Is Denton "Anti-Business?"

before the May 2001 election

after the May 2001 election

Is Denton “Anti-Business?”

During my tenure in Denton, several of the signs like the one shown above appeared throughout the city. Some developers and business owners became angry at what they perceived as a no-growth, anti-business attitude on the part of Denton’s elected officials as well as its staff.

Of course, the "anti-business" signs were political rhetoric. Only a moron would actually believe that the council, city staff and the planning and zoning commission would spend their days sitting around tables trying to conspire new ways to reduce the city’s tax base and quality of life by driving away as many businesses, services and employers as possible. The "anti-business" rhetoric actually came from a perception that a cumbersome development process and a tendency by council to micro-manage development created an environment that discouraged existing businesses from expanding and new businesses from locating in Denton.

I personally never thought that Denton was (or still is, for that matter) a particularly tough place to do business. Indeed, the city saw plenty of commercial development and redevelopment during the three years I was there. Foley’s imoved in to the space at Golden Triangle Mall left vacant by Montgomery Ward’s dissolution. A national travel agency located a call center in Denton. New medical offices were built along Colorado Boulevard; new automobile dealerships were built along I-35E. Denton businesses and industries such as Sirius Enterprises, Trinity Industries, Morrison's Milling, Tetra-Pak, and James Wood Autopark completed major expansions. Northstar Bank recently opened its 25,000 square foot building on Carroll north of downtown. Kroger expanded its store at University and Carroll, CVS/Pharmacy built a sttore at the corner of Teasley and Lillian Miller, new retail space was recently completed next to the Wal-Mart on Loop 288, and a new hotel and restaurant development was recently completed on I-35 near Denton Regional Medical Center. FEMA recently moved into their new office complex and call center just off Loop 288. A new motel was recently finished at the corner of I-35 and University. A bed and breakfast on Lillian Miller recently opened for business. Within the last couple of years Enterprise Rent-a-Car, Texadelphia and Frilly's cajun restaurant (their gumbo is pretty damned good) occupied vacant buildings along University Drive. An aquatic toxicology laboratory was built on Bonnie Brae. New offices were built on North Elm and new retail development continues to go up around the Golden Triangle Mall area. The historic downtown square area is as vibrant as it’s ever been.

However, one's perception is generally one's reality. And, as the results of the council elections held on May 5, 2001 indicated, there indeed was a perception that Denton was anti-business. Four individuals who ran on a "pro-business" platform critical of the existing council were elected to Denton city council. One of the members won a council seat that that was open due to term limits. The other three challangers ousted the three incumbents whose names are listed on the sign shown in the picture above; these three councilmembers were particularly targeted by the business community as being unsympathetic to their needs.

The political rhetoric of the 2001 election was particularly polarized, as a perusal of the political ads and editoral pages in the Denton Record-Chronicle showed. The incumbents, who ran on a "pro-neighborhood" platform, were accused of being "anti-business." In return, the challengers who considered themselves "pro-business" were labelled as "anti-neighborhood." A distinct rift between the residential and commercial interests of the city made itself evident, and there really was very little middle ground.

There was some concern following the election that Denton went from a council that wanted too much control over development to one that wouldn't control development enough. Of specific concern to city staff was the fate of the draft development code, which many local business interests had specifically targeted and a couple of newly-elected councilmemers even suggested eliminating. That was an especially ironic stance, considering that the zoning code in place at the time, which dated back to 1969, was probably more unfriendly to business than the draft code that sought to replace it. While the 1969 code was antiquated, inflexible and byzantine, the new development code provided for a greater mix of uses, reduced parking requirements, and streamlined much of the building process (site plans that had to go to council for review under the old code, for example, would be reviewed and approved at the staff level, and the city's cumbersome and outdated "Planned Development" zoning process would be eliminated).

The new code dcontained site design requirements, such as landscaping and architectural guidelines, that many business owners would have probably prefered not to comply with. However, the new design standards were created because too many developers in Denton appeared perfectly satisfied to line the city's streets with ugly metal buildings containing no green space, insufficient parking and inadequate connections to local utilities, all in the name of making as high a profit as possible. If the desire to do away with these poor land uses and mandate thoughtful, appealing design was construed as “anti-business” by some people, than so be it. The citizens of Denton indicated what they would like new development to look like through a well-publicized visual quality servey conducted early in the code rewriting process; more and more people were demanding quality, aestheticly pleasing development in Denton.

After extensive revision, The Denton Development Code was approved by a 4-3 vote of council in February of 2002. It codified and implement the strategies of The Denton Plan, which was approved by the "old" council in December 1999. The process of adopting The Denton Plan and preparing, revising and adopting the development code occurred while I worked for the city. At times the process was fascinating, and at times it was frustrating.

Ironically, in May of 2002 the pendulum shifted back the other way, as the city's mayor defeated a challenger supported by the "pro-business" community and a candidate who ran on a "pro-neighborhood" platform defeated a staunch ally of the business community for a race for an open at-large council seat. Many people saw this election as a referendum on the development code that council had just adopted. Clearly, citizens supported the new direction Denton was taking in terms of growth and development.

As I mentioned above, the recent election clearly showed that there is a rift between residential and commercial interests in Denton.

As is the case with just about any growing city whose identity is undergoing transformation, there is a lot of disagreement as to how the city should grow and what the city should strive to be. Simply put, as the urbanization of the metroplex inexorably moves northward, Denton faces a crossroads. Longtime residents who remember the city as a farming and university hub are reluctant to see the city change, and newer residents who were attracted by Denton's small town atmosphere don't want to see that environment lost; in fact, one of the most constant protests against new growth I heard was the phrase "I moved to Denton to get away from this stuff." A lot of residents, old as well as new, bristle at the thought of Denton being part of the "Metroplex." On the other side of the equation is the business and development community, who want to capitalize on the northward growth of the Metroplex by bringing as many nw residents and as much new business to the city as possible.

Opinions abound as how Denton should grow. Some people would probably like to see Denton become an upper-class bedroom community for the Dallas-Fort Worth area, like Highland Village or Flower Mound. Others would like to see Denton become a dynamic satellite city of the Metroplex, complete with industries and corporate headquarters, like Lewisville or Plano. Still others would prefer that Denton not grow at all; they want to see the city remain the rural county seat / agricultural hub / university town that it once was.

The simple fact of the matter, however, is that growth is inevitable. It seems that too many people want to have their cake and eat it too; people move to Denton because they want to get away from the "big city" while at the same time still being close enough to enjoy the conveniences and attractions of the same "big city," and then they get upset when the "big city" reaches Denton in the form of new development and growth. Such expectations are, in my opinion, unrealistic. This city is going to become bigger, like it or not, and we can either plan for this growth or we can stick our heads in the sand and let the growth overwhelm us in a way that everyone's quality of life is reduced. This is why The Denton Plan and the development code were created and adopted.

Another point of concern regards Denton's relationships with its two universities. It seems like a lot of people are beginning to underestimate the importance of TWU and UNT to the city. It never ceases to amaze me, for example, that people can buy homes in a two-college town such as Denton and then become so shocked and outraged whan a student-oriented apartment complex is planned for the vacant lot close to their neighborhood.

When I attended a day-long workshop regarding the new code several years ago, I discovered that a lot of citizens didn't see the need for new student housing or specialized development guidelines for the area around the UNT campus; they felt that UNT's enrollment would actually decrease as new satellite campuses, such as UNT's south Dallas facilities, came on line. Of course, if you've been following the speeches of UNT president Norval Pohl, you would know that nothing is further from the truth. Enrollment at the Denton campus will not be shrinking; in fact, it will be growing dramatically over the next couple of decades and Denton currently does not have the infrastructure, resources or housing stock to accomodate these new students. The university prepared for this growth by recently purchasing the long-vacant Texas Instruments plant on the north side of town, and Dr. Pohl has even suggested that the main campus will have an enrollment of 45,000 students by 2015! I've also heard some people say that Denton should not plan for students because they aren't "real" citizens of Denton; they simply go to school for four or five years and leave. This of course, ignores the fact that, while they are in Denton, UNT and TWU students use city services such as police, fire and roads and pay for such services through sales taxes and, by way of rent, property taxes. Students are an important component of Denton's population and any attempt to ignore them is just plain stupid.

Another point to consider is the effect new growth has on the city's relationships with its two universities. Newer residents to the city, for example, are less likely to appreciate the importance of UNT and TWU to the city.

There is reason for hope. Mayor Euline Brock is a big-time UNT supporter and councilmember Perry McNeill is a professor at UNT. However, the city's administration and the administrations of both UNT and TWU need to work together to make sure that everybody's future needs are accomodated.

Another concern is housing in Denton. As this city grows, affordable housing is in short supply.

The city reports offered by homefair.com provide some interesting demographic information about Denton. For example, Denton's median household income is $28,760, which is lower than average but shouldn't be surprising considering the number of students in the city. But, the average price of a three-bedroom home in Denton is an amazing $145,122 (the Denton Record-Chronicle reports the median cost for all homes in Denton to be $102,310 ). The average apartment rent in Denton, according to the Denton Record-Chronicle, is $530 a month for a one-bedroom unit, $648 a month for a two-bedroom unit, and $850/month for a three-bedroom unit). Denton's high housing costs, in fact, are a major reason why its cost of living index as reported by homefair.com, 96.44, is just below the national average but above the statewide average. Compare these numbers to another city in Texas, for example Houston. Houston's median household income is $34,198, and its median price for a three-bedroom home is $99,800. The cost of living index in Houston is 86.89, according to homefair.com.

Now, one could argue that Houston has lower housing costs than Denton because Houston has a much larger and much older housing stock. This is correct. However, it doesn't address the fact that housing costs in Denton are still above the statewide average.

Critics of the pre-2001 city council have argued that their housing policies were elitist, and I can't help but believe that this was the case. At least one of the councilmembers turned out of office in 2001 seemed to be relentlessly opposed to residential development at densities greater than 3 units per acre, regardless of the context. There are problems associated with density; with higher densities come problems such as crime and congestion. However, there are also problems associated with maintaining lower residential densities by encouraging as many 3,000 square foot homes on 15,000 square foot lots as possible. These nice homes might help the tax base by holding higher appraisal values, but they are also less efficient in terms of infrastructure cost and tilt the housing stock away from affordability.

The new development code sought to balance out the issues of higher densities by requiring a quality of design that the old code did not mandate. Higher single family home densities (i.e. above 3 units to gross acre) are required to have brick, front porches, architectural articulation and no garages facing the street. Multifamily dwellings are encouraged to have design standards so that they hold their value. Open space is also a must. In certain parts of town, multifamily housing is only permitted if part of a mixed-use development; i.e. businesses on the ground floor and housing on the upper floors. This would encourage pedestrian activity and create an "urban" atmosphere.