Loading...
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