Minutes June 14, 2005
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
June 14, 2005
nd
After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a 2 Tuesday
Session on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Work Session Room.
PRESENT: Mayor Brock; Mayor Pro Tem McNeill; Council Members Kamp, Montgomery,
Mulroy, Redmon and Thomson.
ABSENT: None
1. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction on the contract
with Freese & Nichols, Inc. concerning the engineering review in the Development Review
Process and associated fees.
City Manager Conduff stated that this was another step in the process of reorganizing the
Engineering Department as outlined to Council several weeks ago. It was proposed that the
engineering development review process be outsourced and he reviewed the process of how a
qualified firm was chosen.
Kelly Carpenter, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the outsourcing would allow
for streamlining of the department and change a mind set in the engineering functions. It was
proposed to contract with Freese and Nichols.
Council asked for a review of the evaluation of the firms.
Carpenter replied that the proposal first addressed reoccurring tasks such as availability in the
city for 19 hours a week, attending meetings, attending Planning and Zoning Commission
meetings if necessary and second addressed the actual fees for development review. It was
determined that an hourly rate contract for review of plats would not be successful. The proposal
by Freese and Nichols was tied to the number of plats in a subdivision. Additional fees were
proposed for work above and beyond plats such as additional reviews for projects. Each project
would receive two reviews for the initial fee. She reviewed the rate of the fee with the number of
types of review. Options for cost recovery included partial recovery, total recovery, or partial
with some portion of recurring costs passed on to developers. Outstanding issues to consider
included: (1) Was there an expectation by Council that development pay its own way so that
there was total cost recovery built into the fee structure? (2) Should the community subsidize the
proposed fees to the development community? Alternatively said, what level of economic
development incentive, if any, did the Council want associated with land development? (3)
Should the recurring costs proposed under the contract be renegotiated with fewer or revised
services? (4) Should the recurring costs be rolled into the fee schedule instead of remaining free
standing?
Council discussion points included:
Part of the challenge was the development. What did the development provide the city
and how much should citizens subsidize that.
Should the developments be subsidized at the same level? Some developments were
perceived good for the community and others that might not be as valuable for the
community. Should they be subsidized at the same level?
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 14, 2005
Page 2
Make the process adaptable in order to achieve the first goal to have development pay its
own way.
Make a decision on whether or not to be totally self funded, then determine where to put
the costs.
If outsourcing were used, the cost would more than doubled what people were
accustomed to paying.
The general perception of outsourcing had been met with good acceptance from the
developers.
Consensus of Council was to keep the costs at a 2% review charge with a schedule of rates;
clarify the Code in terms of titles and how appeals would be processed. The process would be
reviewed in a year for potential amendments.
2. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding rental
property inspections and other rental property concerns.
Rick Jones, Fire Marshal, presented current regulations for building and occupancy of rental
properties. Single-family and multi-family dwellings were inspected through the plan review
and permit process when constructed. After construction and final inspections were completed
for single-family dwellings, the structure was released to its owner or occupant. Usually no
additional inspections were made unless a complaint was received. Multi-family rental
properties included apartments, boarding houses, and dormitory occupancies. These structures
were inspected through the plan review and permit process and also inspected on an annual basis
by fire inspectors. These occupancies were tied to their Certificates of Occupancy that could be
revoked if code violations were persistent. Each time a multi-family occupancy had a change in
ownership or was remodeled, they were required to renew their Certificates of Occupancy that
generated another inspection from building and fire inspectors. Single-family units did not
receive such inspections once the final inspection was completed. Multi-family rental properties
could be covered by a rental property registration program. Each time an occupant vacated his
apartment, the apartment owner had to arrange for an inspection prior to the new tenant moving
in. This would mitigate issues associated with multi-family properties. Adopting the Rental
Property Registration Program along with the International Property Maintenance Code would
provide a minimum level of health and safety and allow the Code Official to keep existing
structures and premises within a reasonable degree of life safety.
Council discussed the aspects of rental property concerns in terms of number of unrelated people
living in one unit, the number of square feet required by the Building Code per person, and the
fact that working on a complaint-by-complaint basis was difficult.
Jones indicated that it was difficult to determine residency just on the basis of cars parked
outside a single-family home as there were factors that had to be considered such as determining
who parked the car, etc.
Alice Gore of the Denia Neighborhood area and Cheryl Ellis of the Emery Street area presented
information on their neighborhoods and asked for help with the conditions in the neighborhoods.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 14, 2005
Page 3
Consensus of the Council was to create a task force with members from Code Enforcement,
Building Inspections and neighbors to develop a proposal to Council on how to work with the
problem and to consider creative ideas on how to solve the issue. Components of the proposal
would be considered during the budget process.
3. The Council discussed the nomination process for the City?s Boards and Commissions.
Jennifer Walters, City Secretary, indicated that staff would be preparing notebooks on the boards
th
and commissions information to be presented to Council on June 24. Council was asked during
the break to gather nominations and submit them to her to compile for a luncheon in mid-July.
th
Council consensus was that nominations would be discussed at a July 18 luncheon.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
_______________________________
EULINE BROCK
MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
_______________________________
JENNIFER WALTERS
CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS