Loading...
April 13, 2010 MinutesCITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 13, 2010 After determining in Open Session that a quorum was present, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas convened in a Closed Session on Tuesday, April 13, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room. PRESENT: Mayor Burroughs, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp, Council Member Engelbrecht, Council Member Gregory, and Council Member Mulroy. ABSENT: Council Member Heggins and Watts. 1. The Council met in a Closed Meeting at 4:02 p.m. A. Consultation with Attorneys - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 and Deliberations regarding Personnel Matters - Under Texas Government Code 551.074. 1. Consultation with the City's attorneys regarding legal issues associated with personnel matters involving the city manager, city attorney, and/or the municipal court judge where public discussion associated with these legal matters would clearly conflict with the duty of the City's attorneys to the City of Denton and the Denton City Council under the Texas Disciplinary of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. Discuss and deliberate the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal and/or hear a complaint or charge involving the city manager, city attorney, and/or the municipal court judge. Council Member Watts arrived during the Closed Session. Following the completion of the Closed Meeting, the Council convened in a 2nd Tuesday Session at 4:45 p.m. to consider the following items: 1. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the accommodation of bicycle facilities in the City of Denton. Frank Payne, City Engineer, stated that the City's transportation system historically focused on movement of motorized vehicles. The City's Denton Plan 1999-2020 discussed the need to advance the accommodation of bicycle facilities in the City's infrastructure. Staff was taking steps to bring alternative transportation into reality. Due to rising gas prices, a consolidated committee of city personnel was formed to study options for connectivity. An earlier study focused on a single corridor which highlighted bicyclists desire for striped bicycle lanes and the need to consider multiple factors. A public meeting was held on March 10, 2010 which focused on citizen input and feedback. The feedback included preferred destinations/origins for proposed bike lanes. Design Considerations included bicycle lanes versus wide curb lanes; an inventory of existing conditions which was a first step in developing a plan; input from bicycle user groups; types of bicycle accommodations such as shared roadway, signed shared roadway, bike lane or shared use path; countermeasures such as ordinances, striping, cross walks with signage, stop bars, dashed striping or narrowing lanes to calm traffic at intersections and preserve space. Payne reviewed what other municipalities/entities had done and potential costs from other cities to show the wide City of Denton City Council Minutes April 13, 2010 Page 2 range of costs involved in developing bicycle lanes. Funding options might include the Statewide Transportation Enhancement Program, Safe Routes to School Program, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program, Hazard Elimination Program, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department National Recreational Trails Fund, TPWD Regional grants, and Centers for Disease Control stimulus funding. Payne presented ongoing accommodations that might include the extension of the Paisley ROW at Lee Elementary, possible Eagle Drive restriping from North Texas Blvd. to Carroll Blvd., possible Welch restriping and possible reconstruction from Eagle Drive to Hickory Street, possible bicycle accommodation on Sycamore Street through DTIP, exploring bicycle connectivity from TWU to downtown DCTA station, possible restriping of Malone Street, the formation of a consolidated staff committee looking into connectivity options, negotiation of consultant contract for a bicycle master plan, and possible extension of bicycle pathway between Chestnut Street and Union Circle on UNT campus. Council Member Mulroy asked if Oak and Hickory were done, would both have bike lanes. Payne replied yes because of the one-way configuration of the streets. Council Member Gregory asked about the drafting of bicycle lane ordinances. City Attorney Burgess stated that staff would look at the best way to draft the ordinances for city streets as opposed to TxDOT roadways or TWU/UNT ordinances. Mayor Burroughs stated that the date when the DCTA station would be opened should be coordinated with bike lanes in that area. There would be a need to know if a funding gap would exist. Payne continued with opportunities for the development of bike lanes which included the approval of a contract with a consultant to evaluate existing assets and develop a bicycle master plan and Safe Routes to school map; formalize a relationship with the faculty at UNT to assist with bicycle facilities planning, surveys, destinations/origins analyses, etc; update to the 1999 AASHTO manual; TxDot accommodation on-system; update the Denton Plan for a comprehensive, coordinated planning effort; funding from upcoming bond elections; formation of a bicycle accommodation focus group or committee; and public education options. Conclusions and recommendations included cataloging the city's existing assets and survey citizen groups for feedback on bicycling accommodation needs; providing a consultant with information from public meetings and reference materials to develop a bicycle master plan; moving forward with the establishment of a focus group made up of city staff, bicycling group members, UNT staff, TWU staff, TxDOT staff and DISD staff, developing a possible slate of capital improvement projects; providing a basis for bicycle accommodation update to the Denton Plan; continuing to implement countermeasures to increase safety and awareness on the City's existing system; and looking for opportunities to incorporate bike lanes where appropriate and pursuing funding opportunities. Council Member Gregory stated that he would like to move ahead quickly with TxDOT discussions for future projects. City of Denton City Council Minutes April 13, 2010 Page 3 Payne stated that TxDOT had requested to keep them in the loop for possible funding opportunities. Council Member Gregory stated that when the bike lanes were developed, the thought needed to be more about the inexperienced rider in terms of safety of the lanes. Change the focus to all riders and not just experienced riders. 2. The Council received a report, held a discussion and provided staff direction regarding the development of the "Governmental Category" development review process. Howard Martin, Assistant City Manager, presented an update on the governmental development review process. He presented the current Denton Development Code review process without any proposed changes for the governmental entity process. Staff worked on a more realistic view of the process including the review process of outside entities for administrative review. The proposal was not intended to work for every project that was submitted as there were always those that needed special attention. In the current process a finish preliminary plat could be done before the review process. Martin presented the proposed governmental development review process. With the governmental tract, the building review process would be done in the beginning with everything coming together in the final inspection. One other key difference was a community facilities agreement which Fort Worth was using. The DISD had an aggressive schedule and accommodations had to be made in order to work through DRC process. The community facilities agreement would represent a road map for the Planning Department to follow. These recommendations were specific to governmental categories and not for the regular development community due to inherent differences such as no building on speculation. Council Member Mulroy stated that there already was a provision in the Code to produce bond capability and present that to the City that a developer was going to build a road and allow for an early start under some conditions. He was in favor of the governmental track especially if it could be done with the DISD due to a compressed schedule. He questioned why a private entity with a similar financial guarantee couldn't do the same process. Martin stated that part one of community facilities agreement was a commitment from the DISD about funding and early on the infrastructure which would be required. Once the infrastructure was approved, the DISD could bid a project which brought in bonding and insurance. Also any changes in the infrastructure such as charge for development and/or inspections would have the appropriate bid documents to base the charge. At that point the DISD would have everything in place such as a 3-way development agreement. All of that would be in place to begin the building permit. Check points in the beginning of the current process would be moved to the end of the proposed process. A problem with the procedure was that it pushed all of the problems up against the final project inspection and issuance of the certificate of occupancy. If all of the issues were not taken care of at the beginning and were pushed to the end of the project, there was no guarantee that the project would get done. Council Member Gregory asked if there had been any times after a temporary certificate of occupancy was issued when some project were not ever completed. City of Denton City Council Minutes April 13, 2010 Page 4 Martin replied that renovations at the high schools would be an example of perimeter street improvements that were not done. Those types of improvements needed to be considered in a bond project. Council Member Gregory asked about the site selection process. Martin stated that one recommendation was to look at site selection while in the planning process. Site selection might help reduce costs in the project if it were reviewed prior to beginning a project. Council Member Watts asked if the components of the community facilities agreement included the infrastructure. Martin replied correct. Council Member Mulroy asked if on the chart, there would be a possibility of building to the left of the building permit issue. Martin replied that it was not envisioned that all public infrastructure would be in place before the project went to the building permit issues. City Manager Campbell stated that the best part was that it would be memorialized. Martin stated that the governmental process was just one aspect in creating the interface for the overall process of the DISD and city in the planning process. Mayor Burroughs stated that if the community facilities agreement were built into a bond proposal, it would go a long way in coordinating the funding needs. The key was to work earlier for more detail and not have problems later. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp left the meeting. Mayor Burroughs stated his appreciation for staff's efforts into this process. It spoke well of staff to work on this proj ect when it was a new process. Martin stated that the County had a different structure than the DISD and projects were not centralized. Each County Commissioner had his/her own precinct and did projects as they saw fit. This new procedure was primarily focused with the DISD as it would be difficult for the County to use this track due to the differences in each precinct's process. City Manager Campbell felt that an agreement with the DISD and County was important to keep all projects in the correct process. Council Member Engelbrecht felt it would formalize the internal process and would help the DISD well in advance of projects. City of Denton City Council Minutes April 13, 2010 Page 5 With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. MARK A. BURROUGHS MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS