Minutes December 15, 1998 M1NUTES
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
December 15, 1998
After determining that a quorum was present and convening in an open meeting, the City
Council convened in a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, December 15, 1998 at 5:15 p.m. in the
Council Work Session Room at City Hall.
PRESENT: Mayor Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Beasley, Council Members Kristoferson,
Burroughs, Durrance, and Young
ABSENT: Council Member Cochran
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.
B. Personnel - Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Sec. 551.074
1. Considered the hiring of Chuck Sears, an electrical engineer, as an
employee of the City of Denton-Denton Municipal Electric.
C. Deliberations regarding Real Property Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Sec.
551.072; and Consultation with Attorney - Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Sec. 551.071.
1. Considered and discussed the condemnation of two Drainage Easements
(0.209 acre) and (0.910 acre) in the Hiram Sisco Survey, Abstract 1184, necessary for
constructing and maintaining drainage improvements along the PEC-4 Tributary specifically in
an area south of Sycamore Street.
2. Considered and discussed the condemnation of a Drainage Easement
(0.366 acre) in the Hiram Sisco Survey, Abstract 1184, necessary for constructing and
maintaining drainage improvements along the PEC-4 Tributary specifically in an area south of
Sycamore Street.
3. Considered and discussed the condemnation of a Drainage Easement
(0.729 acre) and Slope Easement (0.071 acre) in the Hiram Sisco Survey, Abstract 1184,
necessary for constructing and maintaining drainage improvements along the PEC-4 Tributary
specifically in an area east of Ruddell Street.
4. Considered and discussed the condemnation of a Street Right-of-Way
Easement (1.619 acre) in the Gideon Walker Survey, Abstract 1330, necessary for constructing
Lakeview Boulevard from Shady Shores Road to City of Denton Rails to Trails Right-of-Way.
Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, December 15, 1998 at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 2
PRESENT: Mayor Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Beasley, Council Members Kristoferson,
Burroughs, Durrance, and Young
ABSENT: Council Member Cochran
1. Pledge of Allegiance
The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas
flags.
PRESENTATIONS/AWARDS
2. Proclamations
Mayor Miller presented a proclamation declaring December 13-18, 1998 as "Littie Grooms"
Week.
3. Awards
A. Fiscal Management & Municipal Services
Mayor Miller introduced Randy Moravec, a member of the Government Finance Officers'
Association, who presented the Government Finance Officers' Association Distinguished Budget
Presentation Award and Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to Jon
Fortune, Director of Budget.
B. Main Street
Mayor Miller presented the Downtowner of the Year Award to Bill Thomas.
Mayor Miller presented the Best Store Interior Award to Bob and Joan Moses, Elements of
Design.
Julie Glover, Main Street Manager, presented the 1998 Texas Urban Main Street City of the
Year award to the Mayor and Council.
C. Parks & Recreation
Ed Hodney, Director of Parks & Recreation, presented the following awards:
Denton Senior Center's Hospital Visitation Program - Excellence in Programming
Award. Jeff Gilbert and Elsie Wallace accepted the award on behalf of the Senior
Center.
2. Horizons Award to Amanda Green.
3. Advocate of the Year Award to Denton Parks Foundation. John Nesbitt accepted
the award on behalf of the Foundation.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 3
4. Texas Amateur Athletic Federation Region IV Decade Award to Cathy Avery.
5. Innovation Award in Management from Dallas/Fort Worth Parks & Recreation
Directors' Association to Lorraine McGregor.
CITIZEN REPORTS
3. The Council received a report from Leonard Logan, Jr. regarding a church grand opening.
Mr. Logan invited the Council to the grand opening of Galilee Baptist Church in Sanger.
CONSENT AGENDA
Young motioned, Beasley seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and accompanying
ordinances. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "aye",
Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
5. 98-436
AN ORDINANCE FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF
MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE
SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW
EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE
BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PO #91647 - GTE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $49,787.14)
98-437
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING AN
iNSURANCE CONTRACT FOR LONG TERM DISABILITY iNSURANCE;
PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (BID #2250 - LONG TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE TO
UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA IN THE APPROXIMATE
AMOUNT OF $100,000)
98-438
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING AN
INSURANCE CONTRACT FOR LIFE INSURANCE, SUPPLEMENTAL LIFE
iNSURANCE, AND ACCIDENTAL DEATH & DISMEMBERMENT; PROVIDING
FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. (BID #2251 LIFE INSURANCE, SUPPLEMENTAL LIFE
INSURANCE, AND ACCIDENTAL DEATH & DISMEMBERMENT TO
RELIASTAR LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY IN THE APPROXIMATE AMOUNT
OF $100,500)
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 4
98-439
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON
AND FAIRHAVEN, INCORPORATED, RETIREMENT CENTER TO PROVIDE FOR
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SENIOR HOUSING FACILITY AT 2400 NORTH BELL
AVENUE; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR, NOT TO
EXCEED $23,294; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. The Council held a public hearing and considered approval of a resolution adopting the
Roadway Component of the Denton Mobility Plan for the City of Denton; providing a savings
and a repealing clause; and providing an effective date.
Jerry Clark, Director of Engineering and Transportation, stated this Plan had been presented to
the Council at a work session in November. The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval of the Plan with one change-the extension of Hickory Creek Road from
Teasley Lane to F.M. 2499. He stated the current plan was eleven years old and needed to be
updated.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke in favor or in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Council Member Durrance asked if the proposed roadway extension of Loop 288 coming around
the airport would create any problems.
Clark stated they had coordinated with airport personnel and had allowed for that extension.
Council Member Durrance asked about part of the extension of Mayhill Road crossing Denton
State School property.
Clark stated they had coordinated with Denton State School personnel and right-of-way had been
reserved.
Council Member Durrance asked about the access to Loop 288 at Kings Row and whether that
would be changed.
Deputy City Manager Rick Svehla stated there would be an overpass with access ramps at
Windsor and the Kings Row connection would be eliminated.
The following resolution was considered:
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 5
R98-065
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ROADWAY COMPONENT OF THE DENTON
MOBILITY PLAN FOR THE CITY OF DENTON; PROVIDING A SAVINGS AND A
REPEALING CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Beasley motioned, Young seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Beasley "aye",
Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "aye", Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
10. The Council held a public hearing and considered changing the zoning on 34.047 acres
from a Planned Development (PD) zoning district to a Commercial (C) zoning district. The
34.047 acre property was legally described as tract 2 (11.238 acres) and tract 3 (22.809 acres) in
the M. Austin Survey, Abstract 0004. It was located on the west side of Loop 288,
approximately 485 feet north of the T-intersection of Morse Rd. and Loop 288. The proposal
was for future sale and development. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
denial (5-0.) (Z-98-049, Loop 288 and McKinney)
Dave Hill, Director of Planning and Development, stated the property was located at McKinney
and Loop 288. Since the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial 5-0, the
Council would have to vote a super majority in order to override that recommendation. Six
property owners were notified of the request, two notices were returned with favorable
responses. The applicant declined to have a neighborhood meeting. Hill stated there was a fairly
extensive history of this property. There was a 10.25 acre single family detached dwelling
district currently zoned inside the planned development. There was a proposed collector street
that ran east-west through the property. The detached single family zoning started up again with
another 5.5 acres. There was a multi family dwelling located on the eastern portion of the site
and along the south part there was a 10.65 acre flood plain and open space reservation. A review
of subdivision requirements and public improvements had not yet taken place and the property
had to be platted prior to development. Existing street access was available from Loop 288.
Drainage would need to be addressed. As part of the platting process, the development would be
required to install sidewalks as required along any public street frontage and off street parking
would be required to be provided as required by the zoning ordinance. Since the Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended denial, the applicant had agreed to limit the allowable uses
under the straight commercial zoning district to exclude: sexually oriented businesses, poultry
hatchery, trailer camp or mobile home park, and the extraction and storage of sand, caleche,
stone, clay or gravel. There was still a fairly large list of available uses within the commercial
zoning district. Hill stated that the backup included staff's recommendation, which was
consistent with the 1988 Denton Development Plan. The area within the PD for the proposed
straight commercial zoning was considered to be part of the low intensity designation for the
Denton Development Plan. The trip generation that could occur if straight zoning was allowed
far exceeded what would be allowed for a low intensity area. That was the primary reason staff
recommended denial to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Staff recommended some minimum requirements be imposed should the commercial zoning be
favorably reviewed - a maximum allowable floor area ratio .024 to .04:1, 80% brick exterior for
structures and limited access onto Loop 288.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 6
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked if this was zoned commercial would it fall in a moderate or high
intensity area.
Hill stated it would depend on trip generations.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley stated that in looking at the backup for the Growth Management
Strategy, this area appeared to be commercial or light industrial and not low intensity.
Hill stated that looking at the Growth Management Strategy, the intersection of McKinney and
Loop 288 had some mixed use that was appropriate and further in there was residential infill.
Infill was discussed in general and whether or not it all had to be residential. He stated
compatibility was the most significant requirement that was looked at for any infill inside of
Loop 288.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley stated that this request might be more consistent with the new
development plan than the 1988 plan. She stated she was concerned about the flood plain in this
piece of land.
Hill stated that with straight zoning the subdivision regulations would not prohibit filling of the
flood plain.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Kent Key stated he was one of the owners of this property. He stated that they had tried to
market this property with the current planned development, but they had not been successful. He
stated the intensity level on Loop 288 was changing. They wanted commercial zoning to better
market the land and bring more business out on the Loop. There was a collector street that went
through the property. This was more of a commercial neighborhood or light industrial than a
single-family residential neighborhood. He stated he spoke with some of the landowners and
they were in favor of this proposal.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked about the flood plain.
Key stated that he would be willing to dedicate some of the floodway and the flood plain.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley stated her concern to preserve some of the flood plain was because of
the extensive work being done on Pecan Creek. She asked whether straight zoning would allow
for that or whether conditions would have to be placed on it.
City Attorney Prouty stated that conditional zoning had been adopted on other pieces of land. No
building would be allowed on the floodway; the flood plain could be filled and could be built on
subject to conditions. Restrictions could be placed on building in the flood plain provided it did
not significantly reduce the ability of the developer to develop the remainder of the property.
The Council could approve this with a condition to restrict building in the flood plain.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley stated that the developer indicated he might dedicate some of the flood
plain and she wanted to know how that flood plain would be kept free from development.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 7
Hill stated that if commercial zoning was considered for this property, a more intensive use
would be allowed than for single family. A higher floor to area ratio could be allowed so the
developer could make better use of the property outside of the flood plain in exchange for
restrictions on the flood plain. The applicant would have to be willing to accept that kind of
condition.
City Attorney Prouty stated that the applicant had indicated he was willing to dedicate the
floodway and a portion of the flood plain. Commercial property was not subject to the park
dedication ordinance so that would strictly be up to the applicant. If Council indicated that they
wanted the applicant to dedicate that and he was willing to do that, the dedication would be part
of the approval of the zoning. If it was dedicated to public use, then there could not be any
commercial use in it.
Key stated that he would give a portion of the flood plain, about seven or eight acres.
Council Member Burroughs asked how much of the flood plain he would be willing to dedicate.
Key stated five acres of the floodway and three acres of the flood plain.
Council Member Burroughs stated that a number of the commercial uses were not neighborhood
friendly, such as dance hall or night club; transportation related uses; seat cover or muffler
installation shop; on premise sale of beer and/or wine; off premise sale of beer and/or wine;
licensed private club; utility, accessory and incidental uses; drag strip or commercial racing or
go-kart track; flea market.
Key said he wanted to leave the off premise sale of beer and/or wine and the licensed private
club on the list because there might be convenience stores built on some corners or restaurants.
Council Member Kristoferson stated that in commercial zoning a building height of up to 20
stories was allowed. She asked about limiting the size of the building.
The Council and applicant agreed to limit the building height to four stories.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing
Mayor Miller asked what would be the impact of these changes in terms of the intensity.
Hill stated that if they were looking at the Growth Management Strategy in regards to intensity,
they were not prepared to say that a certain number of stories would meet the objectives they
were trying to reach with the Growth Management Strategy. Along the frontage, there was a
chance of having mixed use office, which could be higher intensity. There was a difference on
what the applicant decided to do on the buildable portion of the site versus the aesthetics of the
structure.
Hill stated that in terms of the floodway land, which was about four acres, it would be dedicated
to the City. He stated that it was not negotiable. The flood plain limits extended extensively into
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 8
the rest of the property, approximately 10-15 acres. He stated the question for the Council was if
they wanted to be able to consider higher intensity uses and did favor some commercial uses,
was there a way to reserve a good portion of the flood plain from development and allow some
of the higher intensity uses in places where it's more preferential. He stated that there were a
couple of options: a proper floor area ratio could be determined staying out of the flood plain;
placing conditions to the straight commercial zoning or change to a commercial PD, reserving
the right to see the detailed plan at some future date; or postpone so the applicant could decide
what they were comfortable with.
Council Member Durrance asked if it was postponed, would it come back to the Council or the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Hill stated it would come back to the Council.
City Attorney Prouty stated that if additional conditions were imposed that were more restrictive
than originally presented, it could be postponed and brought back to Council.
Council Member Kristoferson asked about the option regarding designating this as a commercial
PD and wanted more clarification.
Hill stated that to make this a commercial PD, they could amend the existing PD to eliminate the
single family and multi-family residential and make the commercial designation. The
commercial zoning would be in place and some time in the future the Council could look at the
site plan when the applicant brought the detailed plan back to Council.
City Attorney Prouty stated that the Commercial PD with conditions could be approved at this
meeting, as it would be more restrictive than just the commercial zoning. He stated that it was
up to the Council if they wanted to try to put that together tonight or postpone the request.
Hill stated that staff always tried to work with the applicants and Mr. Key had not had an
opportunity to respond to this.
Key stated that he didn't think he had a problem with the PD. He asked if he would have to have
a detailed plan for each parcel that he sold off.
Hill stated yes.
Council Member Durrance suggested postponing the request and give the applicant time to look
over the options instead of asking him to commit to things he was not sure of.
Mayor Miller expressed reluctance to pass it as it had been presented.
Key asked the Council to postpone and instruct staff to work with him on the options.
Burroughs motioned to postpone the request and for staff to work with the applicant, Beasley
seconded. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "aye",
Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 9
11. The Council held a public hearing and considered approval of a zoning change at 1413 E.
McKinney to change the conditions stipulated in a Conditioned Office [O(c)] zoning district.
The .256 acre property was legally described as the east 50 feet of Lot One (1), in Block Twelve
(12) of the College View Addition and was located on the north side of McKinney Street
approximately 96 feet east of Hettie Street. The proposal was to allow for the placement of an
historic structure to serve as an office, which would be larger than the existing structure. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0) with conditions.) (Z-98-054,
1413 E. McKinney)
Council Member Durrance excused himself from consideration of this matter.
Dave Hill, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the size of the property was
actually. 155 acre. He stated the applicant had requested the change to enable the placement of a
larger, historical structure on the site. Fifteen property owners had been notified with no
responses. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting but no interested property owners
attended.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke in favor or opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The Council considered the following ordinance:
98-440
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR AN
AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENT OFFICE CONDITIONED [O(C)] ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION, BY REPEALING THE
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ADDING NEW CONDITIONS ON .155 ACRES OF
LAND AT 1413 E. MCKINNEY, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MCKINNEY
STREET APPROXIMATELY 96 FEET EAST OF HETTIE STREET; PROVIDING
FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS
THEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Kristoferson motioned, Beasley seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye",
Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "abstain", Young "aye", Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Durrance returned to the meeting.
12. The Council held a public hearing and considered rezoning 34.133 acres from Planned
Development 39 (PD39) zoning district and Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district to a Planned
Development (PD) zoning district by way of a detailed plan, allowing for detached single-family
homes. The property was located on the southeast corner of Stuart Road and Loop 288. (The
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 10
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (5-0) with conditions.) (Z-98-042,
Denton Garden Addition)
Dave Hill, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the Council had considered this at
a previous meeting. Two motions failed to receive a minimum of four votes.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked about prior discussion on two entrances.
City Attorney Prouty stated that Council could accept the subdivision with the two entrances if
they determined that the variance was offset by all the other benefits the subdivision would bring
in. Since the Planning and Zoning Commission denied the version of the detailed plan with
those two entranceways, this would require a supermajority vote.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Brian Burke spoke in favor of the rezoning.
Council Member Young asked if he had spoken to some of the neighbors.
Burke stated that some of the neighbors were concerned about the size of the lots. The Planning
and Zoning Commission made a condition that reduced the lots by two.
Council Member Burroughs wanted to know why there was no neighborhood meeting held.
Burke stated that they had held a neighborhood meeting prior to submitting an application for the
rezoning and felt that was adequate.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley expressed a concern on only one way in and one way out of the
proposed subdivision.
Burke stated that they had expressed concern about two entrances. They initiated a variance
application to the Planning and Zoning Commission, who chose to go with one entrance
approach.
Council Member Kristoferson suggested lessening the density of the subdivision.
Mayor Miller asked Burke to explain the drainage. He asked if the development was going to
control the drainage.
Burke stated that the new streets would intercept the surface runoff and go underground due to
the storm drainage pipe installed.
Council Member Burroughs asked if the existing PD-39 had been reviewed to determine whether
it could be utilized in regards to the drainage issues and streets and if so, why wasn't it
developed.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 11
Burke stated that he had reviewed
developed under the current zoning.
produce a better product.
the improvements and didn't know why it couldn't be
He stated the applicant felt the change in zoning would
Dan Gould spoke in favor of the request. He stated the lots would run approximately $23,000.
He stated the existing zoning could be used if Council wished, but it would be about 190 lots
under the present zoning. He felt it was in the best interest of the community to do the mixed lot
development.
Council Member Young asked what the price of a home built in this subdivision would be.
Gould stated they would range from $90,000 to $120,000.
Council Member Burroughs asked how they plan to self-impose the regulations in regards to the
lot size on the southern boundary bordering Juno.
Gould stated they would just have to take his word for it. They would be willing to put in at least
1600 square foot lots adjoining Juno. They could put a condition on it at approval.
Mayor Miller asked if it could be a condition since this was planned development.
City Attorney Prouty stated that Council could make it part of the PD and require them to record
it in a deed restriction. However, a deed restriction could not be enforced where there was
zoning. The individual property owners who bought in a subdivision could enforce those
restrictions.
Council Member Burroughs stated that the abutting property was not in the zoning area but in the
PD area.
Gould stated that the lots abutting were.
City Attorney Prouty stated they could put that as a condition in the PD. This was not about lot
size but construction. Those type of controls were enforced through deed restrictions. He
informed the Council that in cities where there was zoning, deed restrictions could not be
enforced.
Mayor Miller stated it was now SF-7 and PD and the request was to change it to PD. He wanted
to know why they wanted it changed instead of using current zoning.
Gould stated his mother thought it would be the best plan.
Paul Whitlock spoke in opposition. He stated that he thought it was going to bring the value of
his property down. He felt the density was too high and had a safety concern. He also felt that
was a lot of traffic for one entrance, even two. He stated he was not against development.
Council Member Burroughs asked if he had talked with the developer or looked at the current
zoning.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 12
Mr. Whitlock stated he had not.
Council Member Burroughs asked if this was zoned when Mr. Whitlock bought his property.
Mr. Whitlock stated he did not know.
Mayor Miller stated it was zoned in 1982.
Brian Holm spoke in opposition. He stated he did not oppose development but he thought the
size of the lots were too small. He stated he hoped this didn't diminish the value of his property.
He stated the homes should be $F-7 at a minimum.
Council Member Young asked if his garage was in the back or in the front of his home.
Mr. Holm stated it was on the side.
Dale Brown felt the smaller lots would affect the neighborhood and the property values.
Robert Mills stated he would like to see the homes kept SF-7 although SF-10 would be better
and he would like to see two entrances.
Merle Grisham stated he was in opposition.
Gould stated that they would take this back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to have
them reverse their decision on two entranceways. He stated the Council could vote on this plat
and he would take it back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to reconsider the two
entranceways.
City Attorney Prouty stated he could not do it that way. The Council could vote on it with two
entranceways, which would require a supermajority vote, or one entranceway.
Gould stated that he wanted the Council to vote on it tonight. If approved, he could begin the
development. He could still take it back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for them to
approve two entranceways.
City Attorney Prouty advised Mr. Gould that the Council could approve this with one
entranceway. If he took it back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to get their approval on
two entranceways, he would still have to bring it back to the Council. The Planning and Zoning
Commission could only make a recommendation to the Council.
Hill advised Mr. Gould that if his intent was to go back to the Planning and Zoning Commission,
it was not feasible for one plan to be approved and then have to review a second plan. Should a
vote occur on the single entranceway option, the applicant would stand the possibility of
rejection and would have to ask the Council to provide a waiver of the one-year rule for coming
back to have a zoning request examined. He stated that in trying to align these intersections from
a traffic safety standpoint, there would be some pretty stiff resistance from staff in terms of the
recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission to reconsider a two-access option that
they had already denied unanimously.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 13
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Council Member Kristoferson stated that the adjacent property owners spoke in opposition to
one entranceway and also the density. She stated she found it interesting that Mr. Gould was
willing to take this back to the Planning and Zoning Commission and Council, but not back to
the neighborhood. She stated that the neighborhood meeting was hastily and poorly called. Four
people attended and left their opposition in place and are still in opposition after the developer
had met with them. She stated this was a 16-year old PD. No action had been taken on it. The
market standards had changed. The neighborhood had developed. They were asking for
adjacent compatibility. The Planning and Zoning Commission insisted on the density being
changed. She asked the City Attorney if the Council was allowed to consider such things as
deed restrictions, could they consider changing a perimeter zoning to SF-10 and changing the
interior zoning to SF-7, which would meet the concerns of the neighborhood.
City Attorney Prouty stated they could offer those conditions.
Kristoferson motioned, Durrance seconded to approve the request with conditions: the perimeter
lots abutting Juno (Lots 6-16) would be SF-10 and the remaining interior lots be would SF-7.
Council Member Durrance stated this was voted on last week and it was denied.
City Attorney Prouty stated it was a no-vote, because there was only three votes to deny. No
action could be taken unless there were four votes one way or the other.
Council Member Burroughs wanted to know if the proposed conditions were acceptable to the
owner.
Gould stated that this was a downzoning. He stated it was not marketable.
Council Member Burroughs asked that it was not marketable-meaning the value of the remaining
lots would be insufficient to develop.
Gould stated yes that would limit a developer while development costs would stay the same.
Mayor Pro Tern Beasley stated that the standard in the City was $F-7. PD's had gone below that
to smaller lots. She felt this was too high density on this piece of property. She felt that one way
in and one way out was really bad. She stated she would vote in favor of the motion. It was an
equitable use of the land with the neighbors protected on the southern side with the SF-10 and
the rest of it $F-7.
Council Member Young stated what difference did four or five months make. He stated he
would be voting against the motion.
Mayor Miller stated he would be voting against the motion. He stated that this development,
although not perfect, was a good development. He stated this development basically met the
1988 plan and the 1998 plan, because it is planned development. He stated that the thing about
lot size was when more money was put in the lot, less money would be put in the home. He
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 14
stated that no one had demonstrated that as smaller lots had been developed, cheaper homes had
been built. He stated there was a market for this.
Council Member Kristoferson stated in response to the proposal not being economically viable,
someone needed to tell the other 10,000 lots that had been zoned in the last year and a half that
their SF-7's and SF-10's were not economically viable because obviously that seemed to be a
very hot zoning area, so she thought it was extremely marketable and was no way encumbering
anything onerous.
Mayor Miller stated he was talking about the market range they were hitting for this particular
product, which was $90,000 to $110,000. The Council had indicated that they wanted diversity
of residences in the community so when he spoke about economically viable it meant that if
another $10,000 or $15,000 was spent on a lot and the development was only going to spend
$100,000 to $110,000 it's got to come out of the home.
Council Member Durrance stated he agreed about the economical viability. If the project was
not economically viable in SF-4 then Council had just proved several people who were going to
be running to the bankruptcy court. He felt the Council owed a duty to the citizens of the
community to be more than just market driven, and driven by factors of what was cost effective
or what could be placed with a dollar figure on a particular lot. This dealt with adjacent
neighborhood integrity that people were concerned about. To the south and to the east of those
areas were homes which were SF-10. He felt it was not too much to ask to listen to those
neighborhoods and say that Council should be consistent in those types of rulings and zonings.
What hasn't changed here and what he did not appreciate was a lack of consideration or creativity
in the situation. Staff reported last time that SF-10 to SF-16 was less than 2% of those 10,000
lots now in the city.
City Attorney Prouty stated this was a downzoning. The developer was asking for something
more restrictive and made it less dense. What was being proposed was making it even more
restrictive and less dense. It was not taking away an existing property right.
Council Member Burroughs stated that he was trying to get a feel for the message being
conveyed to developers with old PD's that the Council did not like. It seemed as though the
Council was indicating that developers should not come to Council with those old planned
developments or they might lose what they already had.
City Attorney Prouty stated that was a possibility. Any time someone came to the Council with a
zoning request there was always the possibility the Council could impose conditions that made it
less dense and made it more restrictive. In fact that is the only way the Council could do it
without sending it back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. In most cases, in single
application zoning like this, the only way that you can place conditions without going back
through the process is to make it more restrictive. If it was less restrictive, then all of the
neighbors would have to be notified again so that they knew that it would be less restrictive and
denser.
Mayor Miller asked the City Attorney if the developer objected to this, which he had, would a
supermajority vote be required to approve this motion.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 15
City Attorney Prouty stated yes.
Hill stated if 20% of the land represented by the owners affected by the change in zoning filed a
written protest, then it would take a supermajority. Instead of within the 200 foot area, it focused
in on the exact property. A public hearing had been advertised, held and closed. The real
question, at this late stage, was whether the owner wanted to file a written protest or withdraw
his application.
City Attorney Prouty stated it would be unusual to allow that at this late stage.
On roll vote on Council Member Kristoferson's motion, Beasley "aye", Kristoferson "aye",
Durrance "aye", Young "nay", Burroughs "nay", and Mayor Miller "nay". Motion failed with a
3-3 vote.
Young motioned, Burroughs seconded to approve the proposal as submitted.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley suggested that since there was one council member who could not vote
on this and obviously the Council very split on this, that the proposal be postponed for a certain
amount of time to let the developer try to work something out and to allow time for staff to work
with the neighborhood, etc.
Mayor Miller asked if that was a motion.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley stated there was already a motion on the floor, but that was the motion
she was going to make.
Mayor Miller stated that a motion to postpone took precedence over any other type of motion.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley motioned to postpone
City Attorney Prouty stated that in the case of a tie vote, the issue was taken up at the next
meeting when there were seven members. It had been ruled that Council Member Cochran could
vote on the issue the same as had been ruled that Council Member Burroughs could vote. There
was no legal obstacle to them voting and they did not have to abstain. The motion to postpone
was in order because when there was a 3-3 tie it was carried over to the next meeting where there
were seven members who could vote so that the tie could be broken one way or another.
Mayor Miller stated there was a motion that had not been voted on and then a subsequent motion
to postpone.
City Attorney Prouty stated the motion to postpone took precedence.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked if she had to put a time limit on it.
City Attorney Prouty stated that the motion could be just bring it back whenever it was ready to
be reconsidered.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 16
Mayor Miller stated Council could direct staff to work with the developer and the neighbors and
bring the proposal back when they felt it was ready to come back without putting a timeframe on
it. There was a motion to postpone and work with staff and the neighbors and for staff to be
responsible for bringing it back with the developer.
On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "nay", Burroughs "aye",
and Mayor Miller "nay". Motion carried with a 4-2 vote.
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
13. The Council considered approval of a resolution requesting that the 76th Texas
Legislature strongly consider and include within any proposed electric restructuring legislation
the position on electric utility restructuring expressed by and jointly adopted by the four Texas
Municipal Power Agency member cities.
The following resolution was considered:
R98-066
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THAT THE 76TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE
STRONGLY CONSIDER AND INCLUDE WITHIN ANY PROPOSED ELECTRIC
RESTRUCTURING LEGISLATION THE POSITION ON ELECTRIC UTILITY
RESTRUCTURING EXPRESSED BY AND JOINTLY ADOPTED BY THE FOUR
TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY MEMBER CITIES.
Sharon Mays, Director of Electric Utilities, stated the resolution represented a base level
agreement between the four cities that was a first step in the legislative position that could work
all or in part for each of the four cities. It was recognized that each city had additional individual
issues that had to be dealt with and it was agreed that this would be the base and if individual
cities needed to move forward with other individual positions it could be done. This was a fairly
straightforward proposal that asked that the cities be allowed to choose to phase in competition
in their service areas. It asked for authority to issue taxable or tax exempt bonds through an
agency of the state of the cities themselves and the ability to secure payment of such bonds and
stranded investment up to the level that had been calculated by the Public Utilities Commission
as a non-bypassable wires charge that in effect removed the cost of the stranded investment from
generation. It also asked for support of the TPPA general position on deregulation.
Kristoferson motioned; Burroughs seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Beasley
"aye", Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "aye", Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller
"aye". Motion carried unanimously.
14. The Council considered approval of a resolution reviewing and adopting the Investment
Policy for Funds for the City of Denton; designating an investment officer; providing a savings
and a repealing clause; and providing an effective date.
The following resolution was considered:
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 17
R98-067
A RESOLUTION REVIEWING AND ADOPTING THE INVESTMENT POLICY FOR
FUNDS FOR THE CITY OF DENTON; DESIGNATING AN INVESTMENT
OFFICER; PROVIDING A SAVINGS AND A REPEALING CLAUSE; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
Diana Ortiz, Director of Fiscal Management, stated that the policy included the City's investment
parameters or guidelines that set the conservative structure of the portfolio. State law required
the governing body to review its investment policy and strategies at least once per year. The
City's investment policy was substantially changed last year to comply with the changes in the
state law as a result of the legislation. There was no legislative session this year and staff did not
recommend any additional changes. The Investment Committee had reviewed the policy and
recommended that the policy be forwarded to Council for approval. The investment policy
included the designation of an investment officer(s), strategies for each investment type,
settlement requirements of delivery versus payment, market pricing, maximum stated maturities,
and emphasized the safety of principle and liquidity.
Council Member Durrance asked about the parameters for investment features. Had any
delineations been made through the state agencies or state treasury as to how that would be or
was it strictly statutory
Ortiz replied it was strictly statutory. There had not been any additional amendments to it.
Young motioned; Beasley seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Beasley "aye",
Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "aye", Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
15. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving a real estate contract
between the City of Denton and Rayzor Investments, Ltd. relating to the purchase of 1.288 acre
of land for the expansion of U.S. Highway 77 (Parcels 14 & 25); authorizing the expenditure of
funds therefore; and providing an effective date.
The following ordinance was considered:
98-441
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A REAL ESTATE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF DENTON AND RAYZOR INVESTMENTS, LTD. RELATING TO THE
PURCHASE OF 1.288 ACRES OF LAND FOR THE EXPANSION OF U.S.
HIGHWAY 77 (PARCELS 14 AND 25); AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF
FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Young motioned; Beasley seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye",
Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "aye", Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 18
16. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to enter
into a professional services contract with Diversified Utility Consultants, Inc. to review Lone
Star Gas Company's request to increase rates in the City of Denton service area; authorizing the
expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date.
City Attorney Prouty stated when Council suspended Lone Star Gas Company's request for a rate
increase, they had gone out for request for proposals for consultants to help review their request
for a change in rates. Diversified Utility Consultants was the top rated proposal out of eight
proposals. The proposals were reviewed for qualifications, experience, resources, conformity to
specs, etc. Staff recommended approval of this agreement with Diversified.
The Council considered the following ordinance:
98-442
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH DIVERSIFIED UTILITY
CONSULTANTS, INC. TO REVIEW LONE STAR GAS COMPANY'S REQUEST TO
INCREASE RATES IN THE CITY OF DENTON SERVICE AREA; AUTHORIZING
THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Young motioned; Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye",
Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "aye", Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
17. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas donating
certain historical artifacts to Denton County, Texas, to be held in the public interest as public
property; reserving the right to reclaim the artifacts in the event that Denton County was
unwilling or unable to preserve, maintain or display them for the benefit of the public; and
prescribing an effective date.
City Attorney Prouty stated this ordinance would transfer and convey some historical artifacts
that the City was successful in recovering from the Denton County Historical Museum, Inc. in
the litigation and the settlement that resulted out of that litigation. It was recommended to
transfer the artifacts to Denton County's Museum which was now occupying the space
previously occupied by the Denton County Historical Museum.
The following ordinance was considered:
98-443
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS DONATING CERTAIN
HISTORICAL ARTIFACTS TO DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE HELD IN THE
PUBLIC INTEREST AS PUBLIC PROPERTY; RESERVING THE RIGHT TO
RECLAIM THE ARTIFACTS IN THE EVENT THAT DENTON COUNTY IS
UNWILLING OR UNABLE TO PRESERVE, MAINTAIN OR DISPLAY THEM FOR
THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC; AND PRESCRIBING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 19
Beasley motioned; Young seconded to adopt the ordinance.
Council Member Durrance asked if this was the list agreed upon after the litigation. He stated
the list that was it the backup several weeks ago indicated there were still some items in dispute.
City Attorney Prouty stated that there were still some negotiations going on. There may be some
additional artifacts that possibly could require another ordinance to convey those.
On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young "aye", Burroughs "aye",
and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
18. The Council considered nominations and appointments to the City's Boards and
Commissions.
Council Member Young nominated David Tatum to the Keep Denton Beautiful Board.
Council Member Burroughs motioned, Young seconded to suspend the rules to allow the
Council to vote on this nomination. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Durrance
"aye", Young "aye", Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
On roll vote on the nomination, Beasley "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Durrance "aye", Young
"aye", Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
19. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
City Manager Mike Jez reminded the Council that at the next regular meeting the annual
performance reviews for Council appointed employees would be done.
20. New Business
There was no new business.
Following the completion of the Regular Session, the Council convened into a Work Session and
considered the following:
1. The Council received a report regarding the fiscal year 1997-1998 Annual Investment
Program.
Diana Ortiz, Director of Fiscal Operations, presented the 1997-1998 Annual Investment
Program. She stated the program was in compliance each quarter with all the perimeters as stated
in the policy and the funds were totally protected at the depository bank. Some of the
accomplishments achieved by the investment program included implementation of the lock box
system, the investment tracking software, online cash management services, converting to a new
bank depository, streamlining of cash management operations via controlled disbursements,
controlled concentrations and automated account reconcilliations, and consolidation of
investment custodial service.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 20
Mayor Miller asked if this had been reviewed by the Investment Committee.
Ortiz stated that it had been approved by the Investment Committee.
2. The Council received a report and gave staff direction regarding Robson Communities
development issues.
Linda Ratliff, Director of Economic Development, presented a report on the proposed Robson
Communities development. She stated Robson Communities was considering the development
of a resort community to be located west of I-35W, south of 2449, and north of Crawford Road.
Robson had 2500 acres under contract. Several issues needed to be addressed before
development of the property could be done. Water and sewer service were not available, and the
cost to extend water/sewer lines was several million dollars. Approximately two-thirds of the
property was located in Denton's ETJ, and the remaining one-third was in the City of Northlake's
ETJ. Robson would prefer to have all of the property in Denton's ETJ and subsequently annexed
into the City of Denton. Robson wanted to promote the same "resort" image of their existing
projects, and they were asking for certain variances that had not previously been considered by
staff or Council. Robson was asking the City of Denton to give them permission to operate a
private utility. They had proposed to own their own water/wastewater utility and were asking
that impact fees be waived, as the development would have no impact on City facilities. Staff
and the Public Utilities Board recommended that Robson's request for a separate
water/wastewater system be denied, and Robson work with staff to find a satisfactory solution
for providing water/wastewater service. The Public Utilities Board endorsed the philosophy that
development along the I-35W corridor be serviced by Denton water/wastewater utilities because
of the importance of economic development in that area. This philosophy implied that the City
should consider ways to help participate in the cost of utility infrastructure installation in
important corridors. The Public Utilities Board also recommended that the City expedite the
construction of the already planned water line extension along Hwy. 377 in the year 2001 in
order to connect the Hills of Argyle subdivision to the Denton system and eliminate the reliance
on the Upper Trinity Regional Water District for water to this area. Staff and the PUB concurred
that the City should provide the water and wastewater service to Robson. The options for
providing this service included connection to Denton's lines, Denton service through water
supplied by the UTRWD, similar to how the Hills of Argyle was currently being handled, and
service through a system of municipally-owned ground water wells and a wastewater treatment
plant that Robson would build and dedicate to the City.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked whether it was feasible to use groundwater for this development
when this was basically a city of 10,000.
Jill Jordan, Director of Water/Wastewater Utilities, stated that staff was doubtful that there was
sufficient ground water supply to sustain the development over a prolonged period of time.
Groundwater was not a long-term solution for the entire subdivision as it eventually it would
have to be connected to a surface water service. She stated groundwater could be a partial
solution for a temporary source of water.
Council Member Young felt that Robson should be able to use groundwater on a temporary basis
until the City could provide services.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 21
Mayor Miller asked if any test wells had been dug and what the water table was there.
Jordan stated that Robson was planning on digging a test well in January and results would be
available sometime in February. Trying to decide what the water system or wastewater system
should be at this time was premature because all the numbers were not available and there was
more discussion that needed to take place with Robson.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley expressed concern about depleting the groundwater supply there and
felt the PUB's recommendations were very good and staff should work with Robson to find a
solution.
Council Member Kristoferson stated her support of the PUB's recommendations and would not
support the City and the citizens of Denton having to support utility infrastructure out to this
area.
Council Member Burroughs wanted to know if there was any other private water company
operating within the city limits.
Jordan stated there was an individual on Carpenter Road who owned a small well system where
he basically sold water to his neighbors. There was a project now to connect him onto the City's
system.
Council Member Burroughs wanted to know if there would be any difficulty in transferring at
some point in the future onto the City's system.
Jordan stated that would need to be resolved in some kind of contractual way whether it was part
of the PD or some other type of agreement so the City would know specifically when that would
happen. This was a departure from the City's normal policy.
Council Member Durrance wanted to know what the groundwater reserves were in that area,
what was estimated and what was actually being used. He asked what was the estimated use per
capita per person in the City. He wanted to know what would be the estimated costs on the lines
for this area and how those estimated costs would affect present CIP projects for infill within the
City. He also wanted to know what options would be available, if any, for implementation of
those particular lines.
Jordan stated they did not have specific information on the groundwater reserves. She stated the
per capita use per person in the City was 180 gallons per person per day. The five-year CIP plan
included a project to bring water from the Bent Creek Subdivision down to the Hills of Argyle
Subdivision in the year 2001. That project was estimated to cost about a million dollars.
Mayor Miller felt that the Council would go along with the recommendation of the PUB and
staff regarding the options listed on page three of the back-up materials.
Ratliff stated the project would be a secured gated neighborhood, geared towards the senior
retiree. In the recommendation from the Fire Department, the development would be treated as
any gated community and an emergency device called an "opticom" would be required. Another
recommendation from the Fire Department was that a fire station be located somewhere along
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 22
F.M. 2449 some time in the near future. The Fire Department's travel time goal of five minutes
to an emergency would be impossible due to the distance from the fire stations to this area.
Fire Chief Ross Chadwick stated he would like to see a fire station in the area as soon as
possible. He stated the next fire station for the City would need to be in the southwest section of
the City.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked if there would be more emergency medical calls than fire calls
due to the age of the population in this development.
Chadwick stated yes.
Ratliff stated that if the Robson development included publicly dedicated parks and recreation
facilities within the perimeter fence and gate, a 10:00 p.m. closing time would be acceptable and
could be established by ordinance. Robson had asked the City to maintain the roads in the
community and stated that the homeowner's association would maintain the landscaping and
decorative hardscape street enhancements and bear the related costs. Staffs recommendation
was that if this was a private gated community with private streets then they should be
maintained by the development. Public use of the golf course and restaurants during build-out
would be encouraged. Build-out was estimated at 20-30 years. Staff was concerned whether
these amenities would be available to the public after build-out.
Council Member Kristoferson stated that Council Member Cochran did not believe in gated
communities. She also stated that he would not support seeing streets built by the developer and
maintained by the City if they were not accessible to all the public. She stated she also supported
these sentiments.
Council accepted staffs recommendation regarding the streets in the development.
Ratliff stated that Robson wanted to discuss any general moratoriums that might be imposed by
the City and how they might affect the development. Robson asked that development fees
become a part of a development agreement between Robson and the City of Denton. They
suggested that the agreement set appropriate, pre-existing, agreed-to, fees and provide
allowances for periodic increases for inflation, etc. A guarantee that Robson be named
specifically as immune to potential development moratoriums was not considered feasible by
staff due to potential claims of discrimination. The Planning Department would not recommend
a "fee ceiling" given the fact that the zoning and subdivision regulations might experience
significant changes. The City could not guarantee that the impact fees would not change because
developments as large as the Robson plat only portions of their property at a time and the impact
fees could change over time. The Director of the Parks Department indicated he would be
willing to consider contract language, which would set pre-determined fee adjustments for the
Park Development fees.
City Attorney Prouty stated that these fees were based on the impact of the particular subdivision
and anything the Council did that did not follow that particular formula was questionable legally.
Mayor Miller stated the Council accepted staffs recommendations regarding general
moratoriums, "fee ceiling", impact fees, and park development fees.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 23
Ratliff stated that Robson was working with the City of Northlake regarding the ETJ problem.
They had indicated that Northlake would consider relinquishing its ETJ in return for a temporary
water and sewer stub across Crawford Road for a potential shopping center site. They requested
that the City's staff assist in making sure the transfer would be documented correctly. Staff had
two recommendations that were on page seven of the backup. Staff would prefer option one but
was open to the second.
Council Member Burroughs asked if Denton could sell water wholesale to Northlake for this
location.
Jordan stated probably but it would be a deviation from normal policy.
Ratliff stated that Robson asked that the annexation boundaries be set at the perimeter of the
project, not including the perimeter roads, which were Crawford Road and Florence Road.
Robson was working with Denton County regarding the County's participation in improving
those roads so they were requesting that those roads not be annexed into the City and remain
County roads. Two scenarios had been prepared by staff, which were on page seven of the back-
up. Staff preferred scenario #2 because they felt that those two roads would never be major City
of Denton thoroughfares and would likely define interlocal boundaries between the City and the
Town of Northlake.
Council Member Durrance stated he disagreed with this. He felt this set a bad precedence for
what was coming up in the legislature with regard to annexation and that the City would be
limiting their boundaries and ETJ.
Deputy City Manager Rick Svehla stated that by not annexing Crawford, maintenance would be
eliminated, and by not annexing Florence, the western ETJ would be limited by 50 feet.
Consensus of Council was to proceed with scenario two.
Ratliff presented other concerns expressed by Robson. Denton Municipal Electric was certified
to serve only a portion of the Robson tract. CoServe was certified to serve the entire project.
Staff recommended that Denton Municipal Electric not serve the Robson community. Robson
wanted to know if the City of Denton Solid Waste Department would provide solid waste
service.
Howard Martin, Assistant City Manager for Utilities, stated that if the development was annexed
into the City, solid waste service would be provided.
Council Member Young asked who was providing solid waste service to the Hills of Argyle.
Martin stated he did not know but would check on this.
Council Member Kristoferson stated that Items 4 and 5 were very detailed in the back-up and
had excellent recommendations from staff regarding continuation of the process for Item 4 and
further study for Item 5.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 24
Kristoferson motioned, Young seconded to give staff direction to proceed with their
recommendations for Items 4 and 5. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Durrance
"aye", Young "aye", Burroughs "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
3. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding the
draft Growth Management Strategy.
Dave Hill, Director of Planning and Development, introduced Mark Bowers, HOK consultant,
and Renee Jaynes. Bowers stated that based upon the preferences expressed by the citizens of
Denton at the community meetings and at the community workshop, the Growth Management
Plan presented a preferred alternative for future growth in Denton. The plan combined many of
the concepts from the alternative development scenarios that received favorable responses at the
community meetings, including the development of "neighborhood centers", "urban centers", and
a strong industrial district within the City, while encouraging the restoration, redevelopment and
infill of parcels in the downtown area and adjacent to the University of North Texas and Texas
Woman's University.
Bowers stated that the sub-areas had been split to show which areas would be urbanized and
which would be rural. Some of the major conclusions reached at the community workshop were
that the community wanted the quality of growth strongly managed. The quantity of growth
would be managed through the adequate public facilities requirements and proactive planned
extensions of services. The location of growth would be strongly managed as indicated in the
Growth Management Strategy Plan. The timing of growth would be strongly managed through
tools such as adequate public facilities requirements and the capital improvements program. He
reviewed several of the changes made to the specific aspects of the Plan based on the community
meetings.
Renee Jaynes presented the objectives and tools based on feedback from the community and the
Council. She stated that the community wanted the quality of new development to be strongly
managed, that the environmentally sensitive areas be protected, and that Denton's unique quality
of life and unique character be retained in this process. The community wanted to ensure that
adequate public facilities existed to service growth and that new development met community
standards. Citizens wanted the location of growth to be strongly managed, mixed-uses should be
supported in appropriate locations, infill development be encouraged so that the center of the
City remained strong and vital, existing neighborhoods be preserved as well as the downtown
area, and wished to see opportunities for encouraging the growth of the non-residential portion of
the tax base to enhance both the City's and the School District's fiscal positions. The community
wanted the timing of growth controlled to ensure the adequate provision of City services and
facilities and growth in desired areas stimulated. The Growth Management Strategy would be
the cornerstone for staff in refining and bringing the Comprehensive Plan to Council. Adoption
of the Comprehensive Plan would give the City a good tool to guide the location, quantity and
character of future development. The Comprehensive Plan would also give the City a means for
coordinating the master plans for city services and utilities and making sure that future growth
and new development was compatible with existing development within the City. Some of the
individual tools they recommended the Council adopt were the small area and corridor planning,
and the use of the capital improvement program to direct growth to desired locations within the
City. The capital improvement program could be used to control the quantity of development
through the level of services provided and also allowed control of the timing of development
City of Denton City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 25
when combined with the adequate public facilities requirement in terms of when services would
become available. She stated another tool would be the preparation of master plans for
infrastructure to influence the location and quantity of future growth. When the master plans
were tied in with the capital improvement program that would make the tools for controlling the
timing of new development activity that much more effective. They recommended the Council
consider developing and implementing adequate public facilities policies. They recommended
the Council look at utility participation policies and consider using them as incentives to direct
growth to desired locations whether in certain corridors of the City or using it to support the
continued reinvestment in older parts of the City. The impact fee program could be used to
direct development to desired locations. Impact fees structured properly could be used to
encourage growth in areas where adequate facilities existed and where development would be
less costly to serve. The annexation policies could be used to help control the quality of new
development and growth using them as a tool to control future land use and density decisions,
and as incentives to encourage infill and redevelopment activity as well as other objectives that
might be in the Comprehensive Plan. Incentives could take a variety of forms, they did not need
to be just financial in nature. Incentives could be structured into the zoning ordinance to try to
help achieve public policy objectives. Use could be of the zoning ordinance maps, subdivision
regulations, and site plan review process to support the implementation of the Growth
Management Strategy and Comprehensive Plan. She stated these regulatory tools were very
important in controlling the location of growth, the quantity of that growth, and particularly the
quality of new development. There would be issues beyond local control that would require
coordination with other governmental agencies in joint planning activities and using interlocal
agreements.
Council Member Young asked if they came up with the prediction that in the year 2020 the City
of Denton would be 213,000.
Hill stated that HOK was a sub-consultant to RUST and RUST came up with the population
projections.
Council Member Young stated that there were people believing that there would be 213,000
people in the City of Denton in the year 2020.
Hill stated that the consultant stated that the rate of growth could carry on for decades. He stated
their forecast was fairly conservative. He also stated that they would be looking at annexing
about 20 square miles as well as including the existing city limits to reach a population of
185,000.
Council Member Kristoferson wanted to know if each person attending the community workshop
had received a copy of the summary.
Hill stated that staff wanted to present it to Council first and then they would send it out to the
citizens.
Items #4 and #5 were not discussed as indicated by a prior motion of Council Member
Kristoferson.
With no further business, the meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m.
City of Demon City Council Minutes
December 15, 1998
Page 26
JACK MILLER, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
JANE RICHARDSON
DEPUTY CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS