Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fire Station topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears plan for Hunter Ranch fire station; majority signal support for permanent build
Summary
Denton Fire Chief Kenneth Hedges urged the council to fund a permanent fire station in the southwest Hunter Ranch/Robeson Ranch area to preserve response times and the city’s ISO‑1 rating; staff requested $800,000 to begin design while noting a temporary modular setup would cost about $1.2 million.
Denton Fire Chief Kenneth Hedges presented the council with two options to restore and improve emergency coverage in the southwest part of the city, where a developer‑conveyed three‑acre site in Hunter Ranch is now available. Hedges said the city currently operates under an interlocal agreement and that the proposed Station 10 would improve travel‑time coverage for Robeson Ranch and nearby subdivisions.
"We are currently operating underneath the ILA within county emergency services district number 1," Hedges said, stressing that the ILA’s end would leave portions of the corridor without timely coverage. He told council that a temporary modular station setup would have a setup cost of about $1,200,000 while a permanent station carries a multi‑million dollar capital cost, and that Hillwood is conveying land and promising $5,000,000 in public‑safety reimbursement under the development agreement.
The discussion turned to financing. Matt Hamilton, the city’s chief financial officer, told council that phase‑one property tax revenue tied to the development is expected in December 2027 and that, if the city issues bonds for a permanent station, annual debt service would be roughly $900,000 to $950,000 over a 20‑year term. "We would anticipate 2.3 to 2,500,000 from this 1st phase, and we anticipate that revenue to come in, in December 2027," Hamilton said, and added that staff believes $800,000 for design could be shifted from an existing service‑center project.
Councilors debated timing and tradeoffs between taking on debt now versus using a temporary station and building later. Several members — including the council member representing District 6 — argued that a permanent station is fiscally and operationally preferable to paying repeated temporary‑site costs. Other councilors voiced concerns about adding debt and urged careful budget prioritization. The meeting record shows a majority of councilors signaled direction in favor of the permanent option and starting design work, but no formal ordinance or bond issuance occurred during this meeting.
The council asked staff to return with refined cost details, tax‑rate implications, and options to preserve the city’s fiscal flexibility while meeting public‑safety needs. Staff also flagged that improved roadway connectivity and future phases of development could change the revenue‑to‑debt ratio over time.
The council moved on to other agenda items without a final vote to issue bonds or appropriate construction funds; staff were directed to prepare next steps.
