Loading...
Minutes October 28, 1997CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 28, 1997 After determining that a quorum was present and convening in an open meeting, the City Council convened in a closed meeting on Tuesday, October 28, 1997 at 5:15 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room of City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Beasley, Kristoferson, Cochran, Young and Durrance. AB SENT: Mayor Miller 1. The Council considered the following in Closed Meeting: A. Conference with Employees -Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Sec. 551.075. The Council received information from employees during a staff conference or briefing, but did not deliberate during the conference. Following the completion of the Closed Meeting, the Council attended a reception honoring Senator David Sibley at the Longhorn Gallery, 101 N. Elm, Denton, Texas. The Council convened into a Work Session on Tuesday, October 28, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Beasley, Kristoferson, Cochran, Young and Durrance. Ab sent: Mayor Miller 1. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding The Denton Plan Draft Policy Documents including draft mission statement, draft growth management strategy, draft public involvement procedures, and draft planning policies. David Hill, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the intent of this meeting was to determine if the plan documents were ready to be presented to the public for review and comment. The public review process would last approximately four months. It was the intent of staff to recommend that the policy documents would replace the 1988 Denton Development Plan as the City's development guidance document. It would not replace the zoning ordinance but would help look at development ordinances of the City. Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked that when the policies were adopted would they become the standards even before the ordinances were completed. Hill replied correct that there might some times when the policies were completed but not the formal ordinances. MN~qion ~qtatement- Hill stated that Council Member Cochran had offered a substitute mission statement. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 28, 1997 Page 2 Council Member Cochran stated that the draft mission statement in the back-up materials had specifics which he did not feel needed to be in a mission statement. He did not feel specific streets or areas should be included in the Mission Statement. Council Member Beasley expressed concern about getting bogged down on each sentence of the statement. Probably everyone on the Council would word the document differently and Council might be bogged down in such a procedure. Hill suggested having someone in the community look at the statement for an outside impression of the statement. The final product would probably not look like this when completed. Council Member Kristoferson stated that no matter what was submitted to the public, it would not be the same. She suggested allowing the public access to the draft and see what changes would happen. Some of the suggestions from Council could be incorporated and then let the public view it. Council Member Young stated that he was unsure about the version offered by Council Member Cochran. He felt that there was too much emphasis on the universities and not enough emphasis on high-tech industries. Council Member Durrance felt that Council Member Cochran's version covered many points and showed that the Council would be receiving many different points of view. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that economic development experts indicated that Denton should capitalize on its assets and had not done enough with the universities. Many felt the universities were assets and drew high paying high-tech jobs. Council Member Cochran stated that after the citizens looked at the document, he hope there would be suggestions on how to tie it together with a common thread. Council Member Beasley stated that all of the wording could be changed or have different ways to look at the statement but that Council needed to get the document out to the public for comments. She felt the draft captured the essentials of everyone's mission statements. She suggested getting it out to public to see what they felt should be emphasized or de-emphasized. Mayor Pro Tem Brock suggested blending the two documents and use language from both for a draft for public comment. Growth Management ~qtrategy Council Member Beasley noted that there were "shoulds" in the document and felt there should be more 'Will's" instead. Hill stated that there had been much staff discussion regarding that issue. If Council wanted more forceful wording, it could be changed. This was intended to be a guide but if Council wanted more of a priority, the "shoulds" could be changed to 'Wills". "Should" provided direction while 'Will" indicated City of Denton City Council Minutes October 28, 1997 Page 3 the direction that would be taken. As the development plans were finalized the language would be firmed up, as Council desired. Public Involvement Procednreq Hill stated that as many different kinds of media, which were available, would be used for public involvement procedures. Some of those included public meetings, presentations to civic organizations, neighborhood associations, special interest groups, or other interested parties. The intent would be to reach a wide audience by attending meetings that had already been scheduled. Staff would organize and summarize the public comments and would indicate specifically who the draft plan was influenced by the comments. lnfraqtnmtnre Policieq - Tran?ortation ~qy~qtem Council Member Beasley asked for a definition of #11 which stated that a transportation lobbying campaign should be conducted to promote infrastructure linkages. Hill stated that that was a reference to regional relationships such as NCTCOG and the Metropolitan Planning Organizations. Council Member Beasley suggested having definitions in that section to make it easier to read. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that transportation network implied something fixed in the process which was only for streets. She suggested changing the emphasis. Council Member Durrance suggested another word for "network" and change that emphasis. Hill stated that it could be changed to the "City of Denton" and would use the thoroughfare plan to design projects. Mayor Pro Tem Brock noted a similar problem with Access Management practices. Hill stated that the emphasis could be changed by not capitalizing it. A glossary could be included in the back to help with definitions. lnfraqtnmtnre Policieq ~qtormwater Drainage ~qy~qtem Council Member Cochran asked about dedication of floodplains. Hill stated that at this point in time, the City did not require dedication of floodplain but rather the floodway. Jill Jordan, Interim Director of Water/Wastewater stated that the city was not currently requiring dedication of floodplain. This would be a departure from the way the City currently was doing business. The proposal would require a dedication of a portion of the floodplain/floodway to the City City of Denton City Council Minutes October 28, 1997 Page 4 and the City would assume responsibility of that land and the maintenance of that land. Water~qhed Management Planq Hill stated that this definition would deal with erosion, water quality concerns, where urban types of drainage systems would be located and where there were rural drainage systems. These plans would be a document that would be prepared for public comment and alternatives for consideration. lnFraqtnmtnre Policieq - Water and Waqtewater ~qy~qtemq Council Member Durrance felt that an additional statement was needed to indicate that the City was working with intergovernmental entities to work toward long term water issues. Council Member Young asked about an infill policy in the document. Hill stated that that was located on page 14 of the document which indicated that neighborhoods should be served but did not indicate how and when. lnFramnmtnre Policieq - F. lectric ~qymem Council Member Young asked if all new development would have underground utilities. Hill replied correct plus the City would work to have underground utilities when redesigning older areas of the City. Jordan stated that this should be expanded in the future to include the telecommunications industry. Hill replied correct that these policies were not intended to be static. They were meant to be fluid and be changed with changing conditions. Solid Waqte Council Member Cochran asked about the use of public right-of-way for dumpsters. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that part of the issue was old dumpsters versus new dumpsters. Every commercial development before the Development Review Committee was required to show where dumpsters would be placed. An issue was no location for dumpster as they were not there when the building was constructed. There was a need to have other ways to deal with that. Most dumpsters in those locations would end up on public right-of-way but that did not mean that they could not regulated how they looked. Council Member Beasley felt that specific areas could be looked at in small area discussions. She felt this was more of a development policy. Parkq and Recreation Pc~licieq City of Denton City Council Minutes October 28, 1997 Page 5 Council Member Cochran asked about the policy of accepting green space for development. He asked what was the minimum amount accepted at this point in time. He was interested in reducing those requirements from five acres in order to receive more property. Ed Hodney, Director of Parks and Recreation, agreed in essence. A five-acre tract with less than 500 units was a very large amount of land to donate. In those cases, there was the possibility of having too many small areas with one or two acre parks that would increase maintenance and operation costs. Council Member Young stated that the policy sounded good but would be expensive to take expensive land away from the developers. That might also increase the price of the homes to make up for the loss of land. It was not feasible to have parks everywhere. Hodney stated that this issue had been to the Parks and Recreation Board for consideration and to begin the public review process. The Board had spoken with realtors and others in the community regarding the briefings. There was a significant amount of public review of the document. F, nvironment~l Quality policieq Council did not have any comments in this area. Neighborhood Policieq Council Member Beasley asked about #5 and was that forum something similar to neighborhoods. Mayor Pro Tem Brock indicated that that came from the Vision statement. Council Member Cochran felt that a specific neighborhood contact was needed to help citizens understand the system better. Mayor Pro Tem Brock felt that it was important to have neighborhood associations to work with City departments. Council did not have any comments in this area. F, conomic Diver~qific~tion Policieq Council did not have any comments in this area. a council of Government Policieq City of Denton City Council Minutes October 28, 1997 Page 6 Council did not have any comments in this area. 1 lrhan Design Policies Council did not have any comments in this area. Public Involvement Policieq Council did not have any comments in this area. Hill stated that Council would be updated as the public process evolved. 2. Council received a timetable, held a discussion and gave staff direction on how to proceed with impact fees. Jill Jordan, Interim Director of Water/Wastewater, stated that impact fees were a charge imposed on a new development to fund or recoup the costs of capital improvements necessitated by and attributable to the new development. Types of capital improvements that could be funded in part by impact fees included water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities; wastewater collection and treatment facilities; drainage facilities; and roadway facilities. Local examples of projects that could be funded included detention basins on Hickory Creek and possibly Cooper Creek; a new water treatment plant; wastewater treatment plant expansion; collector or larger roadways within the City limits. Examples of local projects that could not be funded with impact fees included: correction of inflow and infiltration problems in existing wastewater collection system; water storage tank for the middle pressure plane which covered the heart of the city; replacement channels along Pecan Creek through the center of the City; storm water sampling and other activities associated with the storm water discharge permit that the City would have to get in approximately 2001. Staff knew of no cities that had drainage impact fees at this time. Several cities in this area had roadway impact fees. Staffwas continuing to research which cities in this area had impact fees, for which types of capital improvement they charged impact fees, and what types of revenues these fees produced. The process of enacting impact fees involved the following key elements: develop and adopt land use assumptions which included a description of the service area and projections of changes in land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a ten year period; prepare a CIP plan, including cost estimates of infrastructure needs and proposed fees; obtain input from an Advisory Board; solicit public comment; and adopt the fees by ordinance. Council member Young stated that he was against this fee as it really was a tax. Council Member Cochran felt that this was a fairness issue and an equity issue. Council Member Beasley stated that many cities that had such fees were growing at a fantastic pace so it really was not a stop to development. Many cities had been doing this for many years. Jordan continued that key decision points included selection of the types of capital improvements to be included in the impact fees; timing of the development of land use assumptions with two options to City of Denton City Council Minutes October 28, 1997 Page 7 proceed before the new comprehensive plan was formulated which would mean reliance on the '88 DDP and market projections of growth or wait on preparing the land use assumptions until the completion of the comprehensive plan; decide on whether the City would impose impact fees on the basis of full cost recovery or partial recovery; appoint an Advisory Board with a decision having to be made of when to select the members and who should serve. The Advisory Board had to have at least five members who represented at least 40% of the development community. Another alternative would be to appoint the current CIP Oversight Committee. The answers to these key decision points affected the length of time and cost of going through the impact fee process. Cost considerations included (1) hiring a consultant to prepare the land use assumptions and a 10-year CIP plan and calculate the impact fees; (2) typical costs of these studies varied tremendously, depending upon the decisions mentioned previously; the study cost that the City would pay was dependent on the desired speed of the study, the depth of data and analysis that the consultant must do and how much stafftime would be diverted to the study; to provide more control and spread the costs out over multiple budget years, use a two-part contract with the consultants-first phase land use forecasts and assumptions and second phase CIP planning. Future, ongoing cost considerations included updating studies every 3-5 years and under certain conditions, the City would have to rebate impact fees that it had collected from a developer back to that developer. If it were desired to enact impact fees, staff recommended (1) follow the schedule in Scenario 2 as indicated in the agenda back-up materials so that impact fees were based on the new comprehensive plan, (2) set up the consultant contract so that the work for the Denton Plan could accommodate the impact fees process, (3) stage the consultant's contract to spread the costs over multiple budget years, and (4) continue to pursue impact fees associated with water and wastewater facilities but not roadways or drainage. Continue to fund these activities using existing funding sources or in the alternative, reconsider the concept of a drainage utility. Council Member Young asked if the Council acted on this or did the citizens. Jordan replied that the citizens would be given an opportunity for input and then it would be a council decision. She presented two scenarios timelines for Council consideration which were included in the agenda back-up materials. Council Member Beasley asked if Council immediately started on this, was there any money available for the consultant. City Manager Benavides stated that staff would have to look for the money and give Council a proposal. Council Member Kristoferson asked about shared costs for the comprehensive plan. City Manager Benavides stated that staff would have to look for those funds also. Any contract would have to be put out for bid and a time constraint would also be a consideration. Council Member Cochran felt that Scenario 2 would provide a more solid project and allowed for more public input. He did not want to rush into the project. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 28, 1997 Page 8 Council Member Durrance stated that he had concerns about Scenario 2 as it dealt with full cost recovery as opposed to limited recovery in Scenario 1. He was concerned about a time line that was 3 years away. He felt that a quicker time frame would be better. He suggested continuing to work on the proposals, discuss the consultant's purpose, and investigate how to perceive a cost savings. Council Member Beasley stated that she was not sure about Scenario 1. She wanted to make sure do right do with the comprehensive plan. She was still not sure she wanted to have impact fees but would like more information. She also wanted to have public comment on whether or not to proceed. Council discussed Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 in terms of time involved and amount of citizen input. Consensus of the Council was to not follow Scenario 1 as it was more costly, did not have as much citizen input and did not have full cost recovery. Durrance motioned, Kristoferson seconded to support Scenario 2. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "nay", and Brock "aye". Motion carried with a 5-1 vote. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. EUL1NE BROCK, MAYOR PRO TEM CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS