Minutes August 11, 1998CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL M1NUTES
AUGUST 11, 1998
After determining that a quorum was present and convening in an open meeting, the City Council
convened in a closed meeting on Tuesday, August 11, 1998 at 5:15 p.m. in the Council Work
Session Room.
PRESENT:
Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Cochran,
Durrance, Kristoferson, and Young.
ABSENT: None
1. The Council considered the following in Closed Meeting:
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.
The Council convened into a Work Session on Tuesday, August 11, 1998 at 6:00 p.m. in the
Council Work Session Room.
PRESENT:
Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Cochran,
Durrance, Kristoferson, and Young.
ABSENT: None
1. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the
draft interim corridor ordinance.
Dave Hill, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the most recent event associated
with this ordinance was the public hearing held last week and the recent meeting with the
Chamber of Commerce committee regarding the corridor ordinance. Staff looked at the basic
premise of the ordinance after the negative comments received at the public hearing. There was a
two-part breakout regarding the options available. The options ranged from keeping on the track
started through dropping the idea altogether. A more flexible type of review was considered at
the Chamber meeting. This review would take into account the unique characteristics of
individual sites. Fifteen issues were listed in the agenda back-up materials for options, objections
and course of action. The Chamber had also submitted a response indicating that it was in favor
of the site plan review option.
Council Member Burroughs asked if there had been any discussion regarding the weaknesses of
the site plan option.
Hill replied that it would provide for more Council business at meetings and more administrative
requirements. Guidelines would still be needed for review.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley felt that staff was in agreement with a number of points with the
Chamber. She wanted the Chamber and staff to continue working together on the issue. She
liked the site plan review but was concerned about the amount of land that would not be
considered. She was concerned that spot development might occur. She suggested combining
the two approaches of site plan review but general control factors for all of the land.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August l l, 1998
Page 2
Hill stated that it was possible to have guidelines to describe certain requirements with overlay for
the straight zoning. If a developer wanted to deviate from those requirements, he would have to
go to Council for review.
Council Member Young liked the site plan review. He felt that the process of developing should
not be rushed and that there were other issues to look at especially if they were constitutional.
There was no mention, however, of a grandfather clause and no mention of "taking" issues
regarding property. He would be in favor of not proceeding with the issues but knew that that
would not happen. He suggested continuing with corridor review and then proceed.
Council Member Cochran felt that the site plan review was reasonable as it dealt with a site by site
basis. Trying to craft an ordinance for all situations resulted in problems. This proposal would
provide some Council discretion on the issues. Community values changed over time and that
also needed to be considered. He felt that there needed to be a grandfather clause in the proposal.
Everyone wanted a "better face" for Denton. He was unsure of the provision regarding
regulations for color schemes on buildings.
Council Member Durrance felt that there should be specific procedures for thresholds and
grandfathering. He was concerned about undeveloped straight zoning on I35 and Loop 288. He
asked for figures on the amount of undeveloped property along the corridors.
Mayor Miller felt that the proposal was moving in the right direction with discussions with the
Chamber. He felt that I-35 currently looked good and that was the result of current regulations.
He stated that Council agreed not to hurry though the proposal. He suggested continuing with
discussions and returning with an agreement from all areas.
Hill recommended that the proposal be returned to the Planning and Zoning Commission for
public hearings on the altered proposal.
Consensus of the Council was to continue to work on the proposal with the Chamber and return
with a report after the Planning and Zoning Commission's public hearings.
2. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the
Comprehensive Plan schedule and Work Plan.
Dave Hill, Director of Planning and Development, presented a description of the proposal for the
comprehensive plan. There were issues that Council wanted to begin discussing such as
management options, densities, location of different kinds of densities, impact on the School
District. He suggested stopping work on the development of the preferred development scenario.
The scope for the preferred development scenario would continue but the process would change
slightly. Public review would be deferred until October. An expanded scope would be developed
now as indicated in the back-up materials. The growth management strategy would be completed
by the end of December in order to bring the comprehensive plan to Council mid-year in 1999.
Staff was asking department heads to consider concerns for growth and develop a list for Council
review. Council would prioritize those concerns and return at a work session to consider the
focus of the growth management strategy.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August l l, 1998
Page 3
Council Member Young stated that it was not necessary to rush through the process.
Hill stated that the growth management strategy was the heart of the project. Once that was
written, rest would fall in line.
Mayor Miller stated that the last meeting of the year was December 15th with no work session
scheduled. He questioned if the growth management would restrict growth.
Hill stated that the process was working on quality of development such as where it would be and
what kind of growth. He felt it was best to not use too many consultants with growth
management as they might not be relevant to Texas.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley felt that there was a need to start focusing energies on the large tasks to
complete.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed as proposed.
The Council considered Item #4.
4. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding an
ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute a tax abatement agreement with United Copper
Industries, Inc., setting forth all the required terms of the tax abatement agreement in accordance
with the terms of Chapter 312 of the Texas Tax Code; setting forth the various conditions
precedent to United Copper receiving the tax abatement; authorizing the Mayor to execute an
agreement with United Copper Industries to provide electric service for a minimum period of five
years; providing for a severability clause; and providing an effective date.
Linda Ratliff, Director of Economic Development, stated that on January 6, 1998, the Council
reviewed and approved a request for a tax abatement for United Copper Industries, Inc., for the
company's copper wiring manufacturing, distribution and national headquarters facility. Council
directed staff at that time to negotiate a tax abatement agreement with United Copper. In
addition, Council asked staff to prepare the necessary documents for establishing a reinvestment
zone for tax abatement purposes, which would include the United Copper site. The reinvestment
zone was approved at the February 3, 1998 Council meeting. She reviewed the major points of
the agreement and the six-year cost/benefit analysis as noted in the agenda materials.
Consensus of the Council was to place the necessary documents for approval on the next meeting.
5. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction concerning an
application form for requesting a franchise for cable television service and establishing the amount
of a non-refundable application fee. (Nortex Telcom, L.L.C.)
Richard Foster, Public Information Officer, stated that the City had been approached by Nortex
Telecom for a cable television service franchise. The City had retained a cable television
consultant to develop a form, assist the City with a review of the completed application, and
develop a franchise agreement between the City and the applicant. Staff was recommending that
the amount of the non-refundable application fee be based on the cost to the City of the cable
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August l l, 1998
Page 4
television consultant, an amount expected to be $5,000. Nortex had expressed some concern
over several of the items in the financial section of the application. The consultant was working
on options for changes in the financial section.
Council Member Burroughs asked about the Sammons application fee.
Foster stated that Golden Triangle Communications was the first to apply for a franchise and paid
a $10,000 application fee.
Council Member Burroughs felt that the concept of the application fee was that the City would
not bear any extraordinary fees for this type of review. He requested an estimate of in-house
costs for legal services and to consider those as an alternative to the fee with the consultant fee.
City Attorney Prouty stated that a provision in the Charter set forth the area to be served. The
applicant would have to provide a construction schedule, how it was going to serve customers
and when it was going to serve those customers. The applicant would have to serve anyone in the
City who wanted the service but would not have to do all at once. Service could be phased in but
there would have to be enough people in an area in order to make it economical to service that
area.
Council Member Durrance stated that the City had to open the area to all qualified competitors.
City Attorney Prouty stated correct but the company had to be a qualified competitor with the
financial and technical expertise to compete.
Council Member Cochran questioned the need to include staff time on the application fee.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the application without staff time included and to
leave the amount of the application fee as the amount of consultant fee.
The Council returned to the regular agenda order.
#3. The Council held a discussion and obtained input on possible affordable housing exemptions
to the water/wastewater treatment impact fee.
Jill Jordan, Director of Water/Wastewater Utilities, stated that the outside legal counsel on impact
fees was present for this discussion. The Denton Capital Improvements Advisory Committee was
recommending one exemption for affordable in-fill housing in Denton. Those properties had to be
located in the current city limits, not lots in the ETJ and was based on the Appraisal District's
value of the property.
Brenda McDonald, consultant with Dahlstrom McDonald, stated that the Committee had
discussed many types of exemptions. The exemptions would apply only to new development.
She had advised the Committee that the fewer exemptions allowed the better would be the fee. A
study of the area cities indicated that the most common approach was to have no exemptions.
The second most common approach was to have some exemptions on a case by case analysis on
the Council level. She did not recommend that option as she felt the Council would receive many
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August l l, 1998
Page 5
requests for exemptions. The proposed ordinance would have an appeal mechanism in order to
appeal the institution of the fee. That would not be considered an exemption request. Other
approaches to exemptions were for schools, churches, and governmental entities. Some
approaches had an exemption to be used as an economic development tool. The Committee was
against waiving the impact fee as a tool for economic development. The issue was affordable
housing that was indicated in the state statute. The definition of affordable housing was not clear
and the Council could determine its own definition of affordable housing. The Committee used
the appraised value of the lot from the Appraisal District. There was a need to articulate the
public purpose for the exemption. With affordable housing, that would not be too difficult but it
might be with other types of exemptions. The appraisal would be on the unimproved lot as
determined by the Appraisal District.
Council Member Kristoferson asked what would happen with a larger lot that was appraised at a
higher price and was then subdivided to reduce the fee.
McDonald stated that the fee would be for in-fill development and not for new subdivisions.
Hill stated that there was a need to look at the intended outcome of the exemption and not what
was easily calculated. Eligibility criteria could be assigned.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley questioned the number of lots in the City valued at $5,000. She favored
granting an exemption to non-profit entities.
City Attorney Prouty stated that that might be discriminatory and not legal.
Council Member Cochran stated that he liked the idea of the use of the cost of the lot for the
criteria on the exemption. He questioned the possibility of a grant mechanism rather than an
exemption.
City Manager Benavides stated that under the economic development statute, the general fund
could reimburse water and wastewater for non-profit organizations.
McDonald stated that in the budget process, the Council could allocate funds each year to
reimburse impact fees charged to non-profit organizations.
Council Member Durrance expressed concern over the possibility of the growth of low and
moderate income housing for the elderly. Those developments usually had large lots rather than
one house at a time and questioned how that would be addressed. That would be an affordable
housing issue and a low-income issue.
Council Member Young expressed concern about using the appraisal value. Lots in southeast
Denton were valued too high for the exemption. He suggested exempting homes valued at
$80,000 and lower.
Jordan suggested that a starting place would be if the Council was interested in considering an
affordable housing exemption. If so, staff would continue to investigate alternatives. A
recommendation for Council to consider would be presented at the September 1st meeting.
Consensus of the Council was to have staff continue to research the issue and return with a
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August l l, 1998
Page 6
recommendation at a future Council meeting. Included in the recommendation would be the
potential for loss in revenue if a set dollar amount was used for the homes. The possibility of a
grant program would also be explored.
6. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding the 1998-
99 proposed budget.
Kathy DuBose, Assistant City Manager for Finance, stated that she would be reviewing the
questions from Council from the last session regarding the budget.
1. Consumer Health Fees - Increase in Restaurant Inspections - Possibility of fewer
inspections during the year. The current procedures required two inspections per year. To
improve public safety, a goal was of four inspections per year with an average of three full
inspections per year. Increased inspections increased the inspection ratings from 81-95.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley questioned the large increase in the fee. Council had to decide if it was
too high. She felt it was important to protect the health of the citizens.
Council discussed the pros and cons of the proposed increased fees. Consensus was to continue
to discuss the issue during the budget discussions.
2. Building Inspections - The proposed budget included an enterprise fund supported by fees
generated with services. It was recommend to adjust the fees so as to be a self-supporting
department.
Council discussed the impact of the franchise fee and the possibility of lowering fees in
conjunction with the franchise.
3. Incorporation of drainage and water/wastewater funds. She presented the key points on
this issue as noted in the agenda materials.
Following the completion of the Work Session, the Council convened into a Special Called
Session.
1. The Council considered nominations/appointments to the City's Boards and Commissions.
Mayor Miller asked for a motion to suspend the rule on board/commission nominations so that a
nomination could be voted on at this meeting.
Beasley motioned, Burroughs seconded to suspend the rules for nominations/appointments. On
roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye",
Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Nominations were made and voted on as noted in the handout presented in the agenda back-up
materials.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
City of Demon City Council Minutes
August l l, 1998
Page 7
JACK MILLER, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
JENNIFER WALTERS
CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS