Loading...
November 15, 2011 Minutes CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES November 15, 2011 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Council Member King, Council Member Watts, Council Member Gregory, Council Member Engelbrecht, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp, Council Member Roden and Mayor Burroughs ABSENT: None 1. Citizen Comments on Consent Agenda Items There were no citizen comments presented on Consent Agenda items. 2. Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for November 15, 2011. Howard Martin, Acting City Manager, stated that there were substitute agreements for Consent Agenda Items 4H and 4I. Denton County made a few minor changes as indicated so Council would need to substitute the agreements for ones in the backup. Mayor Burroughs asked about Item 4D, the mobile data computers. The ordinance did not have a breakdown of what the other bids were and only indicated the best value bid. Kevin Gunn, Director of Technology Services, indicated that there were three bids received. The bid the Council was being requested to approve was the lowest bid. 3.Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding a proposed ordinance requiring the use of reflectors on bicycles operated on roadways and paths set aside for the exclusive operation of bicycles in the city. Roger White, Captain-Denton Police Department, presented background information from the Texas Transportation Code on the use of reflectors and lights on bicycles. He provided a price range for side reflectors and side wall reflective tires. The proposed ordinance mirrored the State Transportation Code except for an additional requirement of side reflectors on each wheel or reflective tires. He stated that there were other options to consider that would be just as effective as side reflectors. He introduced Lt. Tom Woods who presented those options. Lt. Woods demonstrated various options for bicycle riders. Those included a headlight on the bike which emitted a flashing or solid light up to 300 feet which would be more effective than spoke reflectors. Another option was a light emitting device which emitted a light instead of reflecting light. A rear reflector and or a light emitting tail light were required by the Transportation Code. The least expensive option was a leg strap which reflected light. There was 3M tape material which was available by the foot which was reflective. Studies showed motorists responded more to a light rather than shape or form. Staff was suggesting that rather than the proposed wording, the ordinance be revised to allow for all of the options shown which might be more effective. The problem with reflectors was that they did not last long and when riding off road, did not stay in place. Mayor Burroughs asked if there would be a problem with enforcement if there was too much flexibility in the ordinance. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 2 Stephanie Berry, Prosecutor, stated that there would be no problem with alternative options in the ordinance and if a cyclist had any of those options, he would be in compliance. The biggest concern was that the riders were safe. White indicated that the most important features were the headlights in the front and the reflector in the rear. Council Member King stated that as the provisions were already in State law, what benefit was it for the City to pass provisions. Berry felt that there would be education for the cyclist and create a higher level of safety. The City could follow the State law if desired and not include the extra provisions. Council Member Roden asked about the range of prices for the options. Woods stated that they would range from a few dollars for the leg reflectors to approximately $35 for the headlights and rear lights. Woods stated that the pedestrian/bike plan created an environment where cycling would be safer in the City. This was a chance to upgrade that in the City and provide education for motorists. Council Member King indicated a concern about such an ordinance being truly effective as the only applicability would be a ticket. White stated that if an individual received a ticket but purchased a side reflector or other device, he would not have to pay the ticket. Council Member Gregory stated that if motorists had to have a higher level of duty to keep a safe distance from a bicyclist, then a bicyclist had to have a duty to alert a motorist he was there. The original ordinance was suggested with side reflectors as those came with the bike. He felt the more visibility there was the safer it was for the cyclist. He was in favor of reworking the ordinance to include the additional options. Council Member Roden suggested having the Bike Advisory Committee consider the proposal and report back to Council before consideration. Woods stated that he felt he could speak for everyone on the Committee that they would agree with the options. Council Member Engelbrecht asked why there was no requirement for a light on the back of the bicycle. White stated that State law required the headlight and a rear reflector or light. The Council could make a rear light requirement but it would be more expensive for the cyclists. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 3 Consensus of the Council was to revise the ordinance to include the options and forward the proposal to the focus group for consideration. It then would be returned to Council for consideration. 4.Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the Phase II amendments of the City's Gas Well Ordinance; and receive a report on activities germane to the City's Gas Well Inspections. Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, stated he would be providing information on Phase I amendments, potential Phase II amendments and a gas well inspections update with an administrative fee collection update. Phase I amendments included (1) revised existing gas well fees based on cost-of-service and added several new fees, (2) increased minimum separation requirements, (3) reduced expiration timeframe of gas well permits from 12 months to 6 months, (4) required screening, (5) established noise mitigation measures, (6) reduced expiration timeframe of gas well plats from 2 years to 1 year, (7) established an 8 foot storage tank height limitation, (8) restricted fracing and flaring activities to day light hours only except for emergencies, (9) required gas well development plats in the ETJ Division I, (10) required gas well development site plans within the city limits, and (11) required a specific use permit for all compressor stations. Ordinance 2010- 196 approved August 14, 2010 added (12) language to the definition of drilling and production area, (13) added language to allow gas well drilling and production by right for property within the City that was unzoned but were subject to the Rural Residential 5 use regulations, (14) amended language to provide applicability of gas well ordinance within a Planned Development and Master Planned Community district, (15) provided delineation between the issuance of permits by the City and the Texas Rail Road Commission, (16) added language to address issues of legal non-conformity, (17) revised language to add clarity regarding separation standards, and (18) revised language to clarify when screening was required. The following items were identified as potential Phase II issues during the Phase I process: (1) vapor recovery/air quality monitoring, (2) environmentally friendly completion, (3) freshwater well pollution, (4) prohibition of city water for fracing, (5) the use of recycled water only during fracing, (6) development of a permitting process for seismic testing and addressing the use of explosives in this testing, (7) chemical-free fracing, (8) prohibition against gas well flaring and (9) the use of closed loop systems only. In April 2011, the Gas Well Inspections Division was created. The Division consists of 4 full- time staff, implements the gas well drilling and production ordinance, and was in the process of mapping all wells within the city and Division I ETJ. The Gas Well Inspections Division served as a one-stop shop for the permitting, regulating, inspecting, and investigating of gas drilling and production facilities. It was a point of contact to the public and served as technical experts for city board and commissions, the Council, other staff and citizens. Cunningham continued with information on the Gas Well Task Force and the members of staff th and citizen representation. A public meeting was held on August 25 with comment cards given to citizens in order to receive their input. He also presented information on the Denton Stakeholders Drilling Advisory Group (DAG). That group had held a series of meetings to address gas drilling and production concerns that should be considered during the Phase II City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 4 rewrite. City staff met with Dr. Briggle, a member of DAG, to share and discuss information and core principles that should be considered during the Phase II draft. DAG developed a set of guiding principles that included setting priorities, making principled decisions, using precaution, internalizing costs, mandating best practices and taking timely action. The next citizen meeting was scheduled for first week of December. He reviewed the information on the Phase II Action Plan and indicated that staff would like to have the ordinance ready for Council consideration by spring of next year. Mayor Burroughs felt that the process was doing what it was intended to do. He suggested that when the draft was being prepared suggestions for alternate possible provisions to accomplish the same end be included. Show what would be suggested and alternatives that might be included with comments as to why the main provisions were suggested. Those could be sent to DAG for comments and be posted on the web for feedback. Another suggestion was to send them out to stakeholders who were not directly participating in the process such as drilling companies. Council would have the finalized proposal but still see alternates with comments. Council Member Roden asked if there would be any provision for looking at various issues from Phase I. Cunningham stated yes that staff wanted time to implement Phase I to see what worked and what did not in the ordinance. They were in the process of developing those items for consideration. Council Member Roden asked if the task force had regularly scheduled meetings or if they met when needed. Cunningham stated that they met when needed. Council Member Roden asked if the meetings were open to public with minutes. th Cunningham stated that minutes were not done except for the August 25 meeting. Those minutes were posted on website. The task force meetings were internal meeting with minutes not done. Council Member Roden stated that as the process moved forward towards a specific ordinance, he would like to see the meetings open to the public for observation by the citizens. Council Member Gregory asked if any unpermitted wells had been found during the inventory of the wells. Cunningham stated yes. Council Member Gregory stated that he would like to have more information on pipeline routes and any influence the City might have over those. He felt that this was a balancing act to do the process well but also to do it as quickly as possible. Council Member Roden suggested a council luncheon with representations of DAG and the citizen task force. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 5 Council Member Engelbrecht stated that he wanted to see the task force organized and move forward with their own process. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp agreed that this needed to be citizen driven and the task force present information to Council. Council Member Roden clarified his suggestion to be a presentation from the task force to Council rather than a presentation from the task force to staff and then to Council. Mayor Burroughs stated that he would not be in favor of having such a meeting before the issue was fully vetted by the task force. He would rather have the issue fully vetted before coming before Council. Gas Well Inspection Update Darren Groth, Gas Well Administrator, stated that initial Railroad Commission records had 332 gas wells and 1 oil well in Denton corporate limits. However, the City was currently limited to inspect only those wells that were in the City limits and the Division I ETJ. The Gas Well Division had inspected each facility and to date, verified the existence of 257 active wells within the City and 174 active wells within the City's Division I ETJ. Prior to August 4, 2010 (the effective date of Ordinance 2010-196) the City issued 186 gas well permits. Since August 4th, 21 drilling permits had been issued for new wells, 18 wells had been drilled, 1 well was currently being drilled and 2 wells were pending a spud date. All the associated plats for the above permits were issued prior to the August 4th effective date of the Phase I amendments. Annual Inspection Fee Collection – the City sent fee invoices to all gas well operators with wells identified from the Railroad Commission data within the City and Division I ETJ. The total amount of the invoices was $165,700. As of November 14th, only $60,475 in payments had been received. Staff would continue to monitor collections and if substantial payments were not received in the near future, would consider what actions to take to receive payment. Council Member Gregory asked about the differences in the amount of invoices. Cunningham stated that during this year staff was only invoicing for one inspection and next year it would be for two inspections. Council Member Gregory asked if the Division had discovered wells not permitted by the Railroad Commission or by the City. Groth stated that there were wells with no City permit but that they predated the City regulations and that there were no wells without a Railroad Commission permit. Council Member Gregory asked how often an active drilling site was inspected. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 6 Groth stated that it could happen as much as every other day as currently there were only three active wells. They also received notices from operators when they were going to do something with the well. Council Member Gregory asked if a well site with no active drilling knew when they were coming to inspect. Groth stated that sometimes they knew staff was doing an additional inspection instead of their regularly scheduled inspections. The inspectors could do random inspections at any time. The annual inspections were scheduled and known to the operator. Council Member Gregory asked how inspections were done with gated and fenced sites. Groth stated that the inspectors were given permission to enter the site or had a key or gate code. Some locations wanted to be there when they were inspected and had requested to be informed when an inspection was going to be done. Council Member Roden requested a report on the history of violations discovered since the start of the Division and the response to those violations. Following the completion of the Work Session, the Council convened in a Closed Session to discuss the following: 1. Closed Meeting: A. Deliberations regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.086; Consultation with Attorneys - Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.071; Deliberations regarding Real Property - Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.072. 1.Receive a briefing from staff, discuss and deliberate regarding public power competitive and financial matters regarding the Denton Municipal Electric Northeast Denton Transmission Line Re-Build Project in the City of Denton, Texas; consult with the City's attorneys regarding legal issues involved in the said Project, where 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; and discuss, deliberate and receive information from Staff and provide Staff with direction regarding the acquisition or condemnation of tracts involved in the Denton Municipal Electric Northeast Denton Transmission Line Re-Build Project. B. Consultation with Attorneys - Under Texas Government Code, Sec. 551.071. 1.Receive a briefing and a presentation from the City's attorneys and staff regarding a spill incident at the Lake Ray Roberts Water Treatment Plant facility, along with possible regulatory consequences; and discuss, City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 7 deliberate and provide the City's attorneys with direction and any recommendations regarding such legal matter. A public discussion of this legal matter 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.Consult with and provide direction to City's attorneys regarding legal issues and strategies associated with Phase I and proposed Phase II Gas Well Ordinance regulation of gas well drilling and production within the City Limits and the extraterritorial jurisdiction, including Constitutional limitations, statutory limitations upon municipal regulatory authority and statutory preemption of municipal regulatory authority. 3.Consult with and provide direction to the City's attorneys associated with proposed enforcement related to sanitary sewer overflows and where a public discussion of such legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City's attorneys to the City of Denton, Texas and the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. C. 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 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 to Project NEOS, a parts assembly company. This discussion shall include commercial and financial information the City Council has received from Project NEOS 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. The City Council convened in a Regular Session at 6:40 p.m. in the Council Chambers. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U. S. and Texas flags. 2. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamations/Awards City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 8 There were no proclamations/awards for this meeting. 3. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. B. Receive citizen reports from the following: 1. Gricelda Samano regarding outside food vendors. Ms. Samano presented information on a business she recently started on E. McKinney Street. She started an outside business with her tacos and had pulled temporary permits for an outside food vendor but had used up all her permits for the year. She asked Council to make an amendment to the ordinance in order to be able to operate her outside food business. She wanted her business grandfathered in order to stay in business. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Burroughs indicated that any motion to approve the Consent Agenda should include the amended agreements for Consent Items H and I. Council Member King motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and accompanying ordinances and resolutions with the amended ordinances for Items H and I. On roll call vote Council Member King “aye”, Council Member Watts “aye”, Council Member Gregory “aye”, Council Member Engelbrecht “aye”, Council Member Roden “aye”, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp “aye” and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. R2011-041 A. Consider approval of a resolution revising Administrative Policy No. 403.07 "Debt Service Management" and providing for an effective date. The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3-0). Resolution No. R2011-042 B. Consider approval of a resolution reviewing and adopting revisions to the Investment Policy regarding funds for the City of Denton; and providing an effective date. The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3-0). Ordinance No. 2011-226 C. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas to declare the intent to reimburse expenditures from the Technology Services Fund with Certificates of Obligation with an aggregate maximum principal amount equal to $215,000 to allow the Fire Department and Police Department to purchase thirty-eight mobile data computers, and providing an effective date. Ordinance No. 2011-227 D. Consider adoption of an ordinance awarding a contract for the purchase of eighteen City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 9 Mobile Data Computers (MDCs) for the City of Denton Fire Department and twenty Mobile Data Computers for the City of Denton Police Department as awarded by the State of Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) through the Go Direct Program, Contract Number DIR-SDD-1365; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4741-Purchase of Thirty-Eight Toughbook Mobile Data Computers awarded to John Wright Associates, Inc. in the amount of $211,112.70). Ordinance No, 2011-228 E. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting sealed proposals and awarding an "Agreement for Collection Services [Part D: Municipal Court Fines]" by and between the City of Denton, Texas and Linebarger, Goggan, Blair, and Sampson, LLP, a corporation; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor and providing an effective date (RFP 4633-Agreement for Collection Services awarded to Linebarger, Goggan, Blair, and Sampson, LLP a corporation in an amount which is contingent upon its monetary recoveries from persons, in accordance with the percentages expressed in its price proposal which is on file with the City of Denton Purchasing Department). The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3-0). Ordinance No. 2011-229 F. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting sealed proposals and awarding an "Agreement for Collection Services [Parts A-C: Utility, EMS, Code Enforcement, Returned and Miscellaneous Items]" by and between the City of Denton, Texas and Credit Systems International, Inc., a corporation; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor and providing an effective date (RFP 4633-Agreement for Collection Services awarded to Credit Systems International. Inc., a corporation in an amount which is contingent upon its monetary recoveries from persons, in accordance with the percentages expressed in its price proposal which is on file with the City of Denton Purchasing Department). The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3-0). Ordinance No. 2011-230 G. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with MarketSphere Consulting, LLC to perform a JD Edwards (JDE) Software Application Upgrade from Version 8.11 to 9.X; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (RFP 4762-JD Edwards 9.X Upgrade Services for the City of Denton awarded to MarketSphere Consulting, LLC in the amount of $295,500.00). The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3-0). Ordinance No. 2011-231 H. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement (ICA) between the City of Denton and Denton County, Texas, in the amount of $100,000.00; $50,000 being payable by Denton County, Texas and up to $50,000 being payable by the City of Denton, related to the engineering and construction of certain bicycle roadway accommodations within the street or roadways within the municipal City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 10 limits of the City and Denton County Commissioner Precinct No. 1, authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Denton; authorizing the expenditure of funds; and declaring an effective date. Ordinance No. 2011-232 I. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement (ICA) between the City of Denton and Denton County, Texas, in the amount of $100,000.00; $50,000 being payable by Denton County, Texas and up to $50,000 being payable by the City of Denton, related to the engineering and construction of certain bicycle roadway accommodations within the street or roadways within the municipal limits of the City and Denton County Commissioner Precinct No. 4, authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Denton; authorizing the expenditure of funds; and declaring an effective date. Ordinance No. 2011-233 J. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending Chapter 18 of the Code of Ordinances by modifying the speed zone on Loop 288 in Section 18-73; altering the prima facie speed limits established for vehicles under the provision of Transportation Code, Section 545.356, providing a penalty not to exceed $200.00 unless the violation occurs in a work zone and then the penalty shall not exceed $400.00; providing a severability clause; providing a repealing clause; providing for publication; and declaring an effective date. Ordinance No. 2011-234 K. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the first amendment of an agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Protect Environmental Services, Inc. and the expenditure of funds pursuant to Section 252.022(A)(1) and (2) of the Texas Local Government Code in the interest of preservation of property and health and safety, which purchases are exempt from the requirements of competitive bidding, and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board will consider this item on November 14, 2011. Approved the minutes listed below. L. Consider approval of the minutes of: October 3, 2011 October 4, 2011 October 11, 2011 October 17, 2011 October 18, 2011 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ordinance No. 2011-235 A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending Subchapter 4 of the Denton Development Code by adding Section 35.4.4.3 entitled "Governmental Entity Development Review Process," providing a severability clause; and declaring an effective date. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 11 (DCA10-0011) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5- 0). Brian Lockley, Development Review Administrator, indicated that this request was to amend Subchapter 4 of the Denton Development Code by adding a governmental entity development review process. He reviewed the current process and proposed process. The current process was a more linear process while the proposed process was a more three pronged approach. It allowed governmental entities to submit applications concurrently so there was less lag time in the process. The governmental entities eligible for this review process had to have the power to tax real and tangible personal property, limited geographical and jurisdictional boundaries, locally elected or locally appointed governing members, and the authority to provide a general public service or benefit. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approved of the proposed code amendment. Council Member Watts asked if savings of benefits of this proposal had been identified. Lockley stated that one benefit was an understanding of the nature of governmental entities as opposed to private enterprise in the development process. Council Member Watts questioned that all of the criteria had to be met in order to qualify for this process. Lockley replied correct. Council Member Gregory asked if a mobility review suggested one thing and a land use review suggested something different that contradicted each other, how would that be solved. Lockley stated that the Development Review Committee would solve those situations and comments before meeting with the applicant. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Bob Clifton spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Watts motioned, Council Member King seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King “aye”, Council Member Watts “aye”, Council Member Gregory “aye”, Council Member Engelbrecht “aye”, Council Member Roden “aye”, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp “aye” and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. R2011-043 B. Hold a second public hearing and consider recommendations regarding the preferred alignment of the Denton Municipal Electric Northeast Denton Transmission Line Re-Build Project; and consider a resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas regarding establishment of the route of the Denton Municipal Electric Northeast Denton Transmission Line Re-Build Project; and providing an effective date. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 12 Phil Williams, General Manager-DME, stated that this was the second public hearing on the route for the transmission line rebuild. The project went from the Woodrow Substation to the Kings Row Substation to the Denton North Substation. It was an important project because the service load had increased in the City and the need was for a greater line for the load. Due to the change in requirement for easements from 30 feet to 75 feet there was a need to find a better route than the existing one through neighborhoods. Galvanized steel poles would be replacing the wood poles. He reviewed the preferred route which was being called the “purple” route. The “yellow” portion of the route would go from the new Kings Row Substation to the Denton North Substation following the current route on Hercules. Route evaluation factors included impact on homeowners, cost of easements, transmission line constructions cost and distribution line construction costs. The purple route was the preferred route as it directly impacted the least number of homeowners and had the least amount of cost. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke during the public hearing: Jill Haerley, 2610 Royal Acres, Denton, 76209-opposed to yellow route of the proposal Kathleen Davis, 2620 Picadilly, Denton, 76209-opposed to yellow route of the proposal Sam Alexander, 3219 McReynolds, Sanger, 76266 -opposed Johnny Davis, 2620 Picadilly, Denton, 76209-opposed to yellow route of the proposal Paul Smith, 2608 Buckingham, Denton, 76209-opposed to yellow route of the proposal Zack Pannell, 2609 Picadilly, Denton, 76209-opposed to yellow route of the e proposal Comment cards were received in opposition to the yellow route from the following: Bob and Jennie Spence, 2605 Huntington, Denton, 76209 Don and Norma Muller, 2601 Sheraton, Denton, 76209 Elizabeth and James Fagan, 3304 Woodthrush, Denton, 76209 Lloyd Darnell, 2625 Picadilly, Denton, 76209 Shepora and David Baldwin, 105 Meadow Lane, Denton, 76207 Youngae and Tag G. Kim, 2604 Buckingham, Denton, 76209 John Iverson, 804 Sandpiper, Denton, 76205 Additional speaker comments were received from: David Zoltner, 3501 Timber Trail, Denton - opposed Ms. Abernathy, 2600 Timber Trail, Denton - opposed to yellow route Deanna Padgett, 2609 Sheraton Road, Denton-opposed to yellow route Christine Watson-supporting individuals in opposition to yellow route Bob Clifton - opposed Hatice Salih, 300 Northridge, Denton, 76201 – opposed The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Gregory asked about the difference in cost estimates for yellow route. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 13 Williams stated that staff looked at the route next to Loop 288. If the route stayed inside of Loop 288 it would be between TxDOT right-of-way so there was no right-of-way to purchase in that area. Staying outside the Loop would require buying new easements along the route as opposed to already having easements. By moving the transmission lines that much further away they were looking at redoing the distribution system and not sharing a pole in the area. Using the current route would maintain the distribution system as well as the transmission system. Otherwise there would be a double set of poles for transmission and distribution. Council Member Gregory asked about the conflict between the easements for transmission and the water line. Williams stated that it was not impossible to put it along that side and could overlap some but most of it would have to be further back to avoid drilling holes in the water lines. Council Member Gregory stated that notices were sent out about the public meetings regarding the red and purple lines and asked if that included the yellow line. Williams stated that those neighborhoods also received notices. Council Member Gregory stated that postcards were sent in addition to automatic calls and asked if that included the yellow line. Williams stated that the first notices spoke of whole route. Council Member Roden asked why the whole route was not one color and why the yellow route was different. Williams stated it was done that way for planning purposes to keep the routes separated into different projects. Council Member Roden asked why this route had no alternatives discussed. Williams stated that there appeared to not be as much discussion at the public hearings about this route. Council Member Roden asked if it were possible to approve a portion of the route, the purple route, and delay approval of the yellow route until alternatives were discussed. City Attorney Burgess stated that it would be possible but she did not know what that would do operationally to DME. Williams stated that the purple route could be started and then review the yellow route at a later date. Council Member Watts felt that there was a need to look at the yellow route. At the last meeting the yellow route was discussed but there was not as much citizen concern expressed. He was not sure he wanted to put the project into two separate considerations. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 14 Williams stated that it would be better to approve the purple route and substation site so the project could get could get started and then return for the yellow route. Council Member Watts asked about postponing the yellow route at this point in time and look at the Loop 288 route for costs. Paul Williamson, Real Estate Agent, described the process for acquiring easements. A firm would be hired for the overall project which would follow state law procedures. The appraisal process would go through a normal market study for commercial and residential sales and offers would be made for easements. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that the City owned right-of-way along Loop 288 but an easement for a water line was in that area. Due to that water line, the easement may not be wide enough for a power line and would require the need to purchase additional right-of-way. Williamson stated that there was a 20 inch water line in that area with a 20 foot utility easement. On the opposite side there was a 25 foot wide public utility easement with a larger water line in that area. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that he was in favor of splitting the decision and asking staff to prepare a report with regard to other locations for the yellow route. Council Member Gregory suggested an amendment to the ordinance to approve the portion of the proposed DME line referred to as the purple route and the relocation of the Kings Row Substation. Section 1 of the ordinance would need to be edited. City Attorney Burgess read the proposed wording for Section One and suggested if Council wanted to adopt the ordinance to direct Legal to correct the location map in accordance with the wording. Council Member Gregory motioned, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp seconded to adopt the portion of the ordinance for the new Denton electrical transmission line referred to as the purple route along with the location of the proposed Kings Row Substation and directed the City Attorney to change the exhibit with the substation as previously shown. On roll call vote, Council Member King “aye”, Council Member Watts “aye”, Council Member Gregory “aye”, Council Member Engelbrecht “aye”, Council Member Roden “aye”, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp “aye” and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. 6. CONCLUDING ITEMS A. 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 regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen; a City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 2011 Page 15 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 King requested a work session on the sign ordinance dealing with an exception for churches and non-profits for scrolling signs. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp suggested looking at food ordinance amendment to allow for situations similar to the one presented during the Citizen Report. Council Member Roden also suggested that report. Council Member Engelbrecht asked for a discussion on off-site advertising for scrolling signs. B. 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. C. Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. There was no official action on Closed Meeting items. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. ____________________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ____________________________________ JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS