Minutes January 23, 2006
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
January 23, 2006
After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Special Called
Meeting on Monday, January 23, 2006 at 11 :30 a.m. in the Council Work Session Room.
PRESENT: Mayor Brock; Mayor Pro Tem McNeill; Council Members Heggins, Kamp,
Montgomery, and Mulroy.
ABSENT: Council Member Thomson
1. The Council received a briefing, held a discussion and gave staff direction on a process
and review criteria for multi-family tax credit projects.
Kelly Carpenter, Director of Planning and Development, stated that at the January 10th council
meeting, staff had been asked to add criteria concerning preferences for new construction
commensurate with demolition and for rehabilitation. In the Multi-family Tax Credit Process
Proposal two sentences were added to the definition portion of the proposal. Those statements
indicated that a project should include a demolition, replacement and/or rehabilitation
component. New construction without commensurate demolition would not be allowed. Section
C dealing with "information to be submitted" would include three new bullet points indicating
"number of units to be demolished, number of replacement units to be constructed and number of
units to be rehabilitated". Section D, Review Criteria and Standards, would be revised to include
"preference would be given to projects that demolished at least 100 multi-family units and
preference would be given to projects that demolished multi-family units and replaced them with
duplexes or single family units".
Council discussion included:
. Statements were in the proposal indicating a development must follow the Development
Code - be clear that even with a special use permit a development must still follow all
other aspects of Development Code.
. The proposal was included as a zoning case but the first step should be to determine the
criteria for these types of projects and then go into the zoning aspects.
. This would be a first step and there might be a need to separate the two procedures.
. Legally have to be careful with passage of an approval resolution for a project. Have to
do initial steps first, then grant approval.
. This was not a zoning issue or a development issue-the issue was that the city had more
multi-family tax credit projects than the state average of units per capita supported by the
programs.
. An initial process would be to layout the project even before starting the development
process. The City had the ability to approve a project based on state law and conditions
of the project could be enforced through the specific use permit process.
. An outline of a proposal could be brought to council and council determine whether or
not to approve the project and then work through the development process.
The initial step would be to outline the proposal to council. Council would either give
approval to proceed or indicate that they did not want the project.
. The second step would be to start the specific use permit process and put the
requirements above the standard development code.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 23, 2006
Page 2
. A procedure needed to be determined on how to treat offsite demolition.
. Determine a minimum number of units to be demolished in the first step for consideration
-consider a minimum of 50% - for everyone unit going up, a half unit would have to be
demolished.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the recommended changes and return to Council
for approval.
Item #4 was considered.
4. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the structure of Council
meetings.
Mayor Brock indicated that she had asked for this item to be placed on the agenda. She was
concerned based on emails she had received, that there might not be adequate time for citizen
participation during work sessions. She felt that Council deliberations might not be as good as
they could be as citizens had limited ways to express concerns.
Council Member Mulroy indicated that public hearings were held for adoption of certain
ordinances. He was concerned about allowing citizens to speak in work sessions, as there might
be an overload of citizen speakers that would hinder good council deliberation.
Mayor Brock indicated that neighborhood groups had valuable input for council.
Mayor Pro Tem McNeill suggested that rather than change council procedures, perhaps the
board/committee structure needed to be changed. Perhaps there needed to be better publicizing
when a committee or the council was working on an issue. Many citizens had email to respond
to concerns, which would not overwhelm a meeting with many people speaking on the same
issue with the same ideas at a meeting.
Council Member Heggins stated that she agreed with the need for public input. However, she
did not feel that committees were the best representation and that often boards did not bring
information into the community. She felt it was easier to speak in an informal setting such as a
work session rather than a formal setting at a regular meeting.
Council Member Mulroy indicated that the committee level was more informal and flexible for
discussion. The committee could bring forward citizen comments from those meeting. If the
issue was a sensitive issue, there might be a need to hold a workshop with public meetings out in
city and receive citizen input on the issue. The meaningful discussion of the council might be
distracted with large public input during work sessions.
Mayor Brock suggested scheduling a series of meetings in the community for public input such
as code enforcement issues.
Consensus of the Council was to schedule several neighborhood meetings this spring regarding
code enforcement. Tentatively plan for sectional meetings on code enforcement and to continue
to look at the meeting structure. Staff would continue to work with neighborhood groups to
strengthen contacts.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 23, 2006
Page 3
Item #2 was considered.
2. The Council received a briefing, held a discussion and gave staff direction on proposed
amendments to the Development Code related to infill development regulations.
Kelly Carpenter, Director of Planning and Development, stated that an Infill and Redevelopment
Zone was proposed. The purpose of the zone would be to provide standards for the development
of infill lots in existing neighborhoods. The proposed regulations in this zone would apply to
areas no greater than two acres in size. Boundaries for an Infill and Redevelopment Zone were
proposed.
Council discussion:
. The section on impact fees indicated that fees might be discounted. The Utility
Department should not offer a discount but it should be available for General
Government to offer, if desired.
. Regarding park fees - a park could not be placed in an existing neighborhood so park
fees would be used for new parks outside neighborhood.
. Check the boundaries of the district as some areas were excluded.
. If compatibility with existing neighborhoods was stress too much there was a chance that
infill development might not happen.
. A common denominator needed to be raised but it should not be too high so as to not
allow for infill development.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the adjustments as noted.
3. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding Council procedures.
Mayor Pro Tem McNeill stated that the City Charter determined how council was elected, how it
met and how it got things done. He questioned the section relative to plat approval as to whether
the Planning and Zoning Commission or the council approved plats. Was there a conflict with
Section Q and Section 2.1 O?
City Attorney Snyder indicated that there was no conflict.
Mayor Pro Tem McNeill stated that Council had an arrangement with the former city manager
that if they had a question; they could go directly to the Assistant City Manager for an answer
with a copy to the City Manager. In recognizing the provisions of the Charter that did not allow
council to be involved with the daily operations of the city, he questioned how the Interim City
Manager wanted to operate.
Interim City Manager Martin stated that when there was more staff, there was no problem going
directly to an assistant city manager to deal with an issue. However, as it stood today, that would
be hard to do, as there was only one assistant city manager. He felt it would be acceptable for
the council to contact employees on the director level and above for assistance as long as the
assistant city manager and he were copied with the questions, etc.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 23, 2006
Page 4
Council Member Mulroy left the meeting.
Council discussed the sections of the Rules of Procedure dealing with placement of items on the
agenda and suspension of the rules. Consensus of the Council was to draft revisions to these
sections for easier placement of items on the agenda and clearer wording for suspension of the
rul e s.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1 :25 p.m.
EULINE BROCK
MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
JENNIFER W AL TERS
CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS