration.
After there was a consensus on the issues, staff would proceed with the Denton Development Plan.
There was still a need for more information.
Council Member Kristoferson asked how Council would continue to deal with those issues on a
weekly basis when those issues were still not settled.
Svehla replied that at a meeting Council would direct staff to prepare ordinances to handle those
situations. There might be a problem with that in that each week a new ordinance might have to be
considered with different conditions.
Council Member Beasley stated that she first indicated that she did not want to hold up progress on the
Denton Development Plan. It appeared that this process would take several months. There were
zoning cases coming through the process and there was a plan in place. That plan might need better
rules and regulations but they should not be changed temporarily. There was no reason, at this point in
time, to stop everything.
Council Member Young felt there was a need to have all of the legal questions answered and all
information as soon as possible and then go into a work session to settle the issues.
Mayor Miller asked if the Planning and Zoning Commission should be doing this instead of Council.
The Planning and Zoning Commission was suppose to be the planning committee for the Council.
Council was doing some issues which the Commission should be doing.
Council Member Beasley agreed that the Commission should be doing some of this work but worried
about the time factor.
Mayor Miller stated that part of the reason Council slowed the process down was to be sure it was on
target. Several months of work would not be a great deal of time.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock felt that the Council had gone through many issues and needed to bring the
Commission into the process. There should be some way to facilitate that. Council was elected to be
the policy makers and needed to stay involved in the process.
City Attorney Prouty stated that some of these issues were controlled by a legal responsibility of the
Planning and Zoning Commission. Some issues were required to have a recommendation by the
Planning and Zoning Commission while others were not.
Hill suggested to continue with two tracks of information. One of the vision issues connected with the
Denton Development Plan and one with issues which the Planning and Zoning Commission might
provide information on.
Following a discussion on future meeting dates, it was decided that the next special planning session
would be July 30th, followed by August 6th.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 19, 1997
Page 8
2. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding possible
speakers/consultants dealing with planning issues.
Mayor Miller stated that Council was willing to have outside information if needed.
3. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding a review of
a schedule for future planning work sessions.
This item was considered with Item #1.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:10 p.m.
JACK MILLER, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
JENNIFER WALTERS
CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
minut es071997, doc