Minutes July 27, 1999CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
July 27, 1999
After determining that a quorum was present and convening in an open meeting, the City
Council convened in a closed meeting on Tuesday, July 27, 1999 at 5:15 p.m. in the Council
Work Session Room at City Hall.
PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Cochran,
Durrance, and Young.
ABSENT: Council Member Kristoferson
1. The Council considered the following in Closed Meeting:
A. Consultation with Attorney— Under TEX. GOV’T. CODE Sec. 551.071.
1. Discussed and consulted with the City’s attorney, including outside legal
counsel, litigation styled City of Denton v. Denton County Fresh Water
Supply District No. 1A and Denton County Fresh Water Supply District
nd
No. 5, Cause No. 99-40158-362, filed in the 362 District Court of
Denton County, Texas, including strategy and possible settlement
negotiations.
Work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, July 27, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. in the
Council Work Session Room in City Hall.
1. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the
draft scope of work and contract for consulting services prepared for the Development Code
Rewrite, a process that would result in revisions to the City’s Zoning Code and Subdivision
Regulations.
John Fregonese presented a summary of the scope of work for the Development Code rewrite.
Basic objectives were to implement the Comprehensive Plan, improve the process and increase
effective involvement. Guiding principles would be based on the Comprehensive Plan
implementation, Development Code goals and identify issues to address. He reviewed the
development code project key steps as listed in the agenda materials. Supportive tasks included
communication strategy and materials, a preference survey, land use modeling, opinion survey
and focus groups. A decision making system included basic structure of land use decisions,
descending level of decision maker, standardized structure for process, delegation by Council
involved the use of criteria, clear and objective standards, and the limited use of discretion. The
list of Development Code and site design standard tasks was reviewed as presented in the agenda
materials. A proposed timeline was presented for Council consideration.
Consensus of Council was to proceed with preparing of a contract for consideration on the
rd
August 3 agenda.
2. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding an update on Y2K.
Alex Pettit, Director of Information Services, stated that the objective of the Denton 2000 was to
ensure that the City’s systems and service deliveries would function beyond the millennium
change. Success meant that computer systems would accurately process, store and report data up
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 27, 1999
Page 2
to, during, and beyond the year 2000; and that day-to-day business practices would continue as
usual through the change of the century. He reviewed the progress to date on this project.
3. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the
Memorandum of Understanding, Toledo Court Subdivision, the proposed amendment to the
1999 Action Plan for Housing and Community Development and the proposed amendment to the
Agreement between the City of Denton and the Denton Affordable Housing Corporation.
Barbara Ross, Community Development Administrator, presented a review of the three
documents associated with this item. Those included the Memorandum of Understanding -
Toledo Court Subdivision, the proposed amendment to the 1999 Action Plan for Housing and
Community Development and the proposed amendment to the agreement between the City of
Denton and the Denton Affordable Housing Corporation. The Denton Affordable Corporation
did not support the public notification section and the liaison section of the agreement for the
Corporation.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley suggested separating the two issues from the rest of the agreement in
order to move forward with the contract. The neighbors and DAHC were in agreement to
separate out those issues.
City Manager Jez stated that DAHC refused to sign the contract as it currently was presented.
They felt the prior contract should be followed until the next RFP was done and then change the
conditions.
Mayor Miller supported the idea of separating out the two issues and proceeding with the
contract. Next year those issues could be incorporated into the request for proposal.
Council Member Durrance disagreed with this course of action. He felt that the problem to
ensure that this would not happen again was not considered.
Consensus of the Council was to separate the two issues from the main memorandum of
understanding.
Item #5 was considered.
5. The Council received a preliminary report, held a discussion and gave staff direction
regarding an annexation schedule, including public hearings, with regard to the proposed
voluntary annexation of a 34.336 acre tract located on the north side of Ryan Road and east of
Forest Ridge Drive in the City of Denton’s extraterritorial jurisdiction. (A-90-Shadow Brook
Place)
Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development, reviewed the schedule of the proposed
annexation.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the schedule.
6. The Council received a preliminary report, held a discussion and gave staff direction
regarding an annexation schedule, including public hearings, with regard to the proposed
voluntary annexation of a 37.11 acre tract located on the east side of Teasley Lane approximately
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 27, 1999
Page 3
700 feet south of Hickory Creek Road in the City of Denton’s extraterritorial jurisdiction. (A-88,
Teasley near Hickory Creek)
Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development, reviewed the schedule for proposed
annexation.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the proposed annexation schedule.
7. The Council received a preliminary report, held a discussion and gave staff direction
regarding an annexation schedule, including public hearings, with regard to the proposed
voluntary annexation of 46.21 acres located at the southeast corner of Nowlin Road and
Robinson Road, in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Denton, Texas. (A-91, Kirby
Tract)
Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development, reviewed the schedule for proposed
annexation.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the proposed annexation schedule.
8. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding an
application for Statewide Enhancement Program funds to move, restore, renovate and preserve
the old Union Pacific railroad (UPRR) freight depot, located on East Hickory Street.
Ed Hodney, Director of Parks and Recreation, reviewed the history of the project to salvage and
renovate the freight depot. The best option was to pursue Statewide Enhancement Funding for a
grant for funds for the project. Staff was requesting permission to apply for those Enhancement
funds.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the preparation of an ordinance for consideration
rd
on the August 3 Council agenda to authorize the application for funds from the Enhancement
Program. It was felt the depot and the loading dock should be moved prior to the deadline for
demolition and then continue with the renovation funding requirements rather than wait until
receiving confirmation of grant funds.
Council returned to Item #4.
4. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding
research related to the recently imposed multi-family housing moratorium.
Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development, reviewed the background of the
moratorium on the processing of all multiple family rezoning, plat and permit applications. Four
options were presented for Council consideration. Those options were to rescind the
moratorium, continue the moratorium pending additional staff research, revise the off-street
requirements for parking, or explore the options to temporarily mitigate some of the impacts of
leased bedroom multifamily complexes by revising density requirements. The staff
recommendation was to repeal the moratorium. If Council wanted to pursue revisions to the
parking requirements, staff suggested continued research to be integrated into the Development
Code rewrite. Density was being addressed as part of the draft Comprehensive Plan review
process, and would be addressed during the Development Code rewrite process.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 27, 1999
Page 4
Council Member Cochran stated that the moratorium had a termination date built into it and did
not see a reason for terminating it early. He did not like the idea of waiting for the Development
Code rewrite to take care of the problem. He suggested that instead of continuing the
moratorium to look at the possibility of attaching a reasonable parking requirement that was
different from the requirements of multi-family developments. Those requirements would be
1.25 parking spaces per bedroom unit.
Mayor Miller suggested that for one bedroom keep the parking requirement at 1.5 spaces and for
two or more bedrooms have the requirement at 1.25 parking spaces per bedroom unit.
Council Member Cochran stated that he would be agreeable with 1.5 spaces per bedroom unit.
Hill stated that a specific type of zoning category would be developed for lease by the bedroom
developments with specific requirements for that type of zoning.
Council Member Young suggested rescinding the moratorium as soon as possible and follow the
recommendations by staff.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley felt that the moratorium allowed staff to do needed research in this area.
She would like to follow the suggestion to increase the number of required parking spaces. She
felt all of the parking requirements for multi-family housing should be studied for an updating of
those requirements. The moratorium should remain in place until the parking requirements were
in place.
Council Member Durrance stated that the moratorium should remain in effect but felt that only
considering the parking restrictions would not adequately address all of the concerns of the
citizens such as density and height restrictions in relationship to single family neighborhoods.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with parking restrictions and definitions for this type of
zoning for Council consideration.
9. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding a joint
meeting with Leadership Denton.
Council Member Cochran stated that he had a difficult time with holding joint meeting with
private groups and where was the line drawn for qualifying for such a joint meeting.
Council Member Young felt that it would be a good idea for such a joint meeting.
Communication was a great idea for the Council for such groups.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley stated that perhaps a different term needed to be used instead of “joint
meeting” such as workshop or informational meeting.
th
Consensus of the Council was to hold a work session on December 7 with Leadership Denton
as an item on that work session.
10. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the nomination process
for members of the Public Utilities Board.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 27, 1999
Page 5
Council Member Young stated that he might be wrong on this issue and he had an informative
meeting with the Mayor regarding this issue. He would be receiving more information regarding
this issue and then would make a determination on his course of action.
11. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the
relationship between the 1984 Denton Development Guide and the 1988 Denton Development
Plan, including the potential impact of a 3-year time limitation imposed on planned
developments approved between 1984 and 1988.
City Attorney Prouty stated that all of the research on this issue had not been completed. Certain
conclusions had been reached based on the research thus far. He was concerned about going into
the legal aspects regarding this issue due to the threat of possible litigation with the issue. There
was an amendment to the Denton Development Guide in 1984 that set a three year time limit on
planned developments. That meant that if there had not been substantial development on the
planned development within 3 years, the matter was to be brought back for reconsideration by
the Council. This was not self-executing and the property was not automatically rezoned with
the ending of the three years. The Guide was a policy and not a legislative enactment. The
Guide was repealed in September 1988 by a resolution adopting a 1988 Denton Development
Plan which did not include any of those time limits. The Guide also could have been replaced
earlier by Ordinance 86-84 adopted in May 1986 which was the first comprehensive planned
development ordinance that repealed the provisions of the Guide. That ordinance did have some
provisions for planned developments. There was to be a development schedule and if that was
not complied with, the Planning Department would notify the Planning Commission and the
Commission could recommend rezoning to the property developers. The Commission could also
extend the schedule an additional 3 years and Council could extend that for an additional three
years from that time. Because this ordinance attempted to legislate all planned developments it
was felt that it replaced the Development Guide. However, there was no conclusive evidence for
that at this point in time. No cases were found that property was rezoned due to the
Development Guide. The old Guide, under a section of the Code Construction Act, could be
applied but only for planned developments between 1984-88, the time period that the Guide was
in effect. It should apply only to those cases in which the 3-year time limit had expired. He felt
there would be many legal challenges if the old Guide were used. It was felt that until a
comprehensive site plan was approved, the Council had more discretion with the planned
developments. Council could try to apply the Development Guide but there would be a lot of
legal risk to doing that. It would be better to look at each planned development individually for
compliance. Staff would continue to review all planned developments to determine the wording
of the planned developments and report on what regulations were in effect at the time of the
planned developments. In some cases, the time frame might have elapsed or it might not be in
compliance with the 1986 ordinance. Further research was needed with the 1986 ordinance due
to an ordinance that was passed in 1991. He recommend additional research to make sure the
research to date was correct, look at the old planned developments to determine the language in
each and what applied at the time it was approved.
Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked how to give sufficient notice to potential buyers of property with
planned development zoning.
City Attorney Prouty stated that more research was needed to make sure their findings were not
changed by the 1991 amendment to the planned development ordinance. Once staff determined
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 27, 1999
Page 6
that the original findings were accurate, based on the notice provision in the 1986 ordinance
there would be a need to get a notice to the property owners especially if the time limits had
expired. Before that was done he felt there was a need to return to Council with a final report on
the research and with a proposal on how to proceed.
Mayor Miller stated that there were property owners thinking they had certain land uses. He
questioned how staff would know what kind of zoning was acceptable. A procedure was needed
on how to handle the zoning on planned developments presented to the Development Review
Committee in the near future.
Hill stated that a notice could be sent to property owners that the City was in the process of
researching the zoning on their particular property.
Consensus of the Council was to continue with the research of the issue.
Following the conclusion of the Work Session, the Council convened into a Special Called
Meeting to consider the following:
1. The Council held the second of two public hearings regarding the proposed voluntary
annexation of 167.477 acres located southeast of the intersection of Robinson Road and Teasley
Lane (FM 2181) in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the city of Denton, Texas. The proposal
was to develop the property for single-family residential and commercial development. (A-89,
Wheeler Ridge)
Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development, stated that this was the second of two
public hearings regarding Wheeler Ridge. This was a voluntary annexation.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Robert Pendergrass spoke during the public hearing.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
2. The Council considered nominations/appointments to City Boards and Commissions.
The Council made nominations/appointments per Attachment A.
3. Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager.
City Manager Jez did not have any items for Council.
4. New Business
The Council did not have any suggestions of items for New Business.
5. The Council did not meet in a continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-
551.085 of the Texas Open Meetings Act.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 27, 1999
Page 7
6. There was no official Action on Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.085 of the
Texas Open Meetings Act.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
______________________________
JACK MILLER, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
_______________________________
JENNIFER WALTERS
CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS