June 15, 2010 MinutesCITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
June 15, 2010
After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on
Tuesday, June 15, 2010 at 2:30 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall.
PRESENT: Mayor Burroughs, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp, Council Member Engelbrecht, Council
Member Gregory, Council Member Heggins, Council Member King, and Council
Member Watts.
ABSENT: None
1. Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for June 15, 2010.
Council Member Watts requested that Consent Agenda Item 3E dealing with the economic
development grant be pulled for individual consideration. On Consent Agenda Item 3V, the
Walker contract, he asked how involved the firm was with the mediation all of the activities with
the negotiations and asked for a justification for the additional fees.
City Attorney Burgess stated that the TMPA litigation involved resolving multi-year and multi-
case matters with all four member cities and TMPA. The additional fees of $25,000 was for
consummating the dismissal all of the cases.
Council Member Watts asked if it started with the bond validation suit.
City Attorney Burgess replied that suite and the Travis County suit. The PUC issues also
required dismissal. There were almost 20 pieces of litigation to settle.
Council Member Gregory questioned Consent Agenda Items O, P and Q in terms of one
provision in the contract dealing with the current lease holder wanting to release the lease and
release it to a new holder. Part of the contract indicated that the original leaseholder would be
responsible if the new lease individual backed out of the contract. He requested looking at
whether other airports had that same provision to determine if that provision might put Denton in
a business disadvantage when leasing.
Council Member Gregory asked about Consent Agenda Item 3R and the alternate member to the
Board of Directors to DCTA. If Rick Woolfolk was designated as the first alternate, who would
be the second alternate.
City Manager Campbell stated that if Council felt it was appropriate, either Howard Martin or
Mark Nelson could be designated as the second alternate. The ordinance for consideration at this
meeting was only for the first alternate.
Mayor Burroughs suggested that the wording for the airport leases might be changed so that after
a reasonable period of time for the standard form lease assignment the original lease individual
would be released.
Mayor Burroughs asked about Consent Agenda Item 3S and whether it was projected to receive
input from commercial enterprises outside city limits. The wording of the caption indicated
"regional".
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 2
Howard Martin, Assistant City Manager, stated that the grant was looking at local businesses that
provided that resource to use for a pilot project.
Mayor Burroughs asked if it would go beyond the city limits to acquire materials.
Martin replied not for the initial project.
2. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the 2010-11 Proposed
Budget, Capital Improvement Program, and Five-Year Financial Forecast.
Bryan Langley, Director of Finance, presented a preliminary FY 2010-11 budget overview.
Overview and Purpose - included (1) review of the adopted FY 2009-10 long term financial
plan, (2) discuss possible changes to assumptions for long-term financial forecast, (3) review
preliminary FY 2010-11 five year financial forecast, (4) discuss strategies to resolve budget
issues, (5) preliminary GO debt service fund forecast, (6) preliminary Utility Fund budgets and
other key information and (7) next steps.
FY 2009-10 Long Term Plan - Langley reviewed a summary of adopted assumptions in terms of
appraised value growth, sales tax growth, compensation, health insurance, tax rate/$100, and
future bond sales. The adopted 2009-10 General Fund long term plan was reviewed in terms of
beginning fund balance, revenues, tax increase, expenditures, new expenses, additional
reductions, ending fund balance and effective fund balance percentage.
Potential Changes to Assumptions - Areas included fund balance, sales tax, appraised value,
other revenues/cost issues, preliminary FY 2010-11 General Fund five year forecast and other
considerations
Fund Balance Reserves - the beginning level was approximately $948K more than previously
forecasted in the FY 2009-10 budget. It was expected to remain above the target level over the
short term. The Audit/Finance Committee previously established a target reserve level as a
percentage of budgeted expenditures. A 12-15% range was established. The goal was 15%, but
the range was provided to allow for flexibility with economic cycles. Bond rating agencies
recently indicated that a reserve level below 15% was low compared to similarly rated entities.
As a result, staff recommended that no budget be adopted that contemplates a fund balance level
below the 15-20% of budgeted expenditures for a single year only. The long term plan should
also indicate fund balance levels above this threshold, but the emphasis would be on the current
year.
Council Member Watts asked if staff had any recent conversations with bond rating agencies that
would indicate if the City was not able to maintain that level, would there be a risk of a reduction
in rating.
Langley stated that there might be a risk but he couldn't say for sure. He continued with
information on changes in monthly sales tax from FY 2008-09 and FY 2009-10. The revised
estimate for FY 2009-10 was $19,443 million which was $2.0 million below budget. The April
numbers were up about 6%.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 3
Sales Tax - Langley continued the sale tax information with figures from 1998 to present. A 5%
decrease for this budget year was projected.
Appraised Values - using average experience as a guide, 2010 appraised values were expected to
fall 4%. Using 2007 experience, a 5.2% decline was estimated with a 6% decline forecasted for
financial planning purposes. This decline severely affected the long term plan and the GO debt
service fund as well. Preliminary Appraisal District information indicated that most properties
would not increase in value in Denton County. Commercial properties were expected to decline
by 20-30%, multi-family properties were expected to decline by 10%, and residential properties
were expected to decline by 34%. Future appraised value growth estimates should also be
revised due to moderate recovery estimates. Appraised value history since 1998 to present was
discussed.
Tax Rate Information - The Texas Property Tax Code mandated the calculation and publication
of an effective tax rate. The effective tax rate for FY 2009-10 was almost 5 cents more than the
adopted tax rate. In other words, the FY 2009-10 tax rate represented a tax decrease compared to
FY 2008-09.
Other FY 2009-10 revenue items - fine/fee revenue was expected to be $1.2 million below
budget. Investment income was expected to be approximately $425,000 below budget.
Franchise fees and Return on Investment also were expected to be lower than previous estimates
due to reduced Utility Fund revenue.
Preliminary FY 2010-11 General Fund long term plan - included a 2.5 cent tax increase in FY
2010-11 and a 1 cent tax increase in FY 2014-15.
Council Member Watts asked about the gas well revenue transfer from the airport fund.
Langley stated that Council had agreed to transfer $974,000 into the General Fund which was
included in the figures. Council had also talked about an annual transfer of about $500,000 was
excluded from the expenditures.
Council Member Watts stated that the transfers from the airport gas well fund were not factored
into the projections for the out years.
Langley stated correct, that it was a one-time honor.
Other considerations - the long term financial plan did not address the lack of funding for
infrastructure. Approximately $16 million of additional funding was needed annually for street
maintenance. An estimated $7-10 million in drainage improvements (at a minimum) was needed
over the next five years. The financial plan currently underestimated the actual costs of
achieving strategic goals. A long term strategy was needed to eliminate annual deficits and
provide additional resources. The 2008 citizen survey indicated 65% of residents rated street
maintenance as fair or poor and 38% of respondents indicated that they would like additional
street maintenance funding. The strategic plan needed to focus around this issue.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 4
Management Plans Underway - FY 2009-10 cost reductions included a hiring/reclassification
freeze, a suspension of non-essential travel/training, the elimination of the transfer to the non-
airport gas well fund and the implementation of some Efficiency Team recommendations before
the end of the fiscal year. Due to revenue declines, the fund balance decline was still anticipated
to approach $4.5 million by year end. Due to the composition of expenditures, significant
reductions could not be made without affecting personnel and/or service delivery. Efficiency
improvements and minor adjustments to spending would not be sufficient to correct the
structural funding imbalance in the General Fund. Program level funding reductions and/or
eliminations would need to be made even with a tax increase. Since revenues were expected to
be at prior year levels, management would need to consider reducing service to prior year levels
as well.
Items Under Consideration - (1) increase user fees to fully recover cost of service, (2) transfer
Keep Denton Beautiful program from the General Fund to the Solid Waste Fund which would
require an additional rate increase for solid waste customers, (3) transfer savings associated with
CO bond issuance from utility funds to the General Fund, (4) consider overtime reduction
strategies in all General Fund departments including public safety operations, and (5) delay the
Public Safety Training Facility.
Council Member Watts felt that relabeling solid waste revenue from rate to pay for service for
Keep Denton Beautiful was not really a cost reduction but more of a transfer.
Council Member Gregory felt that the same people who pay for solid waste would also pay more
taxes in ad valorem taxes and would be getting hit with both increases. He was not sure that the
timing would be right to move KDB from the General Fund to solid waste. He asked when
would be the next scheduled rate increase for DME.
City Manager Campbell stated that was a range of options that included reductions in some
programs and level of service.
Council Member Gregory suggested keeping a final tab on how the changes were going to affect
citizens.
Mayor Burroughs asked for an estimate on how much the change in Keep Denton Beautiful
would be for solid waste customers.
Langley indicated that it would be about 15 cents per month.
Howard Martin, Assistant City Manager, stated that the total increase would be closer to a 15
cent charge on the refuse side and a 15 cent charge on the recycling side. No electric increase
was anticipated until 2013.
Langley continued with Items Under Consideration - (6) substantial reductions to travel and
training budget, (7) eliminating council contingency funds, (8) re-evaluate planned compensation
increase, (9) create an Airport Enterprise Fund and establish ROI, franchise fees, and indirect
cost transfer to the General Fund, (10) transfer the cost of some positions to the CIP budget, (11)
eliminate the downtown incentive grant, (12) delay increasing the over 65 property tax
exemption to $35,000, (13) increase the non-residential library fees, (14) reduction of the
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 5
Chamber of Commerce contribution, (15) consider higher reimbursement/reallocation of
positions for School resource Officers, (16) transfer available fund balance Internal Service
funds and Non-airport Gas Well funds into the General Fund which would be a one-time revenue
source, (17) explore the feasibility of paying for the Urban Forester out of the Tree Mitigation
Fund, (18) reconsider the supplemental package requests from the General Fund departments,
(19) reduction of programs, services, and personnel to offset projected gap between revenues and
expenditures, and (20) the 2.5 cent tax rate increase proposed for FY 2010-11 would likely be at
or below the effective tax rate so staff may recommend a tax rate increase equivalent to the
effective rate which might be greater than the 2.5 cent increase previously discussed.
Council Member Watts asked what, if any, of the airport expenses could be picked up by the
airport gas well fund.
Mayor Burroughs asked if these suggestions had a goal for awareness to the Council or when
would staff expect push back on some of the items.
Langley replied that if some of the items were definitely off the table staff needed to know that
as soon as possible.
Mayor Burroughs felt a discussion on small items should center the fact that they might not have
a large impact on the budget but could have an impact on service and the perception of service.
There needed to be consideration on how they would be perceived by the public. Large items
would not be a problem. He was a defender of the council contingency funds in the manner in
which they were used for various programs for the city.
Council Member Heggins expressed a major concern about the over 65 property tax exemption.
She understood it was a large item for the city but it was also a large item for the seniors. She did
not like the idea of cutting that and citizens were expecting the city to keep on schedule.
Council Member King asked for more information on the Downtown Incentive Grant.
Mayor Burroughs asked if the School Resource Officers revolved among the schools.
Roy Minter, Police Chief, stated that there were seven School Resource Officers who did not
rotate schools. They remained in their main school in order to build rapport in the schools. If
funding was reallocated, the officers might have to rotate.
Council Member Gregory stated that if the costs were transferred to the DISD, it would help the
city's budget but would also affect the DISD. He asked if there had been any discussion of
eliminating the officers.
Minter stated that it had not been discussed.
Council Member Gregory asked about the cost of each officer.
Minter stated that the total cost of the program was $750,000.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked what the reimbursement from the DISD was for that $750,000.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 6
Minter stated that the DISD reimbursed the City for 50% of one position.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked how that compared to other cities with resource officers.
Minter stated that most other cities charged their ISD 50% of costs. Denton was one of the few
cities that picked up most of the costs for the officers.
Mayor Burroughs asked for the amount of Internal Service Funds.
Langley stated they were still working on the figures.
Council Member Watts requested a water park subsidy discussion and if there were any options
to help reduce the costs such as someone else owning the park and the city lease it.
Council Member Gregory stated that the water park had been paying its own way and the city
subsidized some of the costs for the natatorium.
Langley stated that the city was subsidizing $400,000 per year.
Council Member Watts requested a break out of the natatorium and the water park.
Council Member Engelbrecht requested staff take similar park operations and provide the cost to
the city for those such as the softball fields at North Lakes Park to show what was the true cost
for maintenance as opposed to the revenue received.
Council Member Gregory suggested looking at a reduction in programs by 10% and what that
would save in costs.
Council Initiatives (not included in previously discussed forecast) - included the impact of the
Downtown Implementation Plan, the new animal shelter facility, a new convention center and
hotel facility, the update of the Denton Comprehensive Plan, bicycle master plan update and
implementation, the update of the Mobility Plan, and transportation initiatives such as regional
toll revenue matching funds, annual street maintenance costs, anti-idling ordinance.
Council Member Gregory thought that funds had already been found and completed with the
Downtown Implementation Plan.
Langley stated that funds would have to be found for certain improvements such as landscaping
and drainage.
Council Member Gregory stated that implementation of the bike master plan and CIP plan would
be different. He asked what the estimate would be for the updating of the Denton
Comprehensive Plan.
Langley stated that it was approximately $800,000 dollars and that it could not be done
internally.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 7
Council Member Gregory asked if there was a way to review the plan instead of a complete
update to get at the Council goal and not cost that kind of money.
City Manager Campbell stated that it might be a possibility and that staff could look at those
types of options.
GO Debt Service Fund -no tax rate increase was proposed for the GO Debt Service Fund. Staff
had considered shifting a portion of the tax rate to the General Fund but it did not appear feasible
at this time. Appraisal growth assumptions mirrored those in the General Fund. Staff was
recommending issuing $4.1 million GO (remaining from the 2005 bond election) and $2.9
million CO bonds which was on tonight's agenda. Future issuances would depend on appraised
value growth. Staff was recommending putting the Public Safety Training Facility on indefinite
hold until funding could be obtained. The future size and timing of the next GO bond election
would also be dependent on economic factors.
Other Key Information - possible service enhancements included (1) considering absorbing the
credit care convenience fee, (2) an audio camera system, (3) Profitstars Remit Plus software, and
(4) CIS maintenance. Including the above enhancements, the proposed FY 2010-11 expenditures
were roughly equal to the FY 2009-10 budget. Possible service reductions included reducing the
hours of operation during the week and close on Saturdays.
Council Member Gregory asked what was the most cost efficient method to pay a utility bill.
Langley stated it was an automatic draft.
Mayor Burroughs stated that he received complaints from people paying a small bill amount and
then having to also pay the credit card fee. He suggested a percent rather than set fee.
Langley replied that option would be explored if the convenience fee were kept.
Utility Funds - the Public Utilities Board was still reviewing the financial plans for all of the
utility funds. All funds assumed an average 2% increase in compensation for employees. Each
utility fund was experiencing revenue decline due to slower growth. Expenditure reductions had
occurred in each utility fund to partially offset revenue declines. The emphasis was to maintain
the service delivery level. Langley reviewed the electric fund figures, water fund, wastewater
fund, and solid waste fund.
Council Member Gregory stated again that he would like to look at all numbers for utility
increases.
Health insurance fund - it was expected that employee insurance premiums would be increased
by an average of approximately 8%. The change in employee costs would range from $28 to $32
per month with additional employee rate increases likely in future years. Increases in co-pay
amounts, for urgent care and ER visits as well as a change in the prescription formulary was
contemplated. The rate stricture would be aligned with the cost to the plan.
Mayor Burroughs suggested discussing the aggregate of all of the costs perhaps with a single
carrier quote.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 8
Summary - Langley reviewed the summary of revised assumptions in terms of appraised value
growth, sales tax growth, compensation, health insurance and tax rate/$100. He also presented
the schedule of next steps in the budget process.
3. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction concerning: (1) proposed
amendments to Subchapter 23 - Definitions - of the Denton Development Code (DDC); (2)
proposed amendments to Subchapter 22 of the Denton Development Code (DDC) regarding
gas well drilling and production; (3) proposed amendment to Subchapter 16 of the DDC
regarding gas well development platting; (4) proposed amendments to the schedule of fees
contained in Ordinance 2005-237 pertaining to gas well drilling and production within the
City limits and the Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction; and (5) hold a discussion, and give staff
direction concerning the types of analytical testing that has been conducted at other gas well
monitoring efforts within the Barnett Shale. (Gas Well Ordinance)
Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, stated that at the December 1, 2009
council meeting, staff presented findings from research and analysis of gas well drilling and
production ordinances from seven neighboring cities. Council directed staff to conduct further
research and analysis of various questions that were raised during the presentation. During the
April 20, 2010 Council Work Session staff presented the results of the additional research and
analysis requested by Council. Included in the discussion was the composition of the Fort Worth
Gas Well Drilling Review Committee, examples of decibels for day to day activity, gas well
conditions from prior approvals, zoning district requirements for gas wells, air quality tests,
environmental policies, definitions, setbacks and legal challenges, noise regulations, height of
storage tanks, requirement for environmental insurance, limitations on flaring activities, Texas
Railroad Commission requirements and general chemicals used in drilling operations. Council
directed staff to move forward with amending the city's gas well ordinance, and to consider
appropriate increase of relevant fees. Council also directed staff to provide information
concerning the types of analytical testing that had been conducted at other gas well monitoring
efforts within the Barnett Shale and to determine whether there were any testing requirements
within other Metroplex ordinances concerning soil testing and ground water testing.
Following that meeting staff met and discussed the process and strategy by which the city's
current gas well ordinance could be amended. It was determined that due to the magnitude and
complexity of the topic, it would be best to approach the task in two phases. Phase II would
include a comprehensive rewrite of the entire gas well ordinance and would require consulting
with various gas well experts in terms of planning and legal issues, gas well operational issues
and environmental issues. Phase I would deal with a gas well fee schedule, noise mitigation,
separation distance, screening requirements, definitions, gas well development plan and gas well
permits.
Gas well fees - the current fees were established in 2005 and did not cover the cost of service.
Denton's gas well fees were the lowest of the 8 cities surveyed. It was suggested to implement a
fee increase and add new fees to support salary and benefits for new gas well personnel. The
proposed personnel would consist of a gas well administrator, two gas well inspectors and an
office assistant. Gas well fees comparisons were presented in terms of gas well plat, gas well
inspections, gas well plat amendment, gas well plat extension, transfer of operation, annual
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 9
administrative and inspection, fracture/drill pond, pipeline permit, compressor facility permit,
watershed protection permit, sign installation and appeal fee. Cunningham also presented the
staff recommended fees. He indicated that with the annual fees, the city could legally go back
and assess an annual inspection fee on existing wells.
City Attorney Burgess indicated that the annual fee would apply across the board according to
the triggering event. The effective date could be the key trigger for assessment of fees.
Cunningham indicated that the fees would be for cost of service. A full cost of service analysis
would be presented at the Council's July 20th meeting.
Financial impact - staff would provide expenditures and revenue figures on July 20th.
Recommended definitions - of the seventeen recommended definitions, two dealt with protected
uses and residence which were relative to setbacks.
Council Member Gregory indicated that he saw in other city ordinances, the term dwelling. He
questioned if drilling could take place close to an office building as it was not listed as a
dwelling.
Cunningham replied yes that could happen.
Council Member Gregory asked if there was a different reference indicating the limit on how
close to an office or office building the site could be located.
Cunningham stated that it would be found in the gas well minimum separation requirements. He
reviewed the recommended setback requirements in terms of protected uses and all other use or
features. A setback waiver/variance provision indicated that the minimum separation
requirement could be reduced by the granting of a variance by the Zoning Board of Adjustment
or if all of the property owners of the affected uses within the reduced separation area agreed to
the reduction with a notarized waiver and the waiver was attached to the permit application.
Council Member Watts asked about the recommended setback of 1,000 feet from any lot within
a previously platted residential subdivision. He questioned if there were no plats of residential
lots in a previously platted subdivision, would the 1000 feet apply because there were no platted
lots.
City Manager Campbell stated that previously the setback was from the time the permit was
issued.
Council Member Watts stated if there was a large residential subdivision that was platted and
had one house on the fringe, the restricted 1000 feet would be from the whole platted
subdivision. He questioned the one house provision and the significance of one stricture.
Cunningham stated the current language in the Denton Comprehensive Code indicated the
deciding factor was who came to the table first. The one house was there because the residential
subdivision was there first so the gas well had to respect the subdivision.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 10
Council Member Watts stated he was not comfortable with the language. He understood the
intent but not the rationale.
Council Member King stated that the one house kept the city or community from changing the
zoning if there already was a house on it. The gas well company would have to preplan to
protect the property owners.
Mayor Burroughs asked if a small development had one house, there could be no drilling within
1000 feet because of that far lot.
Cunningham stated that drilling could not be done straight out. It would require a variance or
waiver from the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Mayor Burroughs stated that they were not regulating the wells. They were regulating
emissions, drainage, noise but not the placement of the wells.
Council Member Gregory stated that he wanted to protect a person already in a house from a
well being drilled too close. If the well was already there, then the individual had the right to
live next to the well.
Cunningham reviewed the setback waiver/variance procedure.
Due to time constraints, this item was continued after the regular meeting.
4. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction concerning a resolution of the
City Council of the City of Denton, Texas supporting "extended producer responsibility" to
promote the shift of disposal costs from local governments to producers of items through
state legislation; authorizing its execution by the City Manager; and providing an effective
date.
This item was not considered.
5. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding
nominations/appointments to the City's Boards and Commissions.
This item was considered after the regular meeting.
Council convened into the Closed Meeting at 5:50 p.m.
1. Closed Meeting:
A. Deliberations regarding consultation with the City Attorney - Under Texas
Government Code Section 551.071, Deliberations regarding Economic
Development Negotiations - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.087.
1. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding legal issues on matters in
which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 11
Disciplinary Rules of Professional conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly
conflicts with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551
of the Texas Government Code. Also hold a discussion regarding granting
economic development incentives for a 400,000 square foot distribution
center project to be located in the Airport Industrial Area on Airport Road.
This discussion shall include commercial or financial information the City
Council has received from company which the City Council seeks to have
locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory of the city, and with which the
city council is conducting economic development negotiations; including the
offer of financial or other incentives.
This item was not considered.
B. Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Under Texas Government
Code, Section 551.086.
1. Receive information and a presentation from Denton Municipal Electric staff
regarding a public power utility competitive and financial matter, dealing
with terms regarding a possible extension of the term and other provisions of
the Power Purchase Agreement, entered into on May 1, 2009 by and
between the City and NextEra Energy Power Marketing for the acquisition
by the City of wind energy and renewable energy credits; discuss, deliberate,
consider, and provide staff with direction regarding same.
Council Member Gregory motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded that this item was
appropriate for Council to discuss in Closed Session under the Public Power Utilities competitive
Matters exception. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Heggins
"aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Burroughs
"aye", Council Member Watts "aye", and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
Council Member Watts motioned, Council Member Gregory seconded to adopt Ordinance 2010-
164 extending the contract with NextEra Energy Power Marketing. On roll call vote, Council
Member King "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council
Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", and Mayor
Pro Tem Kamp "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
C. Deliberations regarding Real Property - Under Texas Government Code Section
551.072; Consultation with Attorneys - Under Texas Government Code Section
551.071.
1. Discuss, deliberate, and receive information from Staff and provide Staff
with direction pertaining to the acquisition or the condemnation of fee
simple tracts for Eagle Drive Drainage Improvements - Phase I, the limits of
which being along the existing branch between South Elm Street and South
Locust Street, south of Maple Street, in the City of Denton, Denton County,
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 12
Texas. Consultation with the City's attorneys regarding legal issues
associated with the acquisition or condemnation of the tracts referenced
above where a public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with
the duty of the City's attorneys to the Denton City Council under the Texas
Rules of Disciplinary Conduct of the State Bar of Texas, or would
jeopardize the City's legal position in any administrative proceedings or
potential litigation.
D. Consultation with Attorney -Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071.
1. Receive a briefing and status report from the City's attorneys regarding the
litigation entitled The University of North Texas, Appellant v. City of
Denton, Texas, Appellee, now pending in the Court of Appeals Second
Judicial District, sitting in Fort Worth, Texas, Cause No. 02-09-00395-CV.
Discuss, deliberate and provide the attorneys with direction. A public
discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City's
attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of
Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas.
2. Consider and discuss the status of legal issues relating to the settlement of
City of Denton v. Biodiesel Industries, Inc., et al., Cause No. 4:08-cv-00173
and provide direction to the city's attorneys regarding same.
3. Receive a briefing from the City's attorneys regarding legal issues related to
parking and speed matters on City streets running through or adjacent to the
University of North Texas and Texas Woman's University. Discuss,
deliberate and provide attorneys with direction. A public discussion of these
matters would clearly conflict with the duty of the City's attorneys to the
governmental body under Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct
of the State Bar of Texas.
Council convened in a regular session in the City Council Chambers at 6:40 p.m.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U. S. and Texas
flags.
2. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamations/Awards
1. Recreation and Parks Month
Mayor Burroughs presented the proclamation to Emerson Vorel, Director of Parks and
Recreation, for Recreation and Parks month.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 13
2. Denton Recycles in the Library Day
Mayor Burroughs presented the proclamation to Shirlene Sitton and Lindsey Preston for Denton
Recycles in the Library Day.
3. Drinking Water Week Awards
Kara Robinson, Public Communications Office, presented the awards to the DISD students.
4. Fred Douglass/Fred Moore Days
Mayor Burroughs presented the proclamation to Ruby Cole and family.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Burroughs stated that Item 3E would be considered separately.
Bob Clifton presented Speaker Cards for Items 'A, 31C, 'IF, 'IT, and 3U.
Council Member Gregory motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded to approve the Consent
Agenda and accompanying ordinances and resolutions with the exception of Item 3E. On roll
call vote, Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council Member
Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor
Burroughs "aye", and Council Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Ordinance No. 2010-138
A. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an Interlocal
Cooperative Purchasing Program Agreement with Greenville Electric Utility System
(GEUS) under Section 271.102 of the Local Government Code, to authorize participation in
various GEUS contracts for the purchase of various goods and services; authorizing the
expenditure of funds therefor; and declaring an effective date (File 4508-Interlocal
Agreement with GEUS).
Ordinance No. 2010-139
B. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a Public Works
Contract for the rehabilitation of the Pecan Creek Water Reclamation Plant Raw Pump
Station 42; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date
(Bid 4500-Raw Pump Station 42 MCC Rehabilitation awarded to the lowest responsible
bidder meeting specification, C&G Electric, Inc. in the amount of $199,700). The Public
Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0).
Ordinance No. 2010-140
C. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute Change Order
Number One to the contract between the City of Denton and Corbet Group, Inc.; providing
for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4444-Downtown
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 14
Denton Transit Center Change Order Number One in the amount of $151,254.86 for a total
contract award of $1,887,254.86).
Ordinance No. 2010-141
D. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, approving the 2011 Budget
of the Denton Central Appraisal District, and providing an effective date.
Ordinance No. 2010-142
E. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Chapter 380 Economic Development Grant
Agreement with Allegiance Hillview, LP; and providing an effective date.
Linda Ratliff, Director of Economic Development, stated that the Council had approved a
Chapter 380 Program Grant Agreement with Allegiance Hillview on May 15, 2007. The
Agreement provided a reimbursement to Allegiance for public infrastructure costs, including the
cost to widen Highway 380 from Bonnie Brae to I-35. Allegiance would receive a portion of the
sales tax generated by the project to recoup those expenditures. The grant would be equal to
50% of the total sales tax for three years and 333% for seventeen years. A maximum of $62
million was allowed. Under the original agreement, the developer was required to complete
400,000 square feet of retail on the north side of Highway 380 and 600,000 square feet on the
south side of Highway 380 before they could receive reimbursement for eligible costs. Council
approved an amendment to the original agreement in March 2009 due to the poor state of the
retail economy. The amendment separated the development into two phases with the square
footage for the north and south sides remaining the same. The incentive of a maximum of $62
million was split as well with $20 million allowed for Phase I and $42 million for Phase IL The
years and percentages also changed. Since it appeared that the Phase I maximum of $20 million
could be reached in 15 years, the number of years for that phase was decreased to 15. Phase 11
remained at 20 years. The percentages were increased to begin at 60% and then decreasing in
subsequent years to 50% and 33%.
Since the first amendment, Allegiance Hillview had partnered with RED Development to begin
constricting Phase IL Their plan began with approximately 800,000 square feet of
retail/commercial space for Phase 11 which included the Town Center project. Total
retail/commercial build-out for Phase 11 was approximately 1.2 million square feet. RED
Development believed that they had more accurate projections of sales tax revenues and had
requested a second amendment to the Chapter 380 agreement. The proposed second amendment
would still have the project in phases and the maximum reimbursement would still be at $62
million. Phase I would revert back to 20 years as in the original agreement with sales tax
reimbursements that exceeded $20 million being applied to Phase II during the 20-year term,
provided that all Phase II thresholds were met by 2015 and incentive payments for Phase II had
not been initiated. The agreement provided for a 50% share in the city's sales tax revenue
generated by the project for a period of 20 years for each phase, eliminating the need for dollar
thresholds as in the Second Amendment. In the First Amendment, the developers were required
to spend a minimum of $20 million in infrastructure costs for Phase I and a minimum of $42
million for Phase IL The Second Amendment no longer would require the developer to spend
these minimum amounts per phase. Instead, it limited the reimbursement to the actual amount of
eligible costs, not to exceed a total of $62 million so that the developer would not be penalized
for coming in under budget.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 15
Council Member Gregory questioned what the $62 million represented.
Ratliff stated that originally the request was for over $90 million for roads, water, sewer,
drainage, public improvements, but not for parks. The agreement was for only public
improvements and only for a portion of that.
Council Member Gregory asked if the development was built out to the specifications as per the
agreement and sales tax was slow and stayed slow for a long time, if at end of 20 years what
would happen.
Ratliff stated that agreement would end and whatever they had received would be all they would
get.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that the $62 million generated would be from sales tax and not
from any other source.
Ratliff stated that was correct and also excluded anchors or junior anchors that might move from
the Golden Triangle Mall.
Council Member Watts questioned that now that Highway 380 was almost done along with the
major infrastructure, how the costs would be monitored on what was paid and the process to
verify that.
Ratliff stated that they were in the process of reviewing the first round of submissions and under
each category there was an itemized statement of what was spent. The engineers were reviewing
the actual invoices and payments to make sure they were what they said they were. This process
would continue as the project moved along.
Council Member Gregory asked if the Wal-Mart on Loop 288 would be closed.
Ratliff stated that there had not been any talk about closing the Loop 288 store. It was one of the
best producing stores in the area.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp motioned, Council Member Watts seconded adopt the ordinance. On roll
call vote, Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council Member
Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor
Burroughs "aye", and Council Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Ordinance No. 2010-143
F. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City
Manager or his designee to execute an agreement by and between North Central Texas
Council of Governments ("NCTCOG") and the City of Denton, Texas, regarding the grant
allocated to Denton under the North Central Texas Alternative Fuel and Advanced
Technology Investments Act as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for
those projects identified for funding under the Conservation Research and Development, as
filed with the United States Department of Energy in the maximum amount of $725,514;
providing for the expenditure of funds and an effective date.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 16
Resolution No. R2010-017
G. Consider approval of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas
supporting "extended producer responsibility" to promote the shift of disposal costs from
local governments to producers of items through State legislation; authorizing its execution
by the City Manager; and providing an effective date.
Resolution No. R2010-018
H. Consider approval of a resolution nominating a member to the Board of Managers of the
Denco Area 9-1-1 District; and declaring an effective date.
Ordinance No. 2010-144
L Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between
the City of Denton, Texas and the Denton Animal Shelter Foundation for supplemental
funding for advertising, printing and supplies; providing for the expenditure of funds; and
providing for an effective date. ($1,050)
Ordinance No. 2010-145
J. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between
the City of Denton, Texas and the Juneteenth Committee for supplemental funding for
Juneteenth; providing for the expenditure of funds; and providing for an effective date.
($750)
Ordinance No. 2010-145
K. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between
the City of Denton, Texas and Hearts for Homes; providing for the expenditure of funds;
and providing for an effective date. ($600)
Approved the Exception listed below.
L. Consider a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance for the purpose of performing
live jazz music at the Sweet Y Cafe, located at 511 Robertson Street, on Friday and
Saturday, June 18 and 19, 2010, beginning at 7:30 p.m. and concluding at 11:30 p.m. This
request is for an extension of hours after 10:00 p.m. for amplified sound. The amplified
sound will remain at the allowable 65 decibels. Staff recommends approval of the request
of extending the hours of operation for amplified sound to 11:30 p.m.
Ordinance No. 2010-147
M. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing and ratifying an
agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and the Dog Days of Denton for
supplemental funding for the Dog Days Denton Event on June 4, 2010; providing for the
expenditure of funds; and providing for an effective date. ($450)
Approved the minutes listed below.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 17
N. Consider approval of the minutes of: April 13, 2010; April 20, 2010; May 3, 2010; May 4,
2010; May 11, 2010; and May 18, 2010.
Ordinance No. 2010-148
0. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an assignment of a leasehold interest in an
airport lease agreement at Denton Municipal Airport from Michael Moore, to Tony A. Riley
located at 4710 Lockheed, Denton, Texas at the Denton Municipal Airport and providing an
effective date. The Airport Advisory Board recommends approval (7-0).
Ordinance No. 2010-149
P. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an assignment of a leasehold interest in an
airport lease agreement at Denton Municipal Airport from Avionics International Supply,
Inc. to Andy Johnson located at 1750 Westcourt, Denton, Texas at the Denton Municipal
Airport and providing an effective date. The Airport Advisory Board recommends approval
(7-0).
Ordinance No. 2010-150
Q. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an assignment of a leasehold interest in an
airport lease agreement at Denton Municipal Airport from Andy Johnson to Global
Maritime Supply Management, LLC located at 1750 Westcourt, Denton, Texas at the
Denton Municipal Airport and providing an effective date. The Airport Advisory Board
recommends approval (7-0).
Resolution No. R2010-019
R. Consider approval of a resolution by the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas,
appointing an alternate to the Board of Directors of the Denton County Transportation
Authority; providing a repealer and providing; and providing an effective date.
Resolution No. R2010-020
S. Consider approval of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas
authorizing the filing of a project application with the North Central Texas Council of
Governments for a Regional Solid Waste Program - Local Implementation Project, Food
Waste Composting; delegating and authorizing George C. Campbell, City Manager, or his
designate, to act on behalf of the city in all other matters that are related to this project
application, pledging that if funding for this project is received, the City of Denton, Texas
will comply with all project requirements of the North Central Texas Council of
Governments, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, and the State of Texas,
and providing for an effective date. The Public Utilities Board will consider this item on
June 14, 2010.
Ordinance No. 2010-151
T. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City
Manager or his designee to execute a Real Estate Contract of Sale between the City of
Denton and Odis J. Fuller, Jr. and wife, Kathy A. Fuller and other documents necessary to
acquire two tracts, one being approximately 0377 acre of land, the other being
approximately 0.049 acre of land, both located in the William Loving Survey, Abstract
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 18
Number 759, City and County of Denton, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds
therefore; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board will consider this
item on June 14, 2010.
Ordinance No. 2010-152
U. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City
Manager or his designee to execute a Release and Settlement Agreement and a Temporary
Lease Agreement between the City of Denton and Denton Bible Church regarding two
acquisition tracts, one being approximately 0377 acre of land, the other being
approximately 0.049 acre of land, both located in the William Loving Survey, Abstract
Number 759, City and County of Denton, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds
therefore; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board will consider this
item on June 14, 2010.
Ordinance No. 2010-153
V. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas
authorizing the City Manager to execute a fourth amendment to agreement for professional
legal services with the law firm of Walker Sewell, LLC for professional legal services
relating to litigation styled: Ex Parte Texas Municipal Power Agency, Cause No. D-1-GN-
08-003426, pending in the 126th Judicial District Court in and for Travis County, Texas;
Ex Parte Texas Municipal Power Agency - II, Cause No. D-1-GN-08-3693, pending in the
261st Judicial District Court in and for Travis County; and the litigation styled Texas
Municipal Power Agency, Plaintiff vs. City of Bryan, Texas, Defendant, counter-plaintiff
and third-party plaintiff, vs. City of Denton, Texas and the City of Garland, Texas, third-
party defendants, Cause No. 28169, pending in the 506th Judicial District Court in and for
Grimes County, Texas; together with sixteen related public utility commission of Texas
regulatory proceedings; providing for retroactive approval; authorizing the expenditure of
funds therefor; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends
approval (5-0).
Ordinance No. 2010-154
W. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing an encroachment agreement between the
City of Denton, as grantor and HTA-Denton, LLC., a Delaware limited liability company,
as grantee, regarding a 7.3 square foot tract of land that encroaches into a 20 foot Public
Utility and Sidewalk easement; said Public Utility and Sidewalk Easement being dedicated
as a part of the Rehab Hospital Addition, recorded in Cabinet X, pages 929 and 930, Plat
Records, Denton County, Texas and being in the E. Puchalski Survey, Abstract No. 996,
City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing an effective date. The Public Utilities
Board will consider this item on June 14, 2010.
Ordinance No. 2010-155
X. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an Underground Pipeline Easement between
the City of Denton, Texas, as grantor and EnCana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc., a Delaware
Corporation, as grantee, regarding a 0.04 acre tract of land located in Lot 1, Block 1 of the
Robson Ranch Water Reclamation Plant Addition, recorded in Cabinet R, page 365, Plat
Records, Denton County, Texas and being in the T & P.R.R Survey, Abstract No. 1301, in
the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; and providing an effective date. The Public
Utilities Board will consider this item on June 14, 2010.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 19
Approved the appointment listed below.
Y. Consider the appointment of Dr. Lane Rawlins to the City's Economic Development
Partnership Board.
Ordinance No. 2010-156
Z. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager or
his designee to execute a purchase order through the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing
Network for the acquisition of residential refuse and recycling carts by way of an interlocal
agreement with the City of Denton; and providing an effective date (File 4526-Residential
Refuse and Recycling Carts for the Solid Waste Division awarded to Rehrig Pacific
Company in the amount of $115,456) This item will be considered by the Public Utilities
Board at its meeting on June 14, 2010.
Council considered Items 5A, 5B and 5C under Items for Individual Consideration.
5. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
Ordinance No. 2010-161
A. Consider adoption of an ordinance considering all matters incident and related to the
issuance, sale and delivery of up to $64,000,000 in principal amount of "City of
Denton Certificates of Obligation, Series 2010"; authorizing the issuance of the
certificates; approving and authorizing instruments and procedures relating to said
certificates; and enacting other provisions relating to the subject.
Bryan Langley, Director of Finance, presented background information for Items 5A, 5B and 5C.
Staff discussed these items with the Audit/Finance Committee which recommended approval.
The Notice of Intent for Item 5A had been issued in accordance with state law. The certificates
would provide funding of $63,110,000 for project costs for General Government, Solid Waste
projects and Utility System Debt for electric, water and wastewater projects.
The General Obligation funded projects in Item 5B represented the projects approved by the
voters in the 2005 bond election. In order to accommodate project scheduling, staff was only
recommending the issuance of $4,115,000. The remaining projects would be budgeted in the FY
2010-11 CIP. If approved by Council, the bonds would be sold through a competitive bid
process.
The refunding of existing debt for Item 5C was previously discussed with the Audit/Finance
Committee and the City Council. However, due to current market situations, the refunding
issuance was no longer economically feasible. Staff was seeking approval of a six month
parameters ordinance that would enable staff to sell refunding bonds when, and if, market
conditions changed. Since bond market conditions could change rapidly, staff was requesting
the authority to execute the refunding issuance at any time before December 15, 2101. Greg
Shaker, Bond Counsel, was here for legal questions as well as David Medanich from First
Southwest Company.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 20
David Medanich, First Southwest, presented a booklet of information regarding the bond sale.
The Certificates of Obligation had received 11 bids and the General Obligation bonds had
received six bids. He provided historical bond sale information for the City of Denton. It was
recommended that the city award the Certificates of Obligation to the Banc of American Merrill
Lynch and the General Obligation bonds to Wells Fargo Advisors.
Mayor Burroughs asked for an estimate of savings doing this issuance.
Langley stated that it would be about $1 million over the life of the bonds.
Council Member Gregory asked for more details with Item 5C giving the City Manager the right
to sign off on bonds due to economic conditions.
Langley stated that the ordinance would give authority for the City Manager to move forward
with the bonds as conditions changed hourly and had certain parameters that had to be followed.
Council Member Watts asked if conditions allowed the City Manager to do this, what would be
the estimated savings.
Langley replied about $6.5 million over the life of the debt.
Bob Clifton presented Speaker Cards for Items 5A, B and C.
Council Member Gregory motioned, Council Member Watts seconded to adopt the ordinance for
5A. On roll call vote, Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council
Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye",
Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Ordinance No. 2010-162
B. Consider adoption of an ordinance considering all matters incident and related to the
issuance, sale and delivery of up to $4,115,000 in principal amount of "City of Denton
General Obligation Bonds, Series 2010"; authorizing the issuance of the bonds; approving
and authorizing instruments and procedures relating to said bonds; and enacting other
provisions relating to the subject.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp motioned, Council Member Heggins seconded to adopt the ordinance.
On roll call vote, Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council
Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye",
Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Ordinance No. 2010-163
C. Consider adoption of an ordinance considering all matters incident and related to the
issuance, sale and delivery of up to $50,000,000 in principal amount of "City of Denton
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2010A"; establishing parameters for the
redemption of certain outstanding obligations of the City; authorizing the issuance of the
bonds; approving and authorizing instruments and procedures relating to said bonds; and
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 21
enacting other provisions relating to the subject.
Council Member Engelbrecht motioned, Council Member King seconded to adopt the ordinance.
On roll call vote, Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council
Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye",
Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
The Council returned to the regular agenda order.
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton,
Texas, providing for a Specific Use Permit to allow a drive-thru facility associated
with a proposed bank on property within a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use
(NRMU) zoning district. The 0.949 acre site is located approximately 250 feet west
of the intersection of Teasley Lane (F.M. 2181) and Lillian Miller Parkway; and
providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof,
severability and an effective date (510-0001). The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends approval of this request (6-0).
Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, presented the details of the proposal.
He stated that First State Bank had requested a specific use permit to allow a bank with a drive-
through facility. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval as did the
Development Review Committee. The conditions suggested by the Planning and Zoning
Commission included the specific use permit would only be for the proposed four-lane drive-
through with one pass-through lane in association with the bank facility and the proposed bank
facility drive-through would be limited to the hours of operation from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm
Monday- Friday and 8:00-12 noon on Saturdays.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked about the reason for the opposition from the DATCU.
Cunningham stated that the concern was that there would be too many drive through facilities
using one ingress and egress. The CVS Pharmacy had a drive through as did the DATCU and
one more would be too many.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked if turns could be made out the drive in both directions or
only a right turn.
Cunningham stated that there was a median there so only a right in- right out would be allowed.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked about the exit out of the CVS north lot which allowed for a
left turn.
Cunningham stated that there were two exits - one allowed for a right only turn and the second
had a break in the median to turn west.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 22
Council Member Engelbrecht felt that there was not a good traffic flow operation in the way the
plan was laid out. He felt there was a limitation on the way traffic could move about.
Council Member Gregory stated that both driveways from CVS and the one from the proposed
bank would stay there with the bank going in.
Cunningham replied correct that would be the exit to the far west.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked if the main entrance to the bank was one way or two way.
Cunningham stated that it was two way with any customer going through those areas.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
The following individuals spoke during the public hearing:
Bob Clifton, 1800 Morse, Denton, 76205 - opposed
Marty Rivers, applicant - favor
A Comment Card was submitted by Alex Payne in support.
Council Member Watts asked Mr. Rivers about the hours of operation.
Rivers replied that the hours would be acceptable for now but he would rather not have the
restriction. Currently the drive through did not open until school had already started.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked about the bank's recourse if the ordinance were passed with the
restrictive hours.
City Attorney Burgess indicated that in order to change the hours, the bank would have to apply
for a new specific use permit and associated public hearing. That restriction could be eliminated
if Council desired.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Council Member King motioned to adopt the ordinance with both conditions from the Planning
and Zoning Commission. Council Member Heggins seconded.
Council Member Watts suggested a friendly amendment to the motion to remove the hours of
operation for the drive through.
Council Members King and Heggins accepted the friendly amendment.
Council Member King motioned, Council Member Heggins seconded to adopt the ordinance
with the removal of the restriction on the hours of operation of the drive through. On roll call
vote, Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council Member Gregory
"aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs
"aye", and Council Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 23
B. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton,
Texas, providing for a zoning change from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3)
zoning district classification and use designation to a Neighborhood Residential
Mixed Use (NRMU) zoning district classification and use designation on tracts 256,
257, 258, 260 and 261 of the E. Puchalski survey, with an overlay district on those
same tracts, plus tract 263, containing additional restrictions as noted; the area for the
zoning change encompasses approximately 4.678 acres of land located at the
northeast corner of North Bonnie Brae Street and West Oak Street, in the City of
Denton, Denton County, Texas. The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval of the rezoning of six (6) of the seven lots from
Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-4) to Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use
(NRMU) subject to overlay conditions, as provided in Exhibit 8 (5-1). A
SUPERMAJORITY VOTE BY COUNCIL IS REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL.
Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, presented the details of the proposal
which consisted of rezoning for medical offices with a restrictive overlay. The property was
comprised of seven separate tracts of land and adjoined the current West Oak Historic District.
One lot on the street was not included in the proposal. There were many different uses within a
1/4 mile radius of the site which was currently zoned NR-3 with various other zoning categories
around the proposal. The restrictive overlay district would not allow attached single-family
dwellings, dwellings above businesses, hotels, semi-public halls, clubs and lodges, veterinarian
clinics and bakeries and business and trade schools. Building height would be limited to 40 feet
and no new strictures would be allowed at 2286 West Oak, however, the existing swimming
pool, gazebo and guest house could be removed or repaired for the same function. Commercial
and retail strictures, with the exception of professional services and office buildings, would be
limited to 7,500 square feet with a specific use permit required for additional square footage. An
eight foot high solid screen fence (good side out) constricted with steel posts and a decorative
cap would be required in the buffer yard, in lieu of the required buffer shrubs. Non-single family
access would be from Bonnie Brae or Oak Street and not from Houston Place. Staff was
recommending that the 2286 West Oak lot not be included in the rezoning because it was
adjacent to the West Oak Historic District and would provide a buffer between the commercial
development and the West Oak District. Seven notices in opposition were received which
triggered the supermajority vote by Council. The Development Review Committee originally
recommended denial, but would recommend approval of the rezoning excluding that one
property mentioned. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial as proposed by
the applicant but approval of the 6 of 7 properties with overlay restrictions.
Council Member Gregory stated that he was troubled with spot zoning surrounding one private
residence that was NR3 with NRMU. He noticed that the owner of that property did not submit
a reply to the public hearing notice. He was uncomfortable surrounding one residential lot with
NRMU.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked what would prevent further commercial creep to the east.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 24
Cunningham stated that the West Oak Historic District was adjacent to the site and planners were
working with the community to develop a neighborhood plan for that area. Developing a
neighborhood plan was more difficult to do with the historic district in place.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked what would be a vision for the property on a city level with
the rest of the single-family lots rather than piece meal development in the area.
Cunningham stated that there was a medical facility in the area, a park, and churches and that
there was a need to look at the area and create a neighborhood plan to provide for the protection
of the single-family homes and allow for infill which would not offend the historical designation
in the area.
Council Member Watts felt that some of the uses left in the NRMU category seemed inconsistent
with medical uses/office uses. He felt that some uses were inconsistent with the intent of the
application.
The Mayor opened the public hearing
The following individuals spoke during the public hearing:
Larry Reichhart, representing the applicant - in favor and was in agreement with the
removal of the one lot from the application.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked about the buffer on the north and west near Houston Place.
Reichhart stated that there would be the required 15' buffer plus the 8' fence.
Council Member Gregory asked about making the fence a six foot solid masonry rather than a
wood fence.
Richhart stated that the good side of the wood fence would be towards the neighbors. He did not
have any cost figures on a masonry fence and didn't know if it would be a deal killer.
Pete Hulstrand, 320 Bonnie Brae, Denton, 76201 - favor
Eugene Hargove, 2025 Houston Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Bob Clifton, 1800 Morse, Denton, 76205 - opposed
Alex Payne, 923 Ridgecrest Circle, Denton, 76205 - favor
David Kaplan, 308 Marietta, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Elise Ridenour, 2044 W. Oak, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Council Member Gregory asked Ms. Ridenour what was the West Oak Neighborhood District.
What made one property in and what made one property out.
Ms. Ridenour stated that the group came together when negative zoning was proposed in the
past. Belonging to the group meant joining the group. There were no dues and was voluntary.
Council Member Gregory stated that there was a letter submitted from the West Oak group. He
questioned how it was known that everyone opposed the project.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 25
Ms. Ridenour stated that there were two neighborhood meetings and those present were
unanimously opposed to it. There was a divide in the neighborhood about Bonnie Brae going
commercial but not a divide about this proposal. There was no developer for the proposal and no
plan for development.
Council Member Watts asked if the opposition was for the rezoning without a plan for
development. He questioned if there were enough restrictions to limit the development
specifically to medical offices and ancillary professional services would that make a difference.
Ridenour stated yes and no. If the proposal were specific, it could not be built as the parking lot
and buildings would be abutting people's yards.
Mayor Burroughs questioned if other uses needed a specific use permit, would that work for the
neighborhood.
Ridenour stated that she could not speak for neighborhood, but she would prefer some of the
other options. It would be best to say this did not work and a small area plan proposal would
provide a better vision for Bonnie Brae.
Andy Cooper, 2319 Houston Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked what his main objection to the proposal was.
Cooper stated that they were afraid about Houston Place having to going through to Bonnie Brae.
Cunningham stated that there was a requirement to punch Houston Place to Bonnie Brae;
however, a variance process could be requested to not to push it through. This was a city policy
but the applicant could apply for a variance not to push it through.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked if that was on the mobility plan.
Cunningham stated it was a Denton Development Code requirement.
Council Member Gregory asked who would be responsible for the variance to not connect
Houston to Bonnie Brae.
Cunningham replied it was the applicant.
Council Member Watts stated that he did not understand the concept to push Houston Place
through to Bonnie Brae. He felt that perhaps the Council could place a restriction on the
ordinance to prevent Houston Place to go through to Bonnie Brae.
Joann Nunnelly, 2215 Houston, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Michelle Lynn, 2120 Houston Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Comment Cards were received from the following:
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 26
Joyce Palmer, 1905 W. Oak, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Caroline Polliard, 1800 W. Oak, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Ann Jordon, 2224 Alamo Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Francisca Massardo, 2035 Houston Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Steve Friedson, 2044 W. Oak, Denton, 76201 - opposed
J. W. Gibbons, 2015 Houston Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Henry Gibbons, 2015 Houston Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Mrs. Tom Harpool, 2222 Houston Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Dora Sloan, 2209 Houston Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Leona Langford, 2219 Houston Place, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Susan Pax, 2270 W. Oak, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Melody Buys, 314 N. Bonnie Brae, Denton, 76201 - opposed
Mike and Linda Nolen, 2280 W. Oak Street, Denton, 76201 - favor
The applicant was allowed a five minute rebuttal.
Mayor Burroughs asked about the access on the corner lot.
Reichhart stated that right now the access would be internal on the development.
Council Member King asked about Houston Place.
Reichhart stated that they had proposed a restriction in terms of Houston Place with the zoning
but the Planning and Zoning Commission would not allow it.
City Attorney Burgess stated that the long piece of property next to the historic district would be
excluded from consideration of the proposal. It would also not be considered in the overlay and
zoning restrictions. Because of the withdrawal of that consideration, the supermajority vote was
reshaped and a simple majority vote would now be required instead of a supermaj ority vote.
Council Member Heggins asked if the developer had polled doctors about the site.
Richhart stated that they had been approached by a number of doctors about the site.
Deputy City Attorney Drake stated that the Houston Place issue was a platting question and not a
zoning question. There was a variance process that could be pursued to replat to a residential
neighborhood and would require a public hearing similar to a zoning case. The site plan could
make a condition of zoning and indirectly limit Houston Place. Conditions could also be put on
the zoning develop as the campus was not sold lot by lot.
Council Member Watts stated whether it was this site plan or another incorporated site, the plans
did not show Houston Place going through but if the developer wanted to replat, the site would
be modified with public process of a public hearing. He questioned if Council couldn't say with
the zoning overlay district that there would not be a city street running through the overlay.
Drake replied to not think of it as a zoning issue as it was a platting issue. If Council felt it was
important to the integrity of the area rezoning, it could put it in as a condition.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 27
Council Member Gregory asked if the Planning and Zoning Commission was ministerial with
some discretionary powers.
Drake replied that almost all items going to the Planning and Zoning Commission were
ministerial while Council issues were discretionary. Zoning issues were discretionary but also
ministerial if the plat met all development standards.
Council Member Gregory asked what would be the difference of opinion as to whether a plat
conformed or not.
Drake replied that was when split votes were done.
Reichhart stated that they preferred that there not be any access to Houston Place. There was
also the requirement of a minimum 15 foot buffer along the entire eastern side of the property.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Council Member Watts questioned if a restriction could be placed on the zoning to preclude
access to Houston Place.
Drake replied yes.
Mayor Burroughs recognized the need to protect the neighborhood but also recognized that the
roadway was in many regards a commercial roadway. How to preserve that while recognizing
change was a dynamic of the city. To him it meant transition which provided challenges. The
only way he could see looking favorably on the proposal would be to leave out the one parcel
and the property needed to be consistent with a transition to the neighborhood as well as
recognizing growth. The zoning situation was not at that level of detail. He felt the only way to
do that would be to heavily restrict the property for a specific use purpose permit everything
except for office use. The corner address was different as it had different zoning. A condition
would have to be that Houston Place could not run through to Bonnie Brae.
Council Member Engelbrecht agreed that if there were a planned development approach, it
would help the situation. There was an opportunity to study the area in advance and he had a
sense that the area from Bonnie Brae to Oak was in transition. There was also still the question
of Houston Place. At this point he was not in favor and felt that there was a need to study the
area more before passing anything
Council Member Gregory stated that Lillian Miller was an example of a good transition of
zoning on major thoroughfares. He felt such an approach along Bonnie Brae would be the right
approach. He did not think this request was the way to get this done as there were still too many
unanswered questions.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that she was undecided on this proposal. She felt Council had to be
realistic about what was going to happen along Bonnie Brae; however, she was uncomfortable
with the proposed configuration and outstanding questions. She questioned making the site plan
as a condition for approval and if that would take care of lot of what Council was discussing.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 28
City Attorney Burgess stated that could be a condition if the Council desired.
Council Member Watts stated that Bonnie Brae was in transition and the only way he would be
in favor was to place conditions on the proposal. Several of those would be no access to
Houston Place; uses other than medical/office would require a specific use permit; the buffer on
the north side would have to be larger. Another suggestion would be require a specific use
permit for the entire area which would require a site plan to ensure a plan was in place.
Council Member Watts motioned to approve the ordinance subject to no access to Houston
Place; any use other than medical/office would require a specific use permit and the buffer on the
eastern boundary would be 30 feet with an eight foot high fence.
Mayor Burroughs offered a friendly amendment to include the uses that were eliminated at the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Council Member Watts agreed to the friendly amendment.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp offered another friendly amendment to develop the site as a campus and
make a site plan a condition.
Cunningham stated that the motion should be reworded so that the property would not have
access from Houston Place.
Drake stated that the requirement of a site plan on top of a specific use permit was redundant and
should be removed. He also questioned fire access on the site.
Cunningham suggested having the site plan as part of the approval. Fire access from Houston
would not be an issue.
Drake felt that Council needed to determine if it wanted this site plan or the specific use permit
process. If the conditions in the motion were not approved by the applicant, the applicant could
protest the rezoning which would require a supermajority vote by Council. He suggested
determining if the applicant was in favor of the proposal.
Reichhart stated that they would not be in favor of the motion as it now stood. Having to get a
specific use permit for every use would be a hardship. If everything was tied to a specific use
permit, it would be difficult to deal with architectural standards or layout. The specific use
permit could be denied just because someone didn't like it. If the specific use on the site plan
could be tied down for medical use that would address buffering and architectural standards and
would be different than a specific use permit on everything which would be an unknown.
Council Member Watts stated that the presentation stated a medical office park. Unless there
was a way to ensure a medical office park use, he was trying to tie down what could be
developed.
Reichhart suggested an alternate development plan for medical use or offices and all other uses
have a specific use permit. Medical, office and ancillary uses would be permitted and all other
uses would need a specific use permit.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 29
Mayor Burroughs suggested carving off professional service office use and to table the proposal
to the next meeting to develop a concept with the conditions listed in the motion. Fashion a site
plan requirement for professional service office use and develop the standards.
Council Member Gregory stated that he would like to see the applicant and the neighborhood
have more of a chance to work on this. He would also like a statement from the owner of
property that would be surrounded by the proposal.
Reichhart stated that the property would not remain residential. The owner was looking to sell it
commercially.
Council Member Watts motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded to continue the proposal
based on the Mayor's previous suggestion.
Council discussed whether to have the public hearing reopened to allow for public comment at
the next meeting when the proposal would be considered.
Council Member Watts withdrew his motion to table and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp withdrew her
second.
Council Member Engelbrecht motioned, Council Member Heggins seconded to reopen the public
hearing. On roll call vote, Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye",
Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp
"aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Engelbrecht motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded to continue the Public
Hearing to the July 20th Council meeting. On roll call vote, Council Member Watts "aye",
Council Member Heggins "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht
"aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member King "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
Council considered Item 4D.
D. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of ordinances of the City of Denton,
Texas regarding the following matters, as they relate to the Inspiration (Hunter
Ranch) MPC zoning district classification and use designation [MPC07-0001,
Inspiration (Hunter Ranch)], generally located on both sides of I-35, between
Robson Ranch Road and Vintage Boulevard in the City of Denton, Texas:
Ordinance No. 2010-159
1. To rezone approximately 196.5 acres of property owned by the City of
Denton for a park, located at the northwest corner of Allred Road and
Bonnie Brae Street, from the Inspiration MPC (MPC07-0001) zoning district
classification and use designation to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1)
zoning district classification and use designation; and
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 30
Ordinance No. 2010-160
2. To amend the 3,331 acre Inspiration Master Planned Community Zoning
district classification and use designation [MPC07-0001, Inspiration (Hunter
Ranch)], by amending the Zoning Document, Development Plan Map, and
Development Standards; and providing for a penalty in the maximum
amount of $2,000.00 for violations, thereof, severability and an effective
date. (AMPC 10-000 1) The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval (7-0).
Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, presented the details of the proposal
which consisted of two separate actions. One action was to remove a public park site from the
master planned community and rezone the park site from Master Planned Community to
Neighborhood Residential 1. The second action was to amend the master planned community
zoning district by amending the zoning document development plan map and development
standards.
On November 4, 2008, Council approved a Master Planned Community zoning document and
development which established the Inspiration Master Planned Community. Within the
ordinance were zoning and development standards and zoning districts.
The purpose of the proposed amendment was (1) reduce the number of pad sites. The 2001 plan
for development indicated 50 sites, the 2008 current approved master planned community
indicated 21 sites, two of which were existing and nineteen would be new. The 2010 proposed
amendment indicate 19 sites. (2) Provide certainty to existing perimeter residents by eliminating
Pad Site "D". Existing perimeter sites 7 and 10 and future C & L would have increased wellhead
setback to 750' and conditions for noise, air monitoring, access, screening, lighting and flaring at
parameter sites. The amendment would also provide for the addition of No-drill zones. (3)
Provide certainty for 3300 acre Master Planned Community in terms of surface real-estate and
mineral development coordination, flexibility in pad site location subject to Sub 22 Drilling
Ordinance and a minimum of 19 pad sites by right including the 5 already drilled on.
The summary of the amendments included (1) rezoning of the 196 acre park site, (2) reduction in
multi-family units from 3,408 to 3,249 units, (3) reduction in single family units from 11,914 to
11,135 units, (4) elimination of NR-1 (N) gas pad districts and allow for 19 total pad sites, (5)
provide conditions to pads located along primary existing residential in terms of 750' wellhead
setback, elimination of "D", no drill zones, existing perimeter sites 7 and 10, future perimeter
sites C and L, subject to conditions and all other pads subject to Subchapter 22 per time of
permit, and (6) no changes to ESA/Open space, water, sewer, drainage, phasing or economic
plan.
There were several different scenarios for a noise level recommendation. The staff
recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission for gas pad sites 7, 10, C and L
indicated that the noise level for drilling, completion, production, operation and re-work
activities would not exceed 79 decibels measured at any point 750' from the gas well site.
Commissioner Ryan had suggested the noise level would not exceed 79 decibels measured at any
point 500' from the gas well site. The staff recommendation measured at the actual protected
use location. Five hundred feet was an arbitrary distance that could require unattractive sound
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 31
blanket walls without any benefit to residents. In addition, the operator was required to submit
and abide by a noise mitigation plan.
Council Member Gregory stated that Exhibit 5 dealt with the proposed gas well parks. He asked
how many acres each site had.
Cunningham stated that they varied in size.
Council Member Gregory asked if there was a restriction on the number of actual wells per site.
Cunningham replied there were no restrictions per park site, just a limited number of park sites.
On the east side of the power lines there could be no more than four sites.
Council Member Gregory asked if the Railroad Commission had limits on the number of wells
on a park site.
Cunningham stated that the governing issue dealt with environmental issues and not the number
of wells on site.
Council Member Watts asked that in order to get the gas well permit, did the applicant first have
to plat.
Cunningham stated that except for Sites C, 7, 10, and L, the applicant would have to plat first
then get the drilling permit.
Council Member Watts questioned if there was an amendment to the Denton Development Code
which version would be used.
Cunningham stated that it was possible to have a plat in a zoning district but when coming in for
a permit, the separation criteria might have increased. If there were an approved gas well plat
but not vested with a permit which had then expired, the new permit would have to be consistent
with current standards. If there were an approved plat under the current 500' separation and
vested, all would be vested.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked about the number of wells to drill with the original plan.
Cunningham stated that originally there were 84 wells which were reduced to 19. A trade off
was done to eliminate Pad Site D and an additional site.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked if the applicant met with the neighbors.
Cunningham stated that the neighbors voiced support for the proposal. The major issue was the
elimination of Pad Site D.
The Mayor opened the public hearings for D 1 and D2.
Robert Flozenlogen, Hunter Ranch applicant, stated that they favored the amendments from the
original recommendation. The staff recommendation was 79 db, 750 feet from the gas well. He
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 32
requested Council use the staff recommendation instead of the amendment from the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Council Member Gregory stated that other cities noise levels had less than 79 db at 750 feet with
sound walls.
Flozenlogen stated that the wall was placed on the pad site. Their recommendation included a
noise mitigation plan which was the best solution and on their list of requirements. The original
staff recommendation measured at a protected use to monitor the sound level for an objective
place for measuring.
Council discussed the merits of the level of decibels and number of feet from a protected source.
Flozenlogen requested that Council keep to what staff had recommended and what had been
vetted with the community. The restriction would only apply to four wells.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked about narrowing the number of wells to 19 to match the
number of well sites.
Flozenlogen stated that the sites ranged from 3-5 acres. The number wells per site would be a
factor of economy and gas prices.
The following individuals submitted Speaker Cards:
Martha Wood, 9305 Perimeter, Denton, 76206 - favor
Kathleen Wazny, 9117 Perimeter, Denton, 76207 - favor
Council Member Watts asked Ms. Wazny if she was satisfied with the noise restriction levels.
Wazny replied that the no drill zone helped with the noise reduction.
Elma Walker - favor
Flozenlogen was given a five minute rebuttal.
Cunningham stated that a noise management plan and associated decibels would be related to the
protected stricture.
Council Member Engelbrecht stated that just because a protected stricture was not within 750
feet, sound carried greater at night and could still be disturbing. He suggested the distance be set
at 500 feet for all wells due to the noise impact and the variable for the conditions for sound
travel.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Mayor Burroughs suggested 79 decibels at 500 feet or 70 decibels at 750 feet.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 33
Flozenlogen stated that if the request stood from the community to have the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommendation 79 at 500 feet, they would accept that.
Council Member King indicated that the walled screening was a factor with the community and
he was satisfied with 79 decibels at 750 feet and no screening for those 4 wells.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp motioned, Council Member Heggins seconded to adopt the ordinance for
4.D.1. On roll call vote, Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council
Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye",
Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Heggins motioned, Council Member King seconded to adopt the ordinance for
4.13.2 which included the 79 decibels at 750' plus all other conditions recommended by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. On roll call vote, Council Member Watts "aye", Council
Member Heggins "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye",
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council Member King "aye". Motion
carried unanimously.
Item 4.C. was considered.
C. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton,
Texas providing for amendments to the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District (RROD)
Section 35.7.15 of the Denton Development Code (DDC) on property encompassing
approximately 410 acres of land in its entirety and being located generally on both
sides of U.S. Highway 380 (West University Drive), between Interstate Highway 35
and Bonnie Brae Street. The Northern Tract of the RROD contains approximately
153 acres north of U.S. Highway 380 and the Southern Tract contains
approximately 239.05 acres south of U.S. Highway 380. The proposed amendments
are related primarily to the Southern Tract which is located within a Regional
Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) and a Neighborhood Residential Mixed
Use (NRMU) zoning and use district as modified by the Rayzor Ranch Overlay
District. Specifically the applicant's proposal includes:
1. Modifying certain previously approved development standards,
2. Proposing an increase to Multi-family density on the Southern Tract,
3. Replacing the previously approved Master Site Plan with a
Conceptual/Schematic Plan on the Southern Tract,
4. Amending and adding definitions to land uses on the Southern Tract,
5. Amending and defining landscape guidelines on the Southern Tract,
6. Amending and defining architectural guidelines on the Southern Tract, and
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 34
7. Amending and defining signage guidelines on the Southern Tract.
Chuck Russell, Planning Supervisor, stated that Allegiance Hillview and RED Development
were proposing to amend the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District and provide for design standards
related to signage, landscaping and architecture for the Town Center and residential areas within
Rayzor Ranch South. The amendments focused on south side of the US 380 site. The
applicant's proposal consisted of seven components (1) modifying certain previously approved
development standards, (2) increasing multi-family density on the Southern Tract, (3) replacing
the previously approved Master Site Plan with a conceptual/schematic plan on the Southern
Tract, (4) amending and adding definitions to land uses, (5) amending and defining landscape
guidelines, (6) amending and defining architectural guidelines, and (7) amending and defining
signage guidelines. The proposal would divide the south campus into three primary areas for
land use locations and height. The main subareas consisted of RR-1 which was the Rayzor
Ranch Town Center, RR-2 which was the retail area that would surround the Town Center and
the South Mixed-Use District which would accommodate nonresidential, single-family and
multi-family residential uses.
(1) Development Standards - the amendments consisted of a concept/schematic and site plan
process and criteria, divided the South Campus into three primary areas, moved land use
locations and height restrictions.
(2) Increasing the multi-family density on the southern tract - the proposal was to increase the
multi-family dwelling units from 750 to 1800 dwelling units with the additional units being
located in the multi-family density zone. The other 750 units would be located throughout the
zone. Staff reviewed the following items when considering the increase in multi-family density:
the concept plan, site plan, TIA/Platting, permit milestone, design standards, other projects,
sustainability, and jobs to units. Jobs-housing balance figures were reviewed.
(3) Replacing previously approved Master Site Plan with a Concept Plan - the proposed concept
plan had the Town Center retail in the RR-1 area, the additional RR-2 retail and all other areas in
other categories. The applicant had committed that everything on the south side would go to site
plan detail which would go to the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval. The applicant
was not proposing the detail in the other categories at this time.
(4) Amending and adding definitions to land uses - highlights included definition of a "big
house" which consisted of 10 or fewer dwelling units located in a single building which was
intended to resemble a single large house. The dwelling units in a big house would count
towards the total number of single-family attached dwelling units and not towards the total
number of multi-family dwelling units. A new definition for a convention center, garden-style
home and townhouse-style home was also provided. Staff had spent a lot of time refining the
definition of the townhouse-style home so that it would not be conceived as multi-family. In
order to meet that definition, a provision was added that no units would be vertically above or
below another use or unit within the stricture. These uses would not count against the figures
for the multi-family units.
(5) Landscape guidelines - With the north side development, the cap for surface parking would
be exceeded by 2000 spaces. To compensate for parking beyond code and surface parking area,
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 35
the applicant agreed to landscaping and tree plantings beyond the code requirement. Staff was
encouraging the applicant to utilize tree planting and canopy to mitigate for their requested Code
variances. Staff would also allow the applicant to use proposed open space and tree canopy
within the Southern Tract to help compensate for any shortage of open space and tree canopy
proposed within the Northern Tract. Russell reviewed the applicant's proposed tree canopy and
open space by percentages. A comparison was shown in terms of the current zoning and the
proposed base zoning as it compared to the proposed percentages.
(6) Architectural guidelines - the guidelines were different than what was provided for in the
northern tract but included a large amount of detail for the RR-1 and RR-2.
(7) Signage - the applicant was proposing to expand the special sign district for the RR-1 and
RR-2 areas. There would be large signs along the I-35 frontage, directional signage along US
380 and in the interior Town Center, active lighting and signage along the main street.
Council Member Gregory noted that his backup contained architectural standards for the RR-1
and RR-2 areas but none for the multi-use area.
Russell stated that the only architectural standards outside RR-1 and RR-2 would be behind
Exhibit CI and 0 entitled "multi-family architectural guidelines". These were the base code
requirements and 0 indicated more restrictions but not on the level for RR-1 and RR-2.
Council Member Gregory stated that the residential section of the Legacy development had a
variety of styles.
Russell stated that those detailed design guidelines would be presented at a future date. They
were still going through that process and needed the guidelines before going to the Planning and
Zoning Commission and City Council.
Mayor Burroughs asked at what stage the applicant must come forward with qualitative
architectural standards.
Russell indicated that it would be prior to the site plan. Those standards would have to be in
place before reviewing the site plan for recommendation for the Planning and Zoning
Commission. Staff and the applicant were working through the standards in various areas as
they were going through the process.
Mayor Burroughs asked if there was a necessity of having to approve a density change separate
from the architectural design standards. He would be more comfortable if he could view both at
the same time. He questioned if there was a necessity to consider the density change before
receiving the detailed architectural designs.
Russell stated that it got down to the critical mass of people living as close to retail as possible
and trying to provide vitality and shoppers.
Mayor Burroughs questioned if the density consideration could be postponed until the
architectural standards for the multi-family were received.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 36
Russell indicated that the applicant would be able to explain the critical time frame.
Council Member Watts asked what section of the proposal indicated that more processes for the
architectural guidelines were to follow. He indicated that he had a concern giving the Planning
and Zoning Commission final approval for a site plan. The components of the site plan did not
contain any elevations for the architecture.
Russell stated staff may want to clean up that language as it was understood to him what the
process would be but that didn't mean that it would be understood for someone else. In order for
staff to sign off on the architectural compatibility, they needed to see the site plan elevation and
landscape design. Additional language could be included that every subarea on the south side
and every phase would need a set of guidelines and elevations.
Council Member Watts agreed that part of the justification for the increase in density would be
the quality of the project. He expressed a concern about the definition of a "big house"
containing 10 units and only applying to single-family units. His concern also included the
townhome units applying to the single-family numbers. The proposal was for a large increase in
multi-family density but townhomes and big houses were going towards single-family numbers.
Council Member Gregory questioned some of the permitted uses. In a highly concentrated
multi-family and single-family area, drive through facilities and quick vehicle services would be
allowed.
Russell replied that the intent was that those types of retail uses would be limited to the RR zones
but not in the single-family or multi-family zones.
Council Member King indicated a concern about the definitions of single-family units and
questions about the units with more than three bedrooms.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
The following individuals spoke during the public hearing:
Charles Hodges, applicant, spoke in favor. He indicated that he had no problem with the
submittal of elevations with the site plans and no problem with those assurances and the details.
It was a matter of appropriate timing to do so. His goal was to have 5-6 different multi-family
projects with different texture and styles. Drive though and quick vehicle services might be
allowed along the I35 frontage area.
Council Member Gregory asked Mr. Hodges about the "big house" concept and the fact that it
sounded like multi-family and why it would count towards single-family units.
Hodges stated that the stricture looked like a mansion but consisted of integrated units. They
were vertical separated single-family units as opposed to multi-family units.
Council Member Gregory questioned if it were possible to fit all the single-family attached,
single family detached and high density areas into the high density zone.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 37
Hodges stated that they had done a density test and the figures would work.
Council Member Gregory stated that the applicant was asking Council to set aside the currently
approved plan and replace it with a concept plan. He questioned by the applicant would imagine
that setting aside the entire plan that anything from the other plan automatically be vested in the
new plan.
Hodges stated that they were enhancing the specificity in the old plan as it could not be built as
submitted. They were enhancing and detailing the project over the old plan.
Steve Backman, RED Development, spoke in favor.
Mayor Burroughs stated that there were already 750 units of multi-family approved. He
questioned why approval of the additional units couldn't wait until some architectural quality
standards were approved.
Backman indicated that on the retail side, there was a concern related to keeping the document
together.
John Ryan, 2128 Emerson, Denton, 76209 - spoke in opposition.
Hatice Salih, 300 Northridge, Denton, 76201 - spoke in opposition
Alex Payne, 923 Ridgecrest Circle, Denton, 76205 - spoke in favor
Jim Killion, 1903 Mistywood, Denton, 76201 - spoke in opposition
Rob Rayner, 1200 Woodrow, Denton, 76205 - spoke in opposition
Bob Clifton, 1800 Morse, Denton, 76205 - spoke in opposition
Dalton Allen, 111 Lexington, Denton, 76205 - spoke in opposition
Comment cards in opposition were submitted by:
Eddie Lane, 111 W. McKinney, Denton, 76201
Victoria Hodge, 1833 N. Bell, Denton, 76201
Mrs. Tom Harpool, 2222 Houston Place, Denton, 76201
Michelle Lynn, 2120 Houston Place, Denton, 76201
JoAnn Nunnelly, 2215 Houston Place, Denton, 76201
The applicant was given a five minute rebuttal. Hodges stated that he would agree to count the
"big houses" towards the multi-family numbers. In terms of parking, the underlying multi-
family zoning would address parking. There would be a detailed site plan that would address
parking configuration, parking islands, percentage that would be closed parking and the
percentage that would be open.
Council Member Engelbrecht understood that the 750 proposed units and the 1050 proposed
units were all within the density ring.
Hodges replied that the proposed 1050 units would be in the density ring with the 750 units
scattered in the South Mixed-Use District.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 38
Council Member Engelbrecht stated the proposal showed every other site had multi-family and
questioned why it was needed at the other sites.
Hodges replied that it would provide good diversity within the project.
Council Member Engelbrecht questioned why the access road had eleven signs proposed. He
felt that would almost be too cluttered.
Backman stated that the signage added energy to the project. At this time, he didn't know about
the exact spacing of the signs which would determine the number that would be placed.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked if RED would be willing to work with staff to better define
the development.
Council Member Watts stated that Hodges had indicated that he would not have a problem
adding elevations to the site plan criteria. Watts indicated that he a concern about the Planning
and Zoning Commission having final site plan approval and would prefer the Council having
final approval of the site plan.
Hodges stated that the practicality and reality of that time line was that there might be 15-30
cases with an average time to get through Planning and Zoning Commission and Council of four
months. That was a large amount of process time. All of the details were presented so that the
Planning and Zoning Commission would know what was needed for approval.
Council Member Watts stated that he was still concerned about the justification for the large
amount of increased density. He understood about sustainability over the long term but when
750 units could be started with 20,000 feet of form board survey that was not about
sustainability. He had a problem with the townhomes and felt that at the very least, a portion
should apply to the multi-family number. He questioned if the number of multi-family units had
to be approved at this meeting.
Hodges replied that it would not make any difference; the analysis would be the same for the
number of units needed.
Council Member Gregory stated that he understood what Mr. Hodges was saying about all of the
site plans coming to Council and the amount of time it would take. He still had a concern that if
the ordinance contained more detailed architectural standards similar to the retail, it would be
easier for Council to approve the increased multi-family.
Hodges suggested having the multi-family site plans come to Council and all the other mixed use
site plans go to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Council Member Watts indicated that was what he had in mind.
Hodges felt that was one more layer of safety with which Council could look for the quality of
the proposals.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 39
Council Member Gregory stated that he had a question regarding architectural standards for
retail. Part 5 of Building Design and Materials listed types of materials to be used on all sides of
a building visible from the streets or internal customer areas on the site. One of those materials
listed was EIFS which he had been told by several builders was not a high quality building
material.
Backman replied that EIFS was a high quality material and that many of their projects contained
EIFS. It was a very common building material and was probably the most used material on their
shopping centers.
Council Member Gregory stated that he had heard that EIFS had problems with water leakage,
mold buildup and birds making holes in it.
Backman stated that was not their experience with the material. They used the material in all
different types of weather and had not had the problems noted.
Council Member Gregory stated that the plan offered showed an increase in the open space,
landscape space, canopy and parking from the requirements of the underlying zoning of RCCD.
RCCD required one green landscaped island for every 10 parking spaces while the applicant was
proposing one green island for every 15 parking spaces. That was an approximate 33% decrease.
Backman replied that they had done a lot of study on this issue. Regarding the canopy, they
were able to show 20% of landscape in the parking area and 25% on the overall project which
was a 5% increase overall. There would be smaller parking fields with different orientations of
parking stalls and each one would have buffer areas with canopies that would be wider which
would allow them to space them out a little different than Code. The average was one for every
15 parking spaces. A study they had just completed on their latest site plan showed one for less
than every 10 parking spaces.
Council Member Gregory suggested using those figures.
Backman stated that 15 was an average. He indicated that they could go to one for every 12
parking spaces. They would like some a bit larger so would like some up to 10-15 parking
spaces.
Council Member Gregory stated that he needed assurance that the outer rim would not be
shortchanged to make the Main Street area better. He asked if the applicant would be willing to
go on average one to every 10 on parking spaces.
Backman agreed that they could go to the average of one island to every 10 parking spaces.
They would prefer one to every 12 but could live with one to every 10.
Council Member Gregory indicated that he could go with one to every 11 parking spaces.
Backman agreed.
Hodges presented the idea of 25% of the townhomes going towards the multi-family units.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 40
Mayor Burroughs replied that would help. He stated that the price point level of the multi-family
units was suppose to be significantly higher than the average unit in the City of Denton. He
asked if Hodges had a sense of the price point for the proposed units.
Hodges replied that it would be approximately $1.15 to $1.25.
Mayor Burroughs asked why the original 750 units were exempted from the prohibition of rental
by individual bedrooms.
Hodges stated that lot of the transitional and senior housing was done by the single bedroom in
multi-bedroom units.
Mayor Burroughs stated that the intent then was for the 750 units to be geared towards seniors.
Hodges replied that the 750 units could be built all over the South Mixed-Use District and
certainly some of those would be geared towards seniors.
Mayor Burroughs indicated that rental by the bedroom was a very sensitive position in Denton
and asked if it were a vital issue to rent by the bedroom.
Hodges stated that they wanted diversity and not preclude anyone.
Mayor Burroughs asked if somewhere in site plan it indicated that architectural standards would
be there or elevations would be attached.
Hodges stated that they had already agreed on elevations.
Mayor Burroughs asked if Council could direct staff to place such language in the ordinance as it
currently was not included.
Russell replied it should be included in the list of items to be included in the ordinance. The
intent was known but it would be best to have it included.
Mayor Burroughs asked of it would be possible to put in a condition there would be no voluntary
application for a tax exemption for commercial tenants.
City Manager Campbell indicated that was addressed in the 380 agreement.
Council Member King confirmed the big houses would go towards the multi-family numbers and
25% of the townhouse to multi-family but not the limitation of the 750 units limited to three
bedrooms.
Hodges stated that they had already done that on the 1050 units and could also do that on the 750
units if Council desired.
Council Member Gregory stated that he understood that the applicant wanted some flexibility for
leasing by the bedroom for a senior facility and that type of facility would be less than three
bedrooms.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 41
Council Member Gregory indicated that he really liked the restriction to three bedrooms.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked if any of the multi-family units would be four stories or
more.
Hodges replied that they did not want any three story walk up garden units.
Council Member Watts stated the trigger point for the multi-family came out to approximately
333 square feet of retail per unit. The 750 was almost less than half of the 1800 as requested. If
the trigger point for the 1050 units was 600,000 square feet of foundation, why not do 100,000
square feet of slab.
Hodges stated that they had looked at that and it could be just one anchor store which was an
issue. Various definitions were tried with this as the best alternative.
Council Member Watts stated that the 20,000 feet of form board survey not restricted to the
Town Center was not representative of an equitable number of the 750 units that the applicant
wanted to immediately permit. He suggested that a greater number such as 100,000 to 150,000
restricted to the Town Center would get to a more equal percentage of the multi-family requested
immediately compared to the ratio of the Town Center which was 600,000 feet. He questioned if
it were possible to limit half of the 750 units to not be rented by the bedroom.
Hodges felt that restriction would knock out that use.
Council Member Watts reviewed the conditions he had noted thus far: (1) all site plans for
multi-family uses would go to Council, (2) the site plan criteria would include elevations and
architectural standards, (3) modify the section dealing with the expiration of the site plan for
multi-family and an extension to be considered by the Council, (4) twenty-five percent of the
townhomes would be used for multi-family figures, (5) big houses would be used toward multi-
family figures, (6) limitation of three bedrooms on all units, and (7) 100,000 square footage of
foundation off the green tagged slabs as the trigger for multi-family.
Russell indicated that another would be the average of one green island per every 11 parking
spaces.
Mayor Burroughs included the architectural standards in the site plans.
Russell stated that another was the concept plan. He was not comfortable that the symbols on the
concept plan did not relate back to the intended uses. As written, it was not clear what uses were
permitted in the various sections of the South Mixed-Use District.
Council Member Gregory suggested that items like quick vehicle service or drive through not be
automatic permitted uses. Remove several of those uses and come back for permission for those
uses; understanding that there might be appropriate places for those uses but not near residential
uses.
Mayor Burroughs suggested dropping this into "C" for a specific use permit requirement.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 42
Hodges suggested requiring a specific use permit if the use was adjacent to any residential area.
Council Member Gregory stated that retail sales and service, drive through facilities, and quick
vehicle service uses would be moved to Section C if next to a residential area.
Russell stated that the only place commercial land uses would be permitted would be in the RR
areas.
Council Member Gregory stated that an adjustment needed in the ordinance was page 9 dealing
with the definition of "big house". The language dealing with the "big house" counting towards
single-family needed to be removed and that it would only count towards multi-family.
Council Member Watts clarified that the trigger point would be 100,000 square feet of
foundation as inspected and improved in RR-1
Hodges stated that it needed to be in both RR-1 and RR-2.
Council Member Gregory noted on Exhibit C 3, Multi-Family Guidelines", if they going to rely
on underlying zoning for parking requirements for multi-family, that wording needed to be
included.
Hodges stated that the concept schematic had that shown on the plan.
Council Member Gregory requested that wording be included in Exhibit C.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Council Member Watts motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded to adopt the ordinance with
the following additions: (1) all site plans for multi-family uses would go to Council, (2) the site
plan criteria would include elevations and architectural standards, (3) big houses would count
only towards the total multi-family units, (4) twenty-five percent of the townhomes would apply
towards the total multi-family units, (5) 100,000 square feet of slab that had been poured and
approved by the city of Denton of which would be poured either in RR-1 or RR-2 needed to
occur before the first 750 units of multi-family could be permitted and/or constriction started,
(6) limitation of three bedrooms on all multi-family units, (7) canopy coverage would be an
average of one per every 11 parking spaces, (8) parking language for multi-family found in the
concept plan would be integrated into Exhibit C 3, (9) retail sales and service, drive through
facilities, and quick vehicle service uses would be permitted in the South Mixed-Use District
only with a specific use permit when abutting residential and (10) City Council would have the
authority to extend the expiration date of multi-family site plans. On roll call vote, Council
Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council
Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council
Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously
D. Consider appointing a nominating committee to recommend appointees to serve on
the Economic Development Partnership Board.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 43
Mayor Pro Tem noted that these would be members of the nominating committee as opposed to
nominations to the Board.
Council Member Gregory motioned, Council Member Heggins seconded to nominated James
King, Pete Kamp and Hank Dickinson to the nominating committee. On roll call vote, Council
Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council
Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council
Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
E. Consider appointments to Council committees.
Mayor Pro Tem Kamp motioned, Council Member King seconded to approve the Council
committee appointments as noted in the agenda backup materials. On roll call vote, Council
Member Watts "aye", Council Member Heggins "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council
Member Engelbrecht "aye", Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye", Mayor Burroughs "aye", and Council
Member King "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
F. Citizen Reports
1. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council.
2. Receive citizen reports from the following:
a. Bob Clifton regarding Fry Street issues, including the initiative
petition requiring the establishment of a park.
Mr. Clifton presented information on an Open Records Request he had submitted to the Legal
Department and the ridiculous charge associated with that request. He also indicated that they
were still gathering signatures for the petition for Fry Street.
b. Kimberly Reynolds regarding park policies on emergency procedures
for children.
Ms. Reynolds spoke about emergency procedures for children with allergies and current park
procedures. Her child had a severe allergy and needed to have EPI pen available for
administration if needed. Current park policy would not allow park personnel to administer the
pen. She asked for a change in the policy where staff would be able to administer the EPI pens if
needed.
G. Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from
the City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of
policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming
meeting AND Under Section 551.0415 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, provide
reports about items of community interest regarding which no action will be taken,
to include: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 44
regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official,
public employee, or other citizen; a reminder about an upcoming event organized or
sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or
community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body
that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body
or an official or employee of the municipality; or an announcement involving an
imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has
arisen after the posting of the agenda.
Council Member Gregory asked for a follow-up report on the information presented by Ms.
Reynolds.
H. Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the
Texas Open Meetings Act.
There was no continuation of the Closed Meeting.
L Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the
Texas Open Meetings Act.
There was no official action taken on Closed Meeting items.
Mayor Burroughs indicated that Council would be returning to the Work Session to continue the
gas well amendment discussion and consider the boards and commissions item.
3. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction concerning: (1) proposed
amendments to Subchapter 23 - Definitions - of the Denton Development Code (DDC); (2)
proposed amendments to Subchapter 22 of the Denton Development Code (DDC) regarding
gas well drilling and production; (3) proposed amendment to Subchapter 16 of the DDC
regarding gas well development platting; (4) proposed amendments to the schedule of fees
contained in Ordinance 2005-237 pertaining to gas well drilling and production within the
City limits and the Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction; and (5) hold a discussion, and give staff
direction concerning the types of analytical testing that has been conducted at other gas well
monitoring efforts within the Barnett Shale. (Gas Well Ordinance)
Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, continued with his presentation. He
reviewed current and recommended gas well permit requirements. Staff had wanted to reduce
the life of the permits from one year to six months but the Texas Local Government Code
indicated that the limit on the permits could not be less than two years. However, staff had
added language that the permit would expire unless gas well drilling activities had started prior
to the expiration date. If gas well drilling activities had started under a valid permit, the permit
would have to be renewed annually, subject to all associated fees.
Council Member Gregory asked about a short term administrative moratorium on gas well
permits similar to what other cities had done. He was suggesting protection until the City's
amended ordinance could be passed
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 45
Cunningham stated that there were still some concerns to work out on various issues. It had been
suggested to send the proposal amendments to outside counsel for review. The amendments
were going to the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 23rd for consideration.
Mayor Burroughs suggested the possibility of having a council meeting after the next Planning
and Zoning Commission meeting to consider the gas well ordinance.
Cunningham continued with screening requirements. He indicated that cities had all different
kinds of restrictions. Staff was proposing screening requirements if any part of the drilling
operation was within 1,000 feet of any protected use or any lot within a previously platted
residential subdivision where one or more lots had one or more strictures; or within 500 feet of
all other uses or features. The screening would be an 8-foot high opaque decorative masonry
fence, if the use, lot or feature pre-existed the commencement of gas well drilling activity.
Mayor Burroughs asked if everything on the gas well pad would get a permanent brick box
around it.
Cunningham stated yes if in the process of drilling; yes if in process of fracking, but some
facilities that were minor would look better than a box. He reviewed the noise level summary for
the surveyed cities. The lowest permitted level city was Flower Mound with Denton being the
highest at 90 decibels. There were many different requirements from the surveyed cities. He
reviewed the recommended noise level and requirement for a noise management plan.
Mayor Burroughs felt that under certain circumstances there needed to be some type of threshold
level.
Council Member Gregory suggested adding a location from where the measurement would be
made. He questioned the provision that gave the driller 24 hours to abate a noise violation.
Cunningham stated that an opportunity had to be given to abate the nuisance.
Council Member Gregory requested staff provide a better reason why 24 hours were given to
abate the violation. Perhaps a ticket could be given instead of shutting the operation down.
Cunningham stated that the assumption was that the drill site was the offender. There would
have to be a demonstration of the cause of the noise violation.
Council Member Gregory suggested staff do more research on the issue and bring it back for
council consideration.
Cunningham stated that staff would revisit the existing ordinances. He reviewed the proposed
amendments for gas well plats. The proposed amendment was if gas well drilling or production
had not commenced, the associated Gas Well Development Plat would expire two years from the
date that the Gas Well Development Plat was approved. The Gas Well Development Plat could
not be extended. Upon expiration of a Gas Well Development Plat where gas drilling activities
had not commenced, the applicant could reapply for a new Gas Well Development Plat, subject
to all requirements of the Denton Development Code, as amended.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 46
Council Member Gregory asked about limitations on the height of equipment inside the walls.
Cunningham stated that he would look into it for Council. Staff was reviewing gas well testing
for air, water and soils.
Council Member Gregory felt that there was a need to be able to test ground well water supply
near a drilling site. He suggested charging the driller for the report and provide it to the land
owner to make sure the water was acceptable. The driller would be bearing the cost as opposed
to the homeowner having to do it. He suggested placing that recommendation in Phase II as
opposed to Phase I.
5. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding
nominations/appointments to the City's Boards and Commissions.
Jennifer Walters, City Secretary, reviewed the Board and Commission notebooks that were going
out to Council. The notebooks contained information concerning current members, current
member attendance, applications and whether a current member wished to be considered for re-
nomination. Council was asked to have nominations to the City Secretary by July 12th for
consideration at the July 20th meeting.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:30 a.m.
MARK A. BURROUGHS
MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
JENNIFER WALTERS
CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS