WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.299
>> If anyone has any questions regarding the plots on the

00:00:02.299 --> 00:00:04.799
consent agenda, we'd be more than happy to address those.

00:00:04.799 --> 00:00:06.519
I think they're relatively straightforward.

00:00:08.519 --> 00:00:09.019
Maybe not.

00:00:10.240 --> 00:00:10.839
Go ahead.

00:00:10.839 --> 00:00:11.640
>> Commissioner Bruegel.

00:00:11.640 --> 00:00:12.160
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:00:12.160 --> 00:00:15.320
I just was hoping, Mike, could you run us through the

00:00:15.320 --> 00:00:17.640
timeline of the item C,

00:00:17.640 --> 00:00:21.100
the final plot of block A of the Hickory Creek Shopping

00:00:21.100 --> 00:00:21.920
Center?

00:00:21.920 --> 00:00:23.839
I was just a little confused about that timeline as well.

00:00:23.839 --> 00:00:28.859
>> Right, okay, so two meetings ago, we had the conveyance

00:00:28.859 --> 00:00:29.320
plot.

00:00:29.320 --> 00:00:31.370
>> Yes. >> Which broke up the Hickory Creek Center into

00:00:31.370 --> 00:00:32.840
five lots.

00:00:32.840 --> 00:00:35.799
And the last meeting, we had the preliminary plot of lot

00:00:35.799 --> 00:00:37.200
four and lot eight.

00:00:37.200 --> 00:00:39.640
And this is the final plot of just lot eight.

00:00:39.640 --> 00:00:41.240
So all they want to build on is lot eight.

00:00:41.240 --> 00:00:42.159
>> Perfect, thank you.

00:00:42.159 --> 00:00:43.750
And I had missed the last meeting, so that would make sense

00:00:43.750 --> 00:00:43.920
.

00:00:43.920 --> 00:00:44.600
Okay, thank you.

00:00:46.039 --> 00:00:46.799
>> Commissioner Beck.

00:00:46.799 --> 00:00:52.350
>> Yes, also, I guess I wasn't on the PNZ when this Recur

00:00:52.350 --> 00:00:54.000
rier States was approved.

00:00:54.000 --> 00:00:56.979
Can you just give me a quick, what the heck's going on here

00:00:56.979 --> 00:00:57.240
?

00:00:58.920 --> 00:01:00.520
Which item?

00:01:00.520 --> 00:01:01.520
>> Item E on.

00:01:01.520 --> 00:01:04.840
>> Oh, the Recurrier States.

00:01:04.840 --> 00:01:06.200
This is a property in the ETJ.

00:01:07.319 --> 00:01:08.200
They have two lots.

00:01:08.200 --> 00:01:10.909
Typically, you don't only see those because they're minor

00:01:10.909 --> 00:01:12.760
plots of staff approval.

00:01:12.760 --> 00:01:14.680
But in this case, they have one lot that doesn't have any

00:01:14.680 --> 00:01:16.040
furniture on a public road.

00:01:16.040 --> 00:01:18.140
And per the local government code, that has to go to

00:01:18.140 --> 00:01:19.280
Planning and Zoning Commission.

00:01:19.280 --> 00:01:21.079
It can't be approved by staff.

00:01:21.079 --> 00:01:22.040
So that's the only reason it's here.

00:01:22.040 --> 00:01:24.010
>> So it looks like one lot is just sitting in the big

00:01:24.010 --> 00:01:24.680
middle of the-

00:01:24.680 --> 00:01:27.430
>> Yeah, this family is doing the block in the middle is

00:01:27.430 --> 00:01:28.159
for them.

00:01:28.159 --> 00:01:31.170
And the outside lot is going to be for one of their parents

00:01:31.170 --> 00:01:31.439
.

00:01:31.439 --> 00:01:33.079
>> Okay, okay, thank you.

00:01:37.799 --> 00:01:40.040
>> Okay, no other questions on the consent agenda?

00:01:42.280 --> 00:01:43.599
Move on to our work session reports.

00:01:45.239 --> 00:01:48.040
We've got our work session report.

00:01:48.040 --> 00:01:51.599
The item A, PC 16-039.

00:01:51.599 --> 00:01:54.010
I think Julie's going to get an opportunity to finish this

00:01:54.010 --> 00:01:54.760
for us finally.

00:01:56.920 --> 00:01:58.519
>> Yes, thanks for having me back.

00:02:05.280 --> 00:02:10.439
Okay, so I promise I know how to work a computer.

00:02:19.840 --> 00:02:22.319
Okay, we got most of the way through.

00:02:22.319 --> 00:02:27.639
So I think I'm just going to go straight to bike counts,

00:02:27.639 --> 00:02:31.599
because we kind of went through most of this.

00:02:31.599 --> 00:02:36.439
If anybody has any questions before I start.

00:02:38.199 --> 00:02:43.870
Okay, okay, so we undertook bike and pedestrian manual

00:02:43.870 --> 00:02:45.360
counts this year.

00:02:45.360 --> 00:02:48.259
We did it in conjunction with the National Bike and Pedest

00:02:48.259 --> 00:02:50.560
rian Documentation Project.

00:02:50.560 --> 00:02:55.479
They're a group who work with also planning and design and

00:02:55.479 --> 00:02:58.680
also the Institute of Transportation Engineers.

00:02:58.680 --> 00:03:03.240
They've been doing this since about, I think it's 2004,

00:03:03.240 --> 00:03:03.879
2005.

00:03:03.879 --> 00:03:08.610
And their goal is to have a clearing house of data for bike

00:03:08.610 --> 00:03:09.800
and ped use.

00:03:09.800 --> 00:03:12.199
There's not a whole lot of data that people collect on it.

00:03:12.199 --> 00:03:16.219
We have traffic data for vehicle usage for years and years

00:03:16.219 --> 00:03:17.280
and years, decades.

00:03:17.280 --> 00:03:20.120
But not a lot for ped and bike data.

00:03:20.120 --> 00:03:23.759
So they want to sort of start that project going.

00:03:23.759 --> 00:03:27.319
And you essentially just use volunteers to manually count

00:03:27.319 --> 00:03:27.919
bicycles and

00:03:27.919 --> 00:03:31.159
pedestrians at locations that we choose across the city.

00:03:31.159 --> 00:03:32.639
Like I said, there's a lack of data, so

00:03:32.639 --> 00:03:35.759
we want to start the data collection for Denton.

00:03:35.759 --> 00:03:38.740
So we do have census data, which is great, but it only

00:03:38.740 --> 00:03:40.000
tracks commuters.

00:03:40.000 --> 00:03:42.300
We want to also track people who are riding to go to the

00:03:42.300 --> 00:03:43.120
grocery store,

00:03:43.120 --> 00:03:45.240
go to the movies, go to the square.

00:03:45.240 --> 00:03:47.080
Essentially people who are riding for

00:03:47.080 --> 00:03:51.000
other utilitarian trips, not just to get to work.

00:03:51.000 --> 00:03:54.000
We also want to be able to do before and after studies.

00:03:54.000 --> 00:03:56.099
We want to be able to see, okay, we put in this bike

00:03:56.099 --> 00:03:56.960
infrastructure.

00:03:58.199 --> 00:04:00.080
Are people using it more now?

00:04:00.080 --> 00:04:03.080
If we had charros before, but now we put in a bike lane

00:04:03.080 --> 00:04:04.599
because that was warranted.

00:04:04.599 --> 00:04:05.840
Are we getting more bicyclists?

00:04:05.840 --> 00:04:08.280
So we want to be able to track how a project is doing.

00:04:11.360 --> 00:04:14.439
So based on what the National Bike Ped Project does,

00:04:14.439 --> 00:04:16.879
they set count dates in September.

00:04:16.879 --> 00:04:18.560
That's a good time frame generally.

00:04:18.560 --> 00:04:21.800
People are back in school, so they pick a week in September

00:04:21.800 --> 00:04:21.959
.

00:04:21.959 --> 00:04:22.959
It's usually the second week.

00:04:22.959 --> 00:04:26.399
We did ours the week of September 14th.

00:04:26.399 --> 00:04:28.680
And you count for two hours during the peak time.

00:04:28.680 --> 00:04:31.600
So you count on a weekday and on a weekend.

00:04:32.680 --> 00:04:34.709
Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, those days are

00:04:34.709 --> 00:04:35.800
statistically the same.

00:04:35.800 --> 00:04:38.319
You don't want to count on a Monday or a Friday.

00:04:38.319 --> 00:04:40.600
And then you count on a Saturday or Sunday.

00:04:40.600 --> 00:04:41.959
We used all volunteers.

00:04:41.959 --> 00:04:44.899
We asked them over social media if they wanted to be a

00:04:44.899 --> 00:04:45.800
volunteer.

00:04:45.800 --> 00:04:46.480
They signed up.

00:04:46.480 --> 00:04:47.879
They were trained.

00:04:47.879 --> 00:04:49.160
We had training sessions here.

00:04:49.160 --> 00:04:50.879
We also had a training session at the Civic Center.

00:04:50.879 --> 00:04:53.160
So they learned how to do the counts.

00:04:53.160 --> 00:04:55.519
We did screen line counts, which is the most basic.

00:04:55.519 --> 00:05:00.240
You essentially put a imaginary line across the street.

00:05:00.240 --> 00:05:02.800
And anybody who crosses that line in either direction, you

00:05:02.800 --> 00:05:03.839
count them, either

00:05:03.839 --> 00:05:07.279
as a person on a bike, a pedestrian, or other.

00:05:07.279 --> 00:05:12.959
Other is somebody who is on their rollerblading.

00:05:12.959 --> 00:05:16.000
That's about it for other rollerblader.

00:05:16.000 --> 00:05:17.279
They're not really pedestrians.

00:05:17.279 --> 00:05:18.560
>> Unicycle.

00:05:18.560 --> 00:05:20.279
>> Unicycle would count as a bicyclist.

00:05:20.279 --> 00:05:21.720
>> Okay.

00:05:21.720 --> 00:05:23.199
>> Yeah.

00:05:23.199 --> 00:05:27.050
And every, so I think we had eight volunteers and we had 14

00:05:27.050 --> 00:05:28.399
locations across the city.

00:05:30.120 --> 00:05:32.810
There are definitely some pros and cons to doing bike

00:05:32.810 --> 00:05:34.480
counts this way.

00:05:34.480 --> 00:05:36.360
We like that we're able to involve the community.

00:05:36.360 --> 00:05:37.160
They feel involved.

00:05:37.160 --> 00:05:38.319
They get to count.

00:05:38.319 --> 00:05:39.399
I get to interact with them.

00:05:39.399 --> 00:05:41.079
That's really great.

00:05:41.079 --> 00:05:43.610
When we're counting it ourselves, we're allowed to collect

00:05:43.610 --> 00:05:44.240
extra data.

00:05:44.240 --> 00:05:47.560
So we can count gender, which we did this year.

00:05:47.560 --> 00:05:49.199
You can count helmet use.

00:05:49.199 --> 00:05:51.480
That's not something we counted this year, but

00:05:51.480 --> 00:05:54.120
it's something we can obviously add in the future.

00:05:54.120 --> 00:05:57.199
Gender is a really good thing you want to be tracking.

00:05:57.199 --> 00:06:02.360
It's fairly known that more men ride bikes than women.

00:06:02.360 --> 00:06:05.839
And so the goal is always to get more women riding,

00:06:05.839 --> 00:06:07.680
because that means you're probably doing something right if

00:06:07.680 --> 00:06:08.399
women are choosing to

00:06:08.399 --> 00:06:08.959
ride their bike.

00:06:08.959 --> 00:06:12.519
Women in general are more risk averse,

00:06:12.519 --> 00:06:15.680
and have different roles than men in general, if we're

00:06:15.680 --> 00:06:17.759
talking stereotypes in general.

00:06:17.759 --> 00:06:20.199
So yeah, if you can get women bicycling, that's always

00:06:20.199 --> 00:06:20.959
really good.

00:06:20.959 --> 00:06:23.670
There are definitely some drawbacks to doing the manual

00:06:23.670 --> 00:06:24.959
counts as well though.

00:06:24.959 --> 00:06:27.490
You're limited on your duration and the location of your

00:06:27.490 --> 00:06:27.879
counts.

00:06:27.879 --> 00:06:29.680
Again, we only have so many volunteers.

00:06:31.680 --> 00:06:34.360
We can't count everywhere we'd like to count.

00:06:34.360 --> 00:06:37.120
There's also a lot of effects by the weather.

00:06:37.120 --> 00:06:39.610
It actually rained and we had to cancel one of our count

00:06:39.610 --> 00:06:40.079
dates, and

00:06:40.079 --> 00:06:41.399
that's never fun.

00:06:41.399 --> 00:06:43.120
There's also just human error.

00:06:43.120 --> 00:06:47.970
We train them, but they could mess up, possibly they couldn

00:06:47.970 --> 00:06:48.519
't show up.

00:06:48.519 --> 00:06:51.800
I had some people who had to cancel, cuz life happens.

00:06:51.800 --> 00:06:53.279
So there's pros and cons to doing it.

00:06:53.279 --> 00:06:55.980
There's also other ways we like to do it, which I'll talk

00:06:55.980 --> 00:06:57.160
about near the end.

00:06:58.759 --> 00:07:01.560
Here's where we chose to count.

00:07:01.560 --> 00:07:05.000
We chose them based on where we have projects coming up and

00:07:05.000 --> 00:07:08.040
where we know there is high use, such as Congress.

00:07:08.040 --> 00:07:11.100
We know we're gonna be doing some bike infrastructure there

00:07:11.100 --> 00:07:11.839
this year.

00:07:11.839 --> 00:07:13.600
You see location number three is Malone.

00:07:13.600 --> 00:07:16.839
We'd planned to do a road diet on Malone, but

00:07:16.839 --> 00:07:20.769
found out that there's a street project, a wastewater

00:07:20.769 --> 00:07:22.319
project going on.

00:07:22.319 --> 00:07:24.920
So that project's delayed till 2017, but we counted there.

00:07:26.199 --> 00:07:27.560
Other locations we counted,

00:07:28.680 --> 00:07:30.779
you can see where we have infrastructure right now or

00:07:30.779 --> 00:07:32.600
planned infrastructure.

00:07:34.240 --> 00:07:36.160
Six, we counted on Bonnie Bray, cuz as you know,

00:07:36.160 --> 00:07:37.639
Bonnie Bray's gonna be expanded.

00:07:37.639 --> 00:07:40.129
So we just wanna get some before and after counts at that

00:07:40.129 --> 00:07:41.439
location to see

00:07:41.439 --> 00:07:42.319
what's going on there.

00:07:45.399 --> 00:07:48.480
Here's our raw data.

00:07:48.480 --> 00:07:53.079
And I show this to you cuz I want you to know that this is

00:07:53.079 --> 00:07:54.120
good data to have and

00:07:54.120 --> 00:07:58.279
it's really just a starting point, but the data is limited.

00:07:58.279 --> 00:08:01.509
You only count for two hours and then you extrapolate from

00:08:01.509 --> 00:08:02.319
that data.

00:08:02.319 --> 00:08:05.850
So you can see that we actually only counted a total of 173

00:08:05.850 --> 00:08:06.519
people.

00:08:07.920 --> 00:08:10.519
And we counted 435 pedestrians.

00:08:12.360 --> 00:08:15.160
So it's good data, we definitely wanna build off of it.

00:08:15.160 --> 00:08:17.750
But again, it's not continuous data, it's very limited and

00:08:17.750 --> 00:08:18.240
small.

00:08:18.240 --> 00:08:20.360
>> Commissioner Dettowitz.

00:08:20.360 --> 00:08:23.300
>> On your pedestrians and your bikers, could it be that

00:08:23.300 --> 00:08:24.680
the same person counted

00:08:24.680 --> 00:08:30.000
on three or four days when you got to your total number of

00:08:30.000 --> 00:08:31.120
bikers?

00:08:32.360 --> 00:08:32.919
>> What do you mean?

00:08:32.919 --> 00:08:35.919
>> If somebody would road, your count was done on Tuesday,

00:08:35.919 --> 00:08:37.279
Wednesday, Thursday.

00:08:37.279 --> 00:08:38.919
>> We did count it on Tuesday and Wednesday.

00:08:38.919 --> 00:08:40.200
>> Tuesday and Wednesday, okay.

00:08:40.200 --> 00:08:42.600
And then you counted again on Saturday, right?

00:08:42.600 --> 00:08:43.639
>> Correct. >> Okay.

00:08:43.639 --> 00:08:44.360
>> And Sunday.

00:08:44.360 --> 00:08:46.600
>> Could the same person be counted four times a day?

00:08:46.600 --> 00:08:49.350
>> Yeah, these are individual people, I guess they're trips

00:08:49.350 --> 00:08:49.559
.

00:08:49.559 --> 00:08:52.139
Well, no, these are individual, that's how many people we

00:08:52.139 --> 00:08:52.639
counted.

00:08:52.639 --> 00:08:54.559
You're right, they could be the exact same person.

00:08:54.559 --> 00:08:55.679
>> Okay.

00:08:55.679 --> 00:08:57.240
>> If they travel that route every day.

00:08:57.240 --> 00:09:02.690
>> So that goes back to the pros and cons of the survey

00:09:02.690 --> 00:09:03.720
done.

00:09:03.720 --> 00:09:05.840
>> Well, same thing if you're counting vehicles.

00:09:05.840 --> 00:09:08.350
You can still count the same vehicle every day, because

00:09:08.350 --> 00:09:10.320
they're traveling that same route every day.

00:09:10.320 --> 00:09:13.120
>> Right, as long as you identify trips and not people.

00:09:13.120 --> 00:09:13.799
That's what I'm suggesting.

00:09:13.799 --> 00:09:16.179
>> Right, these ones are definitely, well, these are a

00:09:16.179 --> 00:09:18.600
person crossed, we consider that.

00:09:18.600 --> 00:09:20.320
>> All right. >> You've crossed a trip.

00:09:20.320 --> 00:09:21.870
>> So I'm just questioning- >> If you cross again because

00:09:21.870 --> 00:09:24.279
you're coming home, that's a trip as well.

00:09:24.279 --> 00:09:25.159
>> I understand. >> But you get the same person.

00:09:25.159 --> 00:09:27.600
>> So I'm just looking at vernacular, so it's a trip.

00:09:28.720 --> 00:09:29.799
>> Correct. >> Thank you.

00:09:29.799 --> 00:09:33.220
>> Yeah, so you can see the numbers, you're right, we like

00:09:33.220 --> 00:09:34.080
doing this.

00:09:34.080 --> 00:09:38.600
We want to build off of this data, but it's lacking in

00:09:38.600 --> 00:09:40.759
robustness.

00:09:42.320 --> 00:09:47.279
So the bike pad project, the national bike pad project,

00:09:47.279 --> 00:09:50.080
they give us extrapolation worksheets.

00:09:50.080 --> 00:09:53.159
And that's what I use to do the projection.

00:09:53.159 --> 00:09:57.279
So they give us these Excel worksheets and we input all of

00:09:57.279 --> 00:09:58.480
our numbers and

00:09:58.480 --> 00:10:01.879
do some fancy math that they've honed over the years.

00:10:01.879 --> 00:10:03.480
They've been doing this since 2004.

00:10:03.480 --> 00:10:06.000
So they've been doing it for a long time and they've honed

00:10:06.000 --> 00:10:07.399
their numbers and this is what we use.

00:10:07.399 --> 00:10:10.820
So these are our projections, again, they're based on a

00:10:10.820 --> 00:10:12.480
very small sample size.

00:10:12.480 --> 00:10:15.830
But first I want to point out Oak and Welch, we counted

00:10:15.830 --> 00:10:16.480
there.

00:10:16.480 --> 00:10:20.190
Kind of on Oak Street, so people who are crossing on Oak

00:10:20.190 --> 00:10:21.559
Street at Welch.

00:10:21.559 --> 00:10:24.179
You can see that they had the highest numbers for bicycl

00:10:24.179 --> 00:10:26.559
ists and pedestrians, which is sort of obvious.

00:10:26.559 --> 00:10:29.600
It's not by UNT, lots of bikes and peds at that area.

00:10:32.600 --> 00:10:35.320
Second, we want to highlight Locust and Sycamore.

00:10:35.320 --> 00:10:40.570
So we counted on Locust at Sycamore and that was the second

00:10:40.570 --> 00:10:42.399
highest for pedestrians.

00:10:42.399 --> 00:10:44.080
It's a high area for people walking.

00:10:45.600 --> 00:10:48.720
You can see it's about even for weekday and weekend for

00:10:48.720 --> 00:10:51.519
people who are walking on Locust, which is good.

00:10:51.519 --> 00:10:53.240
That's what we expect for the downtown area.

00:10:55.879 --> 00:11:00.159
Wanted to highlight for bicyclists, Congress and Coy and

00:11:00.159 --> 00:11:01.320
then Malone and Broadway.

00:11:02.519 --> 00:11:05.919
These each are the next highest for bicyclists and those

00:11:05.919 --> 00:11:09.389
are areas that we are planning to put bike infrastructure

00:11:09.389 --> 00:11:12.240
either this year or next year.

00:11:12.240 --> 00:11:14.200
So we really like having this before data.

00:11:15.799 --> 00:11:17.039
>> Commissioner Bruegel.

00:11:17.039 --> 00:11:17.559
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:11:18.919 --> 00:11:21.950
So I'm looking at the Malone and Broadway numbers and I'm

00:11:21.950 --> 00:11:25.679
thinking about like my husband who commutes to UNT daily

00:11:25.679 --> 00:11:28.480
with our three year old in the trailer behind him.

00:11:28.480 --> 00:11:32.169
But because the traffic is so fast on Malone, people go 40

00:11:32.169 --> 00:11:34.159
in a 30 at least, right?

00:11:34.159 --> 00:11:35.279
It's a long stretch there.

00:11:36.399 --> 00:11:41.080
And there is no dedicated bike lane or anything there.

00:11:41.080 --> 00:11:43.279
They typically will ride up and down Gober.

00:11:44.279 --> 00:11:47.149
So I'm wondering, have you looked at any like some of the

00:11:47.149 --> 00:11:50.000
maybe the heat mapping apps that are out there that cycl

00:11:50.000 --> 00:11:52.570
ists are already using that are showing the trips that they

00:11:52.570 --> 00:11:54.840
're taking and the routes that they're taking.

00:11:54.840 --> 00:11:57.450
That you could maybe then also incorporate to some of these

00:11:57.450 --> 00:11:59.820
bike counts to get a clear idea of not only how many cycl

00:11:59.820 --> 00:12:03.210
ists are on Malone and Broadway, but how many cyclists are

00:12:03.210 --> 00:12:06.259
riding in that general area in the general direction to

00:12:06.259 --> 00:12:09.080
kind of get a more robust count for what we're looking at.

00:12:09.080 --> 00:12:10.000
>> Right, that's a good point.

00:12:10.000 --> 00:12:12.710
We haven't looked at Strava or MapMyRide or anything like

00:12:12.710 --> 00:12:13.200
that.

00:12:13.200 --> 00:12:14.679
Generally, I have to pay for that data.

00:12:14.679 --> 00:12:16.960
It's just not something we've looked into at this point.

00:12:16.960 --> 00:12:20.539
But it's good to note that people will take an alternative

00:12:20.539 --> 00:12:23.730
route if they don't have a bike accommodation there

00:12:23.730 --> 00:12:25.440
currently like Malone.

00:12:25.440 --> 00:12:29.710
So that's a road that we have designated as a good

00:12:29.710 --> 00:12:32.720
candidate to do a road diet on.

00:12:32.720 --> 00:12:34.519
So then you would have a bike lane.

00:12:34.519 --> 00:12:37.220
And so hopefully, once there's a bike lane, people would

00:12:37.220 --> 00:12:39.200
then choose to take that route instead of-

00:12:39.200 --> 00:12:39.840
>> Gober.

00:12:39.840 --> 00:12:40.840
>> Gober, yeah.

00:12:40.840 --> 00:12:44.000
>> But my point just more generally is that this data is

00:12:44.000 --> 00:12:44.879
out there.

00:12:44.879 --> 00:12:47.629
>> Right. >> Yes, it may cost something to get that data,

00:12:47.629 --> 00:12:49.759
but there's also,

00:12:49.759 --> 00:12:52.110
I just think that that data would be really important for

00:12:52.110 --> 00:12:54.240
us to have as we're looking towards the future.

00:12:54.240 --> 00:12:55.279
>> Right.

00:12:55.279 --> 00:12:57.909
>> That said, Denton's a really tech savvy town, so there

00:12:57.909 --> 00:12:59.799
might be another way for us to get that data without having

00:12:59.799 --> 00:13:01.120
to pay some sort of membership fee.

00:13:01.120 --> 00:13:05.299
But I think that it would give us a more accurate count of

00:13:05.299 --> 00:13:07.120
where people really truly are riding,

00:13:07.120 --> 00:13:09.450
because people may not be comfortable riding on Malone and

00:13:09.450 --> 00:13:11.080
they may be taking the side streets.

00:13:11.080 --> 00:13:12.639
>> Right. >> If you're not sitting on the corner of Gober

00:13:12.639 --> 00:13:13.279
and wherever,

00:13:13.279 --> 00:13:15.750
you're going to miss 50 riders that morning who don't feel

00:13:15.750 --> 00:13:17.200
comfortable going on Malone.

00:13:17.200 --> 00:13:17.919
>> Right. >> You know what I mean?

00:13:17.919 --> 00:13:19.480
>> Yeah, no, that's a very good point.

00:13:19.480 --> 00:13:22.710
Yeah, again, I mean there are limits to like Strava data as

00:13:22.710 --> 00:13:23.240
well.

00:13:23.240 --> 00:13:27.240
Sometimes it's people who have self-selected as a bicyclist

00:13:27.240 --> 00:13:27.559
.

00:13:27.559 --> 00:13:30.789
But it's still very good data to have, so we could look

00:13:30.789 --> 00:13:31.639
into that.

00:13:31.639 --> 00:13:32.519
>> Yeah, I would encourage that.

00:13:32.519 --> 00:13:36.730
I think it would give us a clearer idea of not only where,

00:13:36.730 --> 00:13:39.519
maybe not specific routes that they're going, but point A

00:13:39.519 --> 00:13:40.279
to point B data.

00:13:40.279 --> 00:13:41.240
>> Right. >> Yeah?

00:13:41.240 --> 00:13:42.320
>> Yeah. >> Okay, thanks.

00:13:42.320 --> 00:13:44.480
>> Thank you.

00:13:44.480 --> 00:13:47.960
So that's about it for projections.

00:13:47.960 --> 00:13:49.759
Again, this is only the first year.

00:13:49.759 --> 00:13:52.000
It's just trying to set a baseline.

00:13:52.000 --> 00:13:54.470
As years progress, we'd like to be able to see the numbers

00:13:54.470 --> 00:13:56.120
increase based on what we're doing,

00:13:56.120 --> 00:13:58.980
not just infrastructure wise, but education and

00:13:58.980 --> 00:14:00.159
encouragement.

00:14:00.159 --> 00:14:01.799
So- >> I have a question before you-

00:14:01.799 --> 00:14:03.320
>> Go for it.

00:14:03.320 --> 00:14:05.799
>> I may not have followed the chart correctly.

00:14:05.799 --> 00:14:09.039
I saw the single asterisk and the double asterisk for

00:14:09.039 --> 00:14:09.679
projections.

00:14:09.679 --> 00:14:13.379
But on the ones that are like Locust and Sycamore, are

00:14:13.379 --> 00:14:16.019
those numbers projected also, or are they somewhat off of

00:14:16.019 --> 00:14:16.559
the count?

00:14:18.559 --> 00:14:19.679
>> No, these are all projections.

00:14:19.679 --> 00:14:24.279
Sorry, the ones that have asterisks, those means they had,

00:14:24.279 --> 00:14:25.919
I think they had two count dates.

00:14:25.919 --> 00:14:29.799
And so I averaged the Tuesday and the Wednesday.

00:14:29.799 --> 00:14:32.539
The other ones, I'd have to average because I'm only

00:14:32.539 --> 00:14:33.759
counted on one day.

00:14:33.759 --> 00:14:36.940
>> So all of this got some kind of a projection- >> Correct

00:14:36.940 --> 00:14:37.039
.

00:14:37.039 --> 00:14:40.330
>> Data in it, because I was looking at it when I went week

00:14:40.330 --> 00:14:42.440
day 68, how did you get 540?

00:14:42.440 --> 00:14:45.250
But if it's some kind of a formula- >> Right, there's a

00:14:45.250 --> 00:14:45.840
formula.

00:14:45.840 --> 00:14:46.519
>> I got you.

00:14:46.519 --> 00:14:49.629
I thought the formula was just on the, maybe on the double

00:14:49.629 --> 00:14:51.840
asterisk and the single, I couldn't follow how-

00:14:51.840 --> 00:14:54.870
>> No, sorry, and I forgot to include the asterisks in here

00:14:54.870 --> 00:14:56.000
, that was my bad.

00:14:56.000 --> 00:15:00.179
Yeah, that meant that we had two days of data and it was

00:15:00.179 --> 00:15:00.879
averaged.

00:15:00.879 --> 00:15:01.519
>> Okay.

00:15:01.519 --> 00:15:03.840
>> And again, we only had so many volunteers, so

00:15:03.840 --> 00:15:07.480
not every location was able to get two weekday counts and

00:15:07.480 --> 00:15:09.080
two weekend counts.

00:15:09.080 --> 00:15:10.840
>> So you really got a couple things going on.

00:15:10.840 --> 00:15:14.240
You've got some averaging of some of your data.

00:15:14.240 --> 00:15:17.750
And then, no matter whether it was averaged or not, then

00:15:17.750 --> 00:15:19.480
there's some kind of a projection formula-

00:15:19.480 --> 00:15:20.000
>> Right.

00:15:20.000 --> 00:15:22.279
>> That you take, whether it's an average number or whether

00:15:22.279 --> 00:15:24.879
it was an actual count number that then creates a type.

00:15:24.879 --> 00:15:25.480
>> Correct, yeah.

00:15:25.480 --> 00:15:28.529
And that's the same process they use when they do average

00:15:28.529 --> 00:15:31.120
daily vehicle counts for roads.

00:15:31.120 --> 00:15:33.759
Of course, they're using continuous data.

00:15:33.759 --> 00:15:35.929
They put the pneumatic tubes on the road and they're

00:15:35.929 --> 00:15:36.799
counting cars.

00:15:37.919 --> 00:15:40.129
So the data is better to do a production off of as opposed

00:15:40.129 --> 00:15:42.360
to we just counted for two hours.

00:15:43.360 --> 00:15:46.039
>> To follow up, did you have any traffic counts that we

00:15:46.039 --> 00:15:49.360
can look at just to kind of see on some of these roads?

00:15:49.360 --> 00:15:52.320
Here's what car traffic count is, here's what pedestrian,

00:15:52.320 --> 00:15:54.320
here's what bikes would get some kind of a feel.

00:15:54.320 --> 00:15:59.240
Are these really heavily traveled roads for vehicles,

00:15:59.240 --> 00:16:01.120
people, and cyclists?

00:16:01.120 --> 00:16:05.159
Or are they not and some of the, I guess, Amber brings up a

00:16:05.159 --> 00:16:08.679
good point about maybe on some of these,

00:16:08.679 --> 00:16:13.320
instead of having a bike lane in a heavily traveled road.

00:16:13.320 --> 00:16:16.399
>> Right. >> It might even make more sense to have it on a

00:16:16.399 --> 00:16:17.440
side street where-

00:16:17.440 --> 00:16:21.080
>> Right. >> There's less vehicle traffic and accidents and

00:16:21.080 --> 00:16:21.919
those types of things.

00:16:21.919 --> 00:16:24.860
And I don't know if that's something that anybody's talked

00:16:24.860 --> 00:16:25.399
about.

00:16:25.399 --> 00:16:27.509
>> Yeah, that's a good point on the bike plan to take that

00:16:27.509 --> 00:16:28.519
into consideration.

00:16:28.519 --> 00:16:31.129
So we have lots of roads that parallel major roads that we

00:16:31.129 --> 00:16:32.840
've put back accommodations on.

00:16:32.840 --> 00:16:35.899
Like Carroll, it's a very busy road, likely won't have back

00:16:35.899 --> 00:16:37.000
accommodations.

00:16:37.000 --> 00:16:39.000
But there are a lot of great parallel streets that can get

00:16:39.000 --> 00:16:39.519
you there.

00:16:39.519 --> 00:16:42.159
So you can go on Allis, you can go on Coyote, you can even

00:16:42.159 --> 00:16:43.240
go on Fulton or Bryan and

00:16:43.240 --> 00:16:46.120
they'll get you the same north south direction.

00:16:46.120 --> 00:16:51.919
>> I think that's a win for the cars and the bicyclists.

00:16:51.919 --> 00:16:54.879
Everybody can get where they need to go and it's probably

00:16:54.879 --> 00:16:55.480
safer.

00:16:55.480 --> 00:16:57.240
And you have some feedback on that?

00:16:57.240 --> 00:16:59.360
>> Well, yeah, thanks.

00:16:59.360 --> 00:17:00.360
>> Commissioner Bruegel.

00:17:00.360 --> 00:17:01.159
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:17:01.159 --> 00:17:06.799
I would say as a woman, I would feel safer riding on Gober.

00:17:06.799 --> 00:17:09.109
My husband, however, if he didn't have our three year old

00:17:09.109 --> 00:17:10.559
behind us, I can't speak for him.

00:17:10.559 --> 00:17:13.569
But I would think that he would just want to take the

00:17:13.569 --> 00:17:14.720
straight shot.

00:17:14.720 --> 00:17:16.200
That's where the cars go.

00:17:16.200 --> 00:17:17.359
That's where the people want to go.

00:17:17.359 --> 00:17:20.440
It's the easiest shot from where we live to his office.

00:17:20.440 --> 00:17:23.000
And so I certainly don't want to disenfranchise riders like

00:17:23.000 --> 00:17:25.119
that who have just as much right to

00:17:25.119 --> 00:17:28.670
be using the road as anyone else, whether or not they're in

00:17:28.670 --> 00:17:29.279
a car.

00:17:29.279 --> 00:17:32.839
But I think to be able to build bike accommodations on the

00:17:32.839 --> 00:17:34.599
heavily traveled areas.

00:17:34.599 --> 00:17:36.910
And perhaps, and I'm glad that you're doing these bike

00:17:36.910 --> 00:17:40.319
counts too, because after Malone gets that road diet,

00:17:40.319 --> 00:17:43.839
I'd be really curious to see, has ridership gone up?

00:17:43.839 --> 00:17:46.740
People will still be traveling the side streets as they

00:17:46.740 --> 00:17:47.960
feel comfortable.

00:17:47.960 --> 00:17:51.140
But to create accommodations on the major roads that people

00:17:51.140 --> 00:17:52.960
want to be traveling on anyway,

00:17:52.960 --> 00:17:55.359
I think it's our duty as a city to do that.

00:17:55.359 --> 00:17:58.920
So if that, did that answer your inquiry?

00:17:58.920 --> 00:18:00.200
Yeah?

00:18:00.200 --> 00:18:00.839
>> Yeah, I just wanted to-

00:18:00.839 --> 00:18:04.769
>> Yeah, I mean, I think there's pros and cons in both

00:18:04.769 --> 00:18:05.839
avenues.

00:18:05.839 --> 00:18:08.500
But I certainly wouldn't want to just say, well, Gober runs

00:18:08.500 --> 00:18:10.799
north south, so we don't have to do anything on Malone.

00:18:10.799 --> 00:18:11.319
Do you know what I mean?

00:18:11.319 --> 00:18:15.750
>> I'm suggesting maybe if you do it on Gober, that it's a

00:18:15.750 --> 00:18:18.119
less heavily vehicle traveled road,

00:18:18.119 --> 00:18:22.839
that it may be safer for bicyclists, and then it doesn't

00:18:22.839 --> 00:18:23.839
get into,

00:18:23.839 --> 00:18:26.900
we've got one lane that's exclusively going to be a bike

00:18:26.900 --> 00:18:28.680
lane, whether it's used or not.

00:18:28.680 --> 00:18:31.640
And some of the heavily trafficked roads stay vehicle.

00:18:31.640 --> 00:18:35.069
And if there's a parallel, that maybe is a share-o or a

00:18:35.069 --> 00:18:37.359
bike lane, and those types of things.

00:18:37.359 --> 00:18:43.039
That it's kind of, at least an initial look to me is maybe

00:18:43.039 --> 00:18:43.720
a little more of,

00:18:43.720 --> 00:18:47.720
I don't know the right word, but it's just another

00:18:47.720 --> 00:18:51.119
alternative of how to solve this issue.

00:18:51.119 --> 00:18:54.240
>> Yeah, and I feel like there's room for both, honestly.

00:18:54.240 --> 00:18:56.609
And that kind of brings me to one of my questions, if I may

00:18:56.609 --> 00:18:56.839
.

00:18:56.839 --> 00:18:58.079
>> Sure.

00:18:58.079 --> 00:19:01.930
>> So this board and many city boards typically will

00:19:01.930 --> 00:19:05.460
revisit documents that have come, been adopted by city

00:19:05.460 --> 00:19:06.079
council.

00:19:06.079 --> 00:19:08.279
This document is now five years old.

00:19:08.279 --> 00:19:11.069
We're just now starting to implement, well, we've been

00:19:11.069 --> 00:19:12.000
implementing some things, but

00:19:12.000 --> 00:19:14.190
we're really starting to see some progress moving forward

00:19:14.190 --> 00:19:17.039
kind of now, now that our waste water projects and

00:19:17.039 --> 00:19:19.400
our road projects are getting taken care of, we can now

00:19:19.400 --> 00:19:20.880
finally build this bike plan.

00:19:22.000 --> 00:19:25.799
What's your sense, do you think that this document is truly

00:19:25.799 --> 00:19:28.549
representative of what we need currently as a city and

00:19:28.549 --> 00:19:29.200
where we're going?

00:19:29.200 --> 00:19:32.309
Is this something that we maybe need to reconvene another

00:19:32.309 --> 00:19:35.200
bike plan task force to look at and

00:19:35.200 --> 00:19:38.400
see is Gober a better route than Malone, or are there

00:19:38.400 --> 00:19:40.200
routes that are missing?

00:19:40.200 --> 00:19:42.819
And I think having data like this and having some of those

00:19:42.819 --> 00:19:45.319
heat mapping apps would give us a better idea.

00:19:45.319 --> 00:19:48.359
When we overlay that on the bike plan that we currently

00:19:48.359 --> 00:19:51.039
have, is the bike plan meeting our needs?

00:19:51.039 --> 00:19:52.839
So what's your sense?

00:19:52.839 --> 00:19:54.720
>> Yeah, that's a really good question.

00:19:54.720 --> 00:19:58.220
Our bike plan is it was adopted in 2012, it was four years

00:19:58.220 --> 00:20:01.079
ago, but the bulk of the work would have been done in 2011.

00:20:01.079 --> 00:20:03.079
So yeah, it's about five years old.

00:20:03.079 --> 00:20:05.920
We have discussed updating it, most plans you would update

00:20:05.920 --> 00:20:07.079
in about five years.

00:20:07.079 --> 00:20:09.690
And right now is the time to do that, we're in the middle

00:20:09.690 --> 00:20:10.880
of budget session.

00:20:10.880 --> 00:20:15.130
So anything that's not currently budgeted, such as money

00:20:15.130 --> 00:20:17.440
for a bike plan, we ask for it right now.

00:20:17.440 --> 00:20:18.000
So that's something that's discussed.

00:20:18.000 --> 00:20:19.480
>> Commissioner Dudowitz.

00:20:19.480 --> 00:20:21.920
>> I'm sorry to interject, but I didn't want this other

00:20:21.920 --> 00:20:24.880
conversation to get away from me, at least a dive from

00:20:24.880 --> 00:20:25.559
loneliness.

00:20:25.559 --> 00:20:28.759
But both bring up good issues.

00:20:30.759 --> 00:20:34.289
My point of view is a sense of yes, we need the bicycle

00:20:34.289 --> 00:20:36.960
lanes and we need to make sure that they're safe.

00:20:36.960 --> 00:20:40.380
And it makes sense, but it makes sense that it doesn't

00:20:40.380 --> 00:20:42.240
disrupt one or the other.

00:20:42.240 --> 00:20:42.880
So bicycle lanes-

00:20:42.880 --> 00:20:44.839
>> Right, our goal is to make them work well together.

00:20:44.839 --> 00:20:46.160
>> Together, exactly.

00:20:46.160 --> 00:20:48.819
because I've seen situations and read situations where the

00:20:48.819 --> 00:20:53.160
bike lanes took over and

00:20:53.160 --> 00:20:56.250
you took lanes away from traffic and then had bottled up

00:20:56.250 --> 00:21:00.160
car traffic, which is a bigger proportion of the commutes.

00:21:00.160 --> 00:21:04.160
To the expense of, I mean, give the bikes more room, less

00:21:04.160 --> 00:21:04.960
for the cars.

00:21:04.960 --> 00:21:07.599
As long as we have a balance and it works so that not one

00:21:07.599 --> 00:21:09.960
or the other is impeded, I think it's fine.

00:21:09.960 --> 00:21:10.599
And I think we need them.

00:21:10.599 --> 00:21:15.380
So the conversation was looking at routes where is it safer

00:21:15.380 --> 00:21:19.200
or put them on side situations, maybe better.

00:21:19.200 --> 00:21:21.549
But I also understand, you have the straight line and it

00:21:21.549 --> 00:21:22.240
makes sense.

00:21:22.240 --> 00:21:25.640
As long as it doesn't take away from the other aspect of

00:21:25.640 --> 00:21:27.160
the traffic as well.

00:21:27.160 --> 00:21:30.099
That's my point of view and I've seen in some cities where

00:21:30.099 --> 00:21:33.630
it's gotten out of hand and backed up traffic and other

00:21:33.630 --> 00:21:34.480
things.

00:21:34.480 --> 00:21:36.640
Maybe they should ride their bike to work.

00:21:36.640 --> 00:21:37.519
>> That's not going to happen.

00:21:37.519 --> 00:21:39.869
Maybe people who ride their bike should take a car, a car

00:21:39.869 --> 00:21:40.279
pool.

00:21:40.279 --> 00:21:43.680
>> Well, I think, and that was a little tongue in cheek,

00:21:43.680 --> 00:21:46.279
but I think that the two can coexist.

00:21:46.279 --> 00:21:49.569
And so I'm curious, do you think that the bike plan needs

00:21:49.569 --> 00:21:50.799
to be revisited?

00:21:50.799 --> 00:21:53.650
Is this something, are we seeing some conflicts kind of

00:21:53.650 --> 00:21:56.759
down the road or the lanes that we have built already?

00:21:56.759 --> 00:21:57.759
Have there been conflicts?

00:21:57.759 --> 00:21:59.039
Do we need to kind of revisit this?

00:21:59.039 --> 00:22:02.799
>> Right, there haven't been conflicts as of yet.

00:22:02.799 --> 00:22:05.480
We've done a couple of road diets so far.

00:22:05.480 --> 00:22:08.230
And the road diet, again, just to clarify, road reconfig

00:22:08.230 --> 00:22:11.440
uration generally is you're taking a four lane roadway and

00:22:11.440 --> 00:22:14.240
you put it into a two lane roadway, continuous turn lane,

00:22:14.240 --> 00:22:16.599
and then you have bike lanes on either side.

00:22:16.599 --> 00:22:19.200
We did that on Windsor and we did it on Highland.

00:22:21.279 --> 00:22:23.680
And those have both been working really well right now.

00:22:23.680 --> 00:22:27.200
And also, we don't just do a road diet on any four lane

00:22:27.200 --> 00:22:27.880
road.

00:22:27.880 --> 00:22:31.059
We look at it, we look at turning movements, we look at the

00:22:31.059 --> 00:22:32.599
daily traffic volumes.

00:22:32.599 --> 00:22:35.230
And we see how is it going to work in the larger grand

00:22:35.230 --> 00:22:37.119
scheme of our roadway network.

00:22:37.119 --> 00:22:39.289
So we wouldn't ever do it if it was going to bottle up

00:22:39.289 --> 00:22:39.920
traffic.

00:22:39.920 --> 00:22:42.829
We have models that we can run that says, no, if we took a

00:22:42.829 --> 00:22:45.799
lane away here, this would cause a bottleneck.

00:22:45.799 --> 00:22:47.559
And if it would, we wouldn't do it.

00:22:47.559 --> 00:22:50.759
But lots of times, road diets are very effective.

00:22:50.759 --> 00:22:52.359
Many, many cities have done them.

00:22:52.359 --> 00:22:54.839
They're a proven safety measure from the FHWA.

00:22:56.279 --> 00:23:01.000
And Malone was recognized as a good option to do a road

00:23:01.000 --> 00:23:02.000
diet.

00:23:02.000 --> 00:23:05.920
For our bike plan, yes, I'd love to visit updating it.

00:23:05.920 --> 00:23:07.440
There are some things we could change.

00:23:07.440 --> 00:23:11.880
ASHA came out with a new guide in 2012, which missed, so

00:23:11.880 --> 00:23:13.880
the bike plan misses a few of those updates.

00:23:13.880 --> 00:23:18.880
>> I think Commissioner Beck was first.

00:23:18.880 --> 00:23:20.119
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:23:20.119 --> 00:23:21.359
>> Fire away.

00:23:21.359 --> 00:23:22.079
>> You'll come back to you.

00:23:22.079 --> 00:23:24.990
>> We brought up Windsor and I kind of figured that's what

00:23:24.990 --> 00:23:26.559
Frank was talking about.

00:23:26.559 --> 00:23:30.420
But I noticed, and I'm curious, why do you have a Sherman

00:23:30.420 --> 00:23:32.160
and Dover route here?

00:23:32.160 --> 00:23:34.480
Because Dover's just a side street.

00:23:34.480 --> 00:23:37.109
>> Right, we counted on Sherman, but the cross street was

00:23:37.109 --> 00:23:37.720
at Dover.

00:23:37.720 --> 00:23:40.920
So Sherman is a nice route for people who are what I'd call

00:23:40.920 --> 00:23:41.759
the weekend warrior.

00:23:41.759 --> 00:23:45.160
They're going out to ride their bike out on the FM roads.

00:23:45.160 --> 00:23:47.789
So I was just curious how many people are riding out there

00:23:47.789 --> 00:23:48.519
on Sherman.

00:23:48.519 --> 00:23:50.200
>> So Dover's kind of an end point then?

00:23:50.200 --> 00:23:53.079
>> Well, Dover was just a good street to be like, that's

00:23:53.079 --> 00:23:54.119
where we're at.

00:23:54.119 --> 00:23:55.200
>> To make the count.

00:23:55.200 --> 00:23:57.559
>> So I knew where we were counting on Sherman.

00:23:57.559 --> 00:24:01.769
>> Okay, but curious too, why didn't we do a count on Winds

00:24:01.769 --> 00:24:02.079
or?

00:24:02.079 --> 00:24:05.240
We did do that road diet there.

00:24:05.240 --> 00:24:06.039
>> You're right.

00:24:06.039 --> 00:24:09.119
So there's no before data for Windsor.

00:24:09.119 --> 00:24:11.240
That was done in 2013, 2014.

00:24:11.240 --> 00:24:13.880
There's no before data for that.

00:24:13.880 --> 00:24:17.769
But I am planning on doing counts on Windsor this spring

00:24:17.769 --> 00:24:18.920
with some

00:24:18.920 --> 00:24:21.079
automatic counters that we can borrow from the COG.

00:24:21.079 --> 00:24:22.759
>> Okay, good, thanks.

00:24:22.759 --> 00:24:23.599
>> Yeah, you're welcome.

00:24:23.599 --> 00:24:24.680
>> Commissioner Riddle.

00:24:24.680 --> 00:24:25.839
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:24:25.839 --> 00:24:30.220
So as we're talking about possibly revisiting the bike plan

00:24:30.220 --> 00:24:32.519
, is that the purview of PNZ?

00:24:32.519 --> 00:24:35.779
Is that, I believe traffic safety is kind of the overseers

00:24:35.779 --> 00:24:36.960
of the bike plan.

00:24:36.960 --> 00:24:39.799
I mean, who would maybe give direction for that?

00:24:39.799 --> 00:24:41.779
Just to revisit it and make sure that it's the right

00:24:41.779 --> 00:24:43.920
document for where we are and where we're going.

00:24:43.920 --> 00:24:46.750
>> If I remember, and this is, I wasn't obviously here when

00:24:46.750 --> 00:24:47.640
we adopted it.

00:24:47.640 --> 00:24:49.940
I think engineering, they didn't have a bike ped

00:24:49.940 --> 00:24:50.680
coordinator.

00:24:50.680 --> 00:24:54.970
Engineering took charge of that, and then they created the

00:24:54.970 --> 00:24:57.559
bike task force or focus group.

00:24:57.559 --> 00:25:01.299
And then they presented, so they came to PNZ, I think, to

00:25:01.299 --> 00:25:02.799
two work sessions.

00:25:02.799 --> 00:25:05.200
They went to Traffic Safety Commission, they went to Mob

00:25:05.200 --> 00:25:08.920
ility Committee, and then once they all gave input, then

00:25:08.920 --> 00:25:10.640
they went to City Council.

00:25:10.640 --> 00:25:13.470
So that would be an undertaking that, it would mainly be

00:25:13.470 --> 00:25:14.079
myself and

00:25:14.079 --> 00:25:17.049
probably Noreen Housewright, the engineer who worked on the

00:25:17.049 --> 00:25:18.480
bike plan the first time.

00:25:19.599 --> 00:25:23.400
>> So would there be, so we would not be looking at like

00:25:23.400 --> 00:25:26.359
reconvening like a citizens group like we did five years

00:25:26.359 --> 00:25:26.799
ago.

00:25:26.799 --> 00:25:28.680
>> No, I think we probably would.

00:25:28.680 --> 00:25:32.319
Once we got funding to do a new bike plan, we'd probably

00:25:32.319 --> 00:25:36.240
have to go through a consultant just because staff time.

00:25:36.240 --> 00:25:39.839
And then we would, I imagine we'd once again get a task

00:25:39.839 --> 00:25:43.240
force together of stakeholders who would help guide the

00:25:43.240 --> 00:25:43.799
project.

00:25:43.799 --> 00:25:46.839
>> Would that direction come from City Council or would

00:25:46.839 --> 00:25:47.640
that come from,

00:25:47.640 --> 00:25:50.759
as you mentioned, many different committees in there?

00:25:50.759 --> 00:25:53.680
I guess my concern is this document is five years old.

00:25:53.680 --> 00:25:54.960
>> Right. >> We're now building things.

00:25:54.960 --> 00:25:59.079
We adopted, our goal is no longer AASHTO standards but

00:25:59.079 --> 00:26:03.480
NACTO standards as per the 2030 comprehensive plan.

00:26:03.480 --> 00:26:06.000
Like are we, is everything matching up?

00:26:06.000 --> 00:26:07.680
I think this would be a good time to revisit it.

00:26:07.680 --> 00:26:09.720
We finally have a bike ped coordinator.

00:26:09.720 --> 00:26:10.519
Welcome to town.

00:26:10.519 --> 00:26:11.720
I'm super glad you're here.

00:26:11.720 --> 00:26:14.880
So how do we, where do we go from here to make sure that

00:26:14.880 --> 00:26:16.880
this is the right document?

00:26:16.880 --> 00:26:19.400
Which committee needs to give that direction?

00:26:21.160 --> 00:26:23.359
>> I imagine City Council would have final say.

00:26:23.359 --> 00:26:27.519
I don't think it'd be P and Z.

00:26:27.519 --> 00:26:28.019
>> Dang it.

00:26:29.160 --> 00:26:30.640
>> I can, may I interject?

00:26:30.640 --> 00:26:31.160
>> Last.

00:26:31.160 --> 00:26:31.660
>> Yeah.

00:26:33.279 --> 00:26:35.480
>> Last staff to give some direction.

00:26:37.599 --> 00:26:40.069
>> Since it's a component of the mobility plan, it has to

00:26:40.069 --> 00:26:41.599
go through the dual hearing.

00:26:41.599 --> 00:26:43.119
I think it's the dual hearing process.

00:26:43.119 --> 00:26:47.640
So it would start here, and once it's recommended to hear,

00:26:47.640 --> 00:26:48.640
you would recommend it,

00:26:48.640 --> 00:26:50.200
and then City Council would pass final.

00:26:52.839 --> 00:26:53.599
>> Commissioner Dotto.

00:26:53.599 --> 00:26:56.359
>> It's a test that would be initiated by the mobility

00:26:56.359 --> 00:26:58.960
committee, but then it would come back to PC.

00:26:58.960 --> 00:27:00.640
>> I see. >> But I, if I may be right.

00:27:00.640 --> 00:27:01.599
>> Commissioner Dotto, is she back?

00:27:01.599 --> 00:27:04.009
>> Then I think she's onto something here with anything

00:27:04.009 --> 00:27:04.440
else.

00:27:04.440 --> 00:27:08.319
She can ask as a commissioner that this be visited and

00:27:08.319 --> 00:27:12.559
ask the appropriate staff to give us a direction.

00:27:12.559 --> 00:27:15.150
Because I've done that and that's something else, and I

00:27:15.150 --> 00:27:18.160
think it's very appropriate for, it's five years old.

00:27:18.160 --> 00:27:22.769
Let's ask the appropriate people to, is this something we

00:27:22.769 --> 00:27:25.079
should be looking at and who should do it?

00:27:25.079 --> 00:27:29.599
>> If it is the will of the commission to revisit this and

00:27:29.599 --> 00:27:32.839
look at what options we have, are any revisions pertinent?

00:27:32.839 --> 00:27:36.609
And if you have a succinct recommendation, then Julie can

00:27:36.609 --> 00:27:38.960
then take forward to her committee.

00:27:38.960 --> 00:27:41.279
And then they can get the ball rolling from there, and then

00:27:41.279 --> 00:27:43.660
it would come back, as Jennifer mentioned, to a public

00:27:43.660 --> 00:27:44.559
hearing process.

00:27:44.559 --> 00:27:46.160
>> Yeah, I mean, I would like to see that.

00:27:46.160 --> 00:27:46.920
>> Commissioner Bruegel.

00:27:46.920 --> 00:27:47.720
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:27:47.720 --> 00:27:49.720
I think the timing is right.

00:27:49.720 --> 00:27:51.960
We just recently approved the mobility plan.

00:27:51.960 --> 00:27:53.200
We've got a new comp plan.

00:27:53.200 --> 00:27:54.720
We've got a bike pedestrian coordinator.

00:27:54.720 --> 00:27:58.180
I think that now would be a good time to, so I would like

00:27:58.180 --> 00:28:00.079
to see this come back to us eventually.

00:28:00.079 --> 00:28:02.240
>> Right, well, we are talking about updating it.

00:28:02.240 --> 00:28:05.420
So my plan was I was going to submit a budget package to

00:28:05.420 --> 00:28:08.079
get the funding to update our bike plan.

00:28:08.079 --> 00:28:11.329
That's something that goes on right now during the budget

00:28:11.329 --> 00:28:12.039
season.

00:28:12.039 --> 00:28:16.970
So we submit budget supplementals, I want to say it's in

00:28:16.970 --> 00:28:17.559
May.

00:28:17.559 --> 00:28:20.160
And then, you know, city council votes on our budget, and

00:28:20.160 --> 00:28:23.000
then in October we get a new budget,

00:28:23.000 --> 00:28:27.000
depending on if city council approves my budget package.

00:28:27.000 --> 00:28:28.319
>> Right, okay.

00:28:28.319 --> 00:28:29.319
>> Commissioner Dottowich.

00:28:29.319 --> 00:28:33.420
>> I think by what you heard from this commission, we would

00:28:33.420 --> 00:28:34.279
endorse that.

00:28:34.279 --> 00:28:36.980
Maybe you could go to city council and say planning and

00:28:36.980 --> 00:28:38.680
zoning has endorsed an update.

00:28:38.680 --> 00:28:39.920
Can it be funded?

00:28:39.920 --> 00:28:42.720
So that would be something that you could hang your hat on

00:28:42.720 --> 00:28:46.269
and have some leverage that this commission is suggesting

00:28:46.269 --> 00:28:47.200
that you follow that.

00:28:47.200 --> 00:28:48.039
So, Mike?

00:28:48.039 --> 00:28:49.279
>> That would be, yeah.

00:28:49.279 --> 00:28:51.079
It's been my plan, so that's great.

00:28:51.079 --> 00:28:52.279
I'm glad we're all on the same page.

00:28:52.279 --> 00:28:53.359
>> How much?

00:28:53.359 --> 00:28:53.880
>> I like it.

00:28:57.400 --> 00:28:58.079
>> Okay.

00:28:58.079 --> 00:28:59.119
>> I'm done talking now.

00:28:59.119 --> 00:28:59.640
Thank you.

00:29:02.039 --> 00:29:03.839
>> Okay, so here's some census data.

00:29:03.839 --> 00:29:08.309
Like I said, census data counts just those commuting to

00:29:08.309 --> 00:29:09.039
work.

00:29:09.039 --> 00:29:11.960
So I went and used the census data.

00:29:11.960 --> 00:29:15.480
It's the 2014 American Community Survey Means of

00:29:15.480 --> 00:29:17.200
Transportation to Work.

00:29:17.200 --> 00:29:20.440
And this is how we compare to some other places.

00:29:20.440 --> 00:29:25.440
So you can see the US, we are better than the US.

00:29:25.440 --> 00:29:27.680
Like nationally, those are national numbers.

00:29:27.680 --> 00:29:31.359
We're better than our state as well.

00:29:31.359 --> 00:29:33.549
We're actually a little bit better than Dallas, so that's

00:29:33.549 --> 00:29:34.119
exciting.

00:29:37.400 --> 00:29:40.279
Here we are compared to other Texas cities.

00:29:40.279 --> 00:29:43.440
It's worth it to note that Austin and Richardson are both

00:29:43.440 --> 00:29:46.950
recognized as bicycle friendly communities from the League

00:29:46.950 --> 00:29:48.720
of American Bicyclists.

00:29:48.720 --> 00:29:51.160
You can see that we have a higher mode share.

00:29:52.359 --> 00:29:53.680
Okay, actually, I should clarify.

00:29:53.680 --> 00:29:57.680
This is mode share of everybody who commutes to work.

00:29:57.680 --> 00:30:00.990
So the census has different categories, either you drive

00:30:00.990 --> 00:30:04.309
alone, you carpool, you take transit, you walk, you work

00:30:04.309 --> 00:30:06.160
from home, or you bike.

00:30:06.160 --> 00:30:09.839
And this is our mode share of those people who commute to

00:30:09.839 --> 00:30:12.160
work, and this is those groups that walk or bike.

00:30:14.000 --> 00:30:17.950
So you can see that we have 0.9 people who, percent of our

00:30:17.950 --> 00:30:22.000
commuters who bike, and 3.8 of our commuters who walk.

00:30:23.240 --> 00:30:26.880
We are slightly better than Richardson, we're better than

00:30:26.880 --> 00:30:29.000
Fort Worth a little bit as well.

00:30:29.000 --> 00:30:31.450
So that's just us compared to them, in case you were

00:30:31.450 --> 00:30:32.119
curious.

00:30:32.119 --> 00:30:32.759
>> Commissioner Beck.

00:30:32.759 --> 00:30:34.200
>> Thank you.

00:30:34.200 --> 00:30:39.170
Just for clarification, so like 0.9% of the 100, roughly

00:30:39.170 --> 00:30:41.400
120,000 people that you have?

00:30:41.400 --> 00:30:46.359
>> Not the entire population, just the working population.

00:30:46.359 --> 00:30:47.720
>> Okay.

00:30:47.720 --> 00:30:50.019
>> I'm sorry, I don't have that number, but I do have it in

00:30:50.019 --> 00:30:52.880
charts that I downloaded from census.

00:30:52.880 --> 00:30:56.299
But it's not entire population, it's only people who are 16

00:30:56.299 --> 00:30:57.039
and over.

00:30:57.039 --> 00:30:58.160
Those who would go to work.

00:30:58.160 --> 00:30:59.799
>> 16 and over.

00:30:59.799 --> 00:31:02.460
>> Correct, so this is just commuting to work, it's not

00:31:02.460 --> 00:31:05.519
like people who are riding their bike to school or.

00:31:05.519 --> 00:31:06.839
>> No.

00:31:06.839 --> 00:31:08.359
>> Yeah.

00:31:08.359 --> 00:31:11.490
You can see Portland, which is kind of the national

00:31:11.490 --> 00:31:14.319
standard along with Minneapolis and Chicago.

00:31:14.319 --> 00:31:16.319
They have a very high mode share.

00:31:16.319 --> 00:31:20.259
They have 6.3% of their commuters that bike to work, which

00:31:20.259 --> 00:31:21.839
is fairly impressive.

00:31:21.839 --> 00:31:23.920
I also want to highlight Bellingham, Washington.

00:31:23.920 --> 00:31:26.799
It's a city that's just a little bit smaller than Denton,

00:31:26.799 --> 00:31:28.160
it doesn't have a college.

00:31:28.160 --> 00:31:31.000
And they have not the best weather.

00:31:31.000 --> 00:31:34.819
It's very rainy there, and so it's just, I bring this up to

00:31:34.819 --> 00:31:39.470
point out that weather doesn't often play a large factor in

00:31:39.470 --> 00:31:46.599
those who choose to bike or walk to work.

00:31:46.599 --> 00:31:51.240
Here's data that's just for Denton, so I took the American

00:31:51.240 --> 00:31:55.009
Community Survey data over the years to see what Denton

00:31:55.009 --> 00:31:57.519
looked like with our bike and walk mode share.

00:31:57.519 --> 00:32:00.180
And you can see we've actually been declining just a little

00:32:00.180 --> 00:32:00.559
bit.

00:32:00.559 --> 00:32:06.680
I'm not a demographer, I don't quite know why that is.

00:32:06.680 --> 00:32:09.960
Could be that gas prices have gone down, perhaps it's, you

00:32:09.960 --> 00:32:12.039
know, many choices, who knows.

00:32:12.039 --> 00:32:16.119
But we did have a high of 1.7 back in 2009.

00:32:16.119 --> 00:32:19.029
And we're still actually fairly good on people who walk to

00:32:19.029 --> 00:32:19.519
work.

00:32:19.519 --> 00:32:23.279
So, these are definitely numbers I think we can increase.

00:32:23.279 --> 00:32:25.910
That's my job too, and you know, make sure these numbers

00:32:25.910 --> 00:32:26.839
are increased.

00:32:26.839 --> 00:32:29.720
>> Gas prices were the highest in 2009.

00:32:29.720 --> 00:32:35.730
>> Yeah, and I imagine that probably played a role in, yeah

00:32:35.730 --> 00:32:36.160
.

00:32:36.160 --> 00:32:40.069
As I mentioned earlier about getting better data, you know,

00:32:40.069 --> 00:32:41.960
we count with volunteers.

00:32:41.960 --> 00:32:45.519
We love using them, but the data is very limited.

00:32:45.519 --> 00:32:47.839
So, there are these mobile count units.

00:32:47.839 --> 00:32:48.920
The COG has them.

00:32:48.920 --> 00:32:51.930
They have two that they can loan out to different

00:32:51.930 --> 00:32:54.519
municipalities in the North Texas region.

00:32:54.519 --> 00:32:58.839
And we did use some back in September to count on Mingo.

00:32:58.839 --> 00:33:02.279
I know that lots of cyclists use Mingo, but lots of cycl

00:33:02.279 --> 00:33:03.599
ists is very anecdotal.

00:33:03.599 --> 00:33:04.839
What is lots of cyclists?

00:33:04.839 --> 00:33:06.809
And I'm sorry I didn't include a slide, but it was actually

00:33:06.809 --> 00:33:09.160
a fair amount of cyclists on Mingo.

00:33:09.160 --> 00:33:12.019
For a road that is not very friendly to cyclists, there

00:33:12.019 --> 00:33:13.599
were a surprising amount.

00:33:13.599 --> 00:33:16.869
And if you look at the bike count report, there's actually

00:33:16.869 --> 00:33:20.160
a graph in there of the cyclists who are using Mingo.

00:33:20.160 --> 00:33:21.359
So, I just wanted to get a count.

00:33:21.359 --> 00:33:23.000
I borrowed these from COG.

00:33:23.000 --> 00:33:24.640
We really liked using them.

00:33:24.640 --> 00:33:28.319
There's a little bit of a learning curve on getting them

00:33:28.319 --> 00:33:31.000
installed, but we got it to work out.

00:33:31.000 --> 00:33:32.599
And we'd like to use these more.

00:33:32.599 --> 00:33:35.660
I plan to use these this spring to count some locations in

00:33:35.660 --> 00:33:37.319
the spring and the summer.

00:33:37.319 --> 00:33:40.460
But we would also like to purchase a unit ourselves so we

00:33:40.460 --> 00:33:42.160
can start our own bike count program

00:33:42.160 --> 00:33:43.400
of getting continuous data.

00:33:43.400 --> 00:33:47.519
So, this data, we can put these tubes out there and count

00:33:47.519 --> 00:33:49.839
for two weeks all day, all night,

00:33:49.839 --> 00:33:53.309
24 hours instead of just two to two hours and then try to

00:33:53.309 --> 00:33:55.039
extrapolate from there.

00:33:55.039 --> 00:33:57.339
So, I'm also going to be submitting a budget package to

00:33:57.339 --> 00:34:00.440
purchase a mobile count unit for ourselves.

00:34:00.440 --> 00:34:03.599
But until then, I will be able to use them from the COG to

00:34:03.599 --> 00:34:05.960
do some counts this spring and summer.

00:34:05.960 --> 00:34:12.119
And that is the end.

00:34:12.119 --> 00:34:16.719
So, does anybody have any questions?

00:34:16.719 --> 00:34:19.800
I left Beverly plenty of time.

00:34:19.800 --> 00:34:21.239
>> Commissioner Hussbett.

00:34:21.239 --> 00:34:23.920
>> I was making notes.

00:34:23.920 --> 00:34:26.880
I wanted to make sure we got to the end.

00:34:26.880 --> 00:34:27.519
So, pardon me.

00:34:27.519 --> 00:34:28.280
I'm going to go back.

00:34:28.280 --> 00:34:28.920
>> Go back.

00:34:28.920 --> 00:34:29.440
That's fine.

00:34:29.440 --> 00:34:31.119
>> But it's okay.

00:34:31.119 --> 00:34:35.360
So, I wanted to make sure I understood the goals.

00:34:35.360 --> 00:34:38.179
So, I go back and I look at the goal statement and the

00:34:38.179 --> 00:34:39.639
first and second goal.

00:34:39.639 --> 00:34:42.530
What jumps out to me and kind of talked about pathing

00:34:42.530 --> 00:34:43.239
before.

00:34:44.280 --> 00:34:46.000
Well, let me back up.

00:34:46.000 --> 00:34:51.809
First, I'm curious, it doesn't seem like there's

00:34:51.809 --> 00:34:53.760
connectivity, right?

00:34:53.760 --> 00:34:57.800
So, for example, you put loop 288 in so that people can get

00:34:57.800 --> 00:35:00.039
from one side of the city to the other.

00:35:00.039 --> 00:35:03.809
Kind of a seamless, if you're going to go to the other side

00:35:03.809 --> 00:35:06.880
of this city, you can use loop 288 to get there.

00:35:06.880 --> 00:35:11.440
And this seems kind of, I'm curious, has there been any

00:35:14.119 --> 00:35:17.760
Efforts in making sure what we're doing connects so that we

00:35:17.760 --> 00:35:22.440
don't have a lane on Malone that ends.

00:35:22.440 --> 00:35:27.449
And then you got to go another six, seven, eight blocks to

00:35:27.449 --> 00:35:28.840
another ride.

00:35:28.840 --> 00:35:31.639
>> Right. >> What is the plan ultimately?

00:35:31.639 --> 00:35:34.320
So, if I look at an overlay and say, here's the plan.

00:35:34.320 --> 00:35:37.159
Here's where most people, if they're commuting to UNT, they

00:35:37.159 --> 00:35:38.239
're commuting to TW.

00:35:38.239 --> 00:35:42.280
>> Right. >> Here's a path that we've kind of gradually

00:35:42.280 --> 00:35:46.190
implemented that then achieves that goal and kind of covers

00:35:46.190 --> 00:35:47.079
the city.

00:35:47.079 --> 00:35:52.960
So, I'm curious about that, but in addition to that,

00:35:54.239 --> 00:35:58.519
looking at the goals, Goal 2 talks about promote and the

00:35:58.519 --> 00:35:59.960
increase and

00:35:59.960 --> 00:36:03.119
use of safety of bicycling, walking, so on and so forth.

00:36:03.119 --> 00:36:08.440
So that to me jumps out because I think it's important to

00:36:08.440 --> 00:36:08.760
note,

00:36:08.760 --> 00:36:11.800
if we're trying to increase, that means we have new users.

00:36:11.800 --> 00:36:12.559
New users.

00:36:12.559 --> 00:36:13.239
>> Correct.

00:36:13.239 --> 00:36:17.019
>> May not be as comfortable on busy streets, which takes

00:36:17.019 --> 00:36:18.440
me to, I would much prefer

00:36:20.000 --> 00:36:23.289
something like you have going through next to the rail

00:36:23.289 --> 00:36:24.480
station.

00:36:24.480 --> 00:36:25.360
I mean the rail.

00:36:25.360 --> 00:36:26.639
>> A separated trail?

00:36:26.639 --> 00:36:27.320
>> Yes.

00:36:27.320 --> 00:36:31.159
I just think that's, cars run into cars, right?

00:36:31.159 --> 00:36:32.480
I mean, that's just a fact.

00:36:32.480 --> 00:36:34.880
So, cars are going to run into bikes.

00:36:34.880 --> 00:36:39.530
I mean, it just, it's, but if you put them on a trail, they

00:36:39.530 --> 00:36:40.079
're safe.

00:36:40.079 --> 00:36:43.170
If I'm a new user, my daughter's a new user, we're

00:36:43.170 --> 00:36:46.119
comfortable going there and just riding wherever we're

00:36:46.119 --> 00:36:46.719
going.

00:36:46.719 --> 00:36:49.000
And so I think that's, so those two go hand in hand.

00:36:49.000 --> 00:36:52.360
Connectivity and trails, because then you can kind of make

00:36:52.360 --> 00:36:54.000
a path that covers the city,

00:36:54.000 --> 00:36:59.000
that keeps cars and safe and

00:36:59.000 --> 00:37:02.719
bikes, bicyclists safe as well.

00:37:02.719 --> 00:37:07.449
I mean, I don't know if that's popular, but it just, when I

00:37:07.449 --> 00:37:08.719
look at the goals,

00:37:08.719 --> 00:37:12.469
and if I'm new, I'm not going to be in a hurry to jump on

00:37:12.469 --> 00:37:18.679
anything, you know, that's risky, if you will.

00:37:18.679 --> 00:37:22.010
>> There's a broad range of cyclists out there, and there's

00:37:22.010 --> 00:37:23.280
what we call the interested but

00:37:23.280 --> 00:37:25.949
concerned group, which is probably what the group you would

00:37:25.949 --> 00:37:26.599
fall into.

00:37:26.599 --> 00:37:28.710
Those people want to ride their bike, but again, they're

00:37:28.710 --> 00:37:30.239
like, I don't know, do I feel safe?

00:37:30.239 --> 00:37:32.289
I know I can ride my bike on the trail and I feel safe

00:37:32.289 --> 00:37:33.760
there, but what about on the roads?

00:37:33.760 --> 00:37:35.519
Oh no, that's so scary.

00:37:35.519 --> 00:37:38.199
Those are the kind of people that want to have a bike lane,

00:37:38.199 --> 00:37:39.239
a dedicated bike lane,

00:37:39.239 --> 00:37:42.000
want a protected bike lane or a buffered bike lane.

00:37:42.000 --> 00:37:44.940
And that's how you, that's the best way to get new riders

00:37:44.940 --> 00:37:47.280
is building that infrastructure for them.

00:37:47.280 --> 00:37:50.159
But you also have to teach them how to use those.

00:37:50.159 --> 00:37:53.360
So that's a part of my job is education and encouragement.

00:37:53.360 --> 00:37:56.210
So we have city bike rides, if you're not comfortable on

00:37:56.210 --> 00:37:57.039
the streets,

00:37:57.039 --> 00:37:59.610
I would recommend you come to one of our sponsored bike

00:37:59.610 --> 00:38:01.119
rides and ride with a group first.

00:38:01.119 --> 00:38:04.360
We always ride on the streets to get yourself comfortable.

00:38:04.360 --> 00:38:08.269
I do believe that cars and bicyclists can cooperate safely

00:38:08.269 --> 00:38:09.920
on the road together.

00:38:10.920 --> 00:38:13.159
We don't, there don't have to be accidents.

00:38:14.679 --> 00:38:16.769
The Netherlands has so many cyclists and they don't have

00:38:16.769 --> 00:38:18.360
accidents with cars.

00:38:18.360 --> 00:38:21.019
It's possible, it's definitely possible to do it, you just

00:38:21.019 --> 00:38:23.039
have to build the right infrastructure.

00:38:23.039 --> 00:38:25.429
So we're working on a network, as you can see, so this is

00:38:25.429 --> 00:38:26.079
our bike plan.

00:38:26.079 --> 00:38:28.489
Sorry, I didn't bring my printed copy this time, I have a

00:38:28.489 --> 00:38:29.000
big one.

00:38:30.639 --> 00:38:34.570
But we, this is our network that's supposed to connect our

00:38:34.570 --> 00:38:36.320
streets together on a bike network.

00:38:37.880 --> 00:38:40.800
Obviously a network doesn't happen overnight.

00:38:40.800 --> 00:38:44.269
We're funded $200,000 each year, that's not going to give

00:38:44.269 --> 00:38:47.320
us our entire network in three years.

00:38:47.320 --> 00:38:50.880
So at first I started out little bits and pieces here based

00:38:50.880 --> 00:38:51.239
on,

00:38:51.239 --> 00:38:54.260
well we're doing a street project here, let's piggyback on

00:38:54.260 --> 00:38:54.760
that.

00:38:54.760 --> 00:38:56.920
And we're kind of now getting to a point where we're

00:38:56.920 --> 00:38:59.519
picking up those pieces of connecting our network together.

00:38:59.519 --> 00:39:04.880
And I actually have a slide from another presentation that

00:39:04.880 --> 00:39:08.679
will show that better.

00:39:08.679 --> 00:39:13.909
So you can see here, pre-bike plan, that's what we had for

00:39:13.909 --> 00:39:14.920
bike accommodation.

00:39:16.239 --> 00:39:18.760
And it really wasn't the best.

00:39:18.760 --> 00:39:23.739
It wasn't even bike lanes or, you know, Cheros on Jago, Sh

00:39:23.739 --> 00:39:26.480
ady Oaks right there was just to share the road sign.

00:39:29.000 --> 00:39:33.519
Then the bike plan, this is what we look like right now.

00:39:33.519 --> 00:39:36.940
We've been slowly adding pieces together to create a

00:39:36.940 --> 00:39:37.559
network.

00:39:37.559 --> 00:39:40.309
And then our projects for this year adds even more

00:39:40.309 --> 00:39:41.360
connectivity.

00:39:41.360 --> 00:39:45.429
So we're building our network road by road, and we're

00:39:45.429 --> 00:39:46.960
finally getting to a point, you know,

00:39:46.960 --> 00:39:49.320
where we've been doing infrastructure for, you know, three,

00:39:49.320 --> 00:39:53.400
four years of building a much more connected network.

00:39:53.400 --> 00:39:56.719
But it takes a little bit of time.

00:39:56.719 --> 00:39:57.639
>> Can it continue?

00:39:57.639 --> 00:39:58.079
>> Thank you.

00:39:58.079 --> 00:39:58.400
Thank you.

00:39:58.400 --> 00:39:58.920
I'm sorry.

00:39:58.920 --> 00:40:00.519
>> Well, I just wanted to make sure.

00:40:00.519 --> 00:40:01.199
>> Go ahead.

00:40:01.199 --> 00:40:01.679
No, no.

00:40:01.679 --> 00:40:02.480
I got a lot.

00:40:02.480 --> 00:40:03.039
>> Okay.

00:40:03.039 --> 00:40:03.880
Commissioner Beck.

00:40:03.880 --> 00:40:05.719
>> Thank you.

00:40:05.719 --> 00:40:09.530
I couldn't agree more that if we had dedicated paths that

00:40:09.530 --> 00:40:12.480
would be the best possible thing for us.

00:40:12.480 --> 00:40:16.179
But it appears like with a $200,000 a year budget that

00:40:16.179 --> 00:40:17.960
there's no way we can do that.

00:40:17.960 --> 00:40:21.530
So apparently what we're trying to do here is work with

00:40:21.530 --> 00:40:24.559
existing roads and this limited budget to try and make that

00:40:24.559 --> 00:40:25.320
connectivity.

00:40:25.320 --> 00:40:28.369
>> Right. You know, my job is on street infrastructure of

00:40:28.369 --> 00:40:31.960
getting people using their bikes for active transportation.

00:40:31.960 --> 00:40:35.230
Parks does a lot with our off-road trails like the rail

00:40:35.230 --> 00:40:37.840
trail and our trails within our parks.

00:40:37.840 --> 00:40:40.860
We want to work together so that it creates a network so

00:40:40.860 --> 00:40:44.280
you could use the rail trail and then use city streets to

00:40:44.280 --> 00:40:46.519
get to where you want to go.

00:40:46.519 --> 00:40:50.889
Lots of cyclists want to ride on the street as well, though

00:40:50.889 --> 00:40:51.199
.

00:40:51.199 --> 00:40:55.639
Lots of times we can't build a rail trail everywhere, you

00:40:55.639 --> 00:40:55.639
know.

00:40:55.639 --> 00:40:59.050
But it works well for what it is right now and for what it

00:40:59.050 --> 00:41:01.559
serves, the people that it serves.

00:41:01.559 --> 00:41:02.000
And they're great.

00:41:02.000 --> 00:41:03.960
People love them.

00:41:03.960 --> 00:41:04.480
>> I agree.

00:41:04.480 --> 00:41:04.960
I agree.

00:41:04.960 --> 00:41:05.639
Thank you, sir.

00:41:05.639 --> 00:41:06.400
Yes.

00:41:06.400 --> 00:41:07.480
>> Commissioner Hatchboth.

00:41:07.480 --> 00:41:10.280
>> Thank you, sir.

00:41:10.280 --> 00:41:17.039
And so that takes me to in the goals objectives here.

00:41:17.039 --> 00:41:22.400
It touches on a public-private partnership.

00:41:22.400 --> 00:41:25.679
And so could you tell me what you've done in that regard?

00:41:25.679 --> 00:41:31.639
Because I'm almost thinking, if I go to Target corporate

00:41:31.639 --> 00:41:33.000
office and say,

00:41:33.000 --> 00:41:38.920
are you willing to invest or donate or

00:41:38.920 --> 00:41:42.420
have naming rights for this particular segment of a private

00:41:42.420 --> 00:41:44.440
trail, it's Target's trail.

00:41:44.440 --> 00:41:48.639
With that, it's on every map, it's signed.

00:41:48.639 --> 00:41:52.550
Are you willing to take some of your ad dollars, especially

00:41:52.550 --> 00:41:54.869
in a climate today where most people aren't watching

00:41:54.869 --> 00:41:55.440
commercials.

00:41:55.440 --> 00:41:56.639
They're fast-forwarding for them.

00:41:56.639 --> 00:41:59.590
I mean, my kindergartner would absolutely melt if she had

00:41:59.590 --> 00:42:00.920
to watch a commercial.

00:42:00.920 --> 00:42:02.119
I mean, she doesn't see them.

00:42:02.119 --> 00:42:06.650
I mean, so I think those type retail agencies are looking

00:42:06.650 --> 00:42:08.199
to do something different.

00:42:08.199 --> 00:42:14.429
And I'm curious if we've approached them to get additional

00:42:14.429 --> 00:42:16.440
funds in a creative way.

00:42:16.440 --> 00:42:18.159
>> I can't speak to naming for trails.

00:42:18.159 --> 00:42:20.440
Again, I don't work with our trail system.

00:42:20.440 --> 00:42:22.789
The Parks Department would be the one to work with Target

00:42:22.789 --> 00:42:25.530
or some home office if they wanted to name a part of a

00:42:25.530 --> 00:42:26.159
trail.

00:42:26.159 --> 00:42:30.019
I don't quite know if we would have people name segments on

00:42:30.019 --> 00:42:31.159
our streets.

00:42:31.159 --> 00:42:34.469
But we could look for partnerships for education activities

00:42:34.469 --> 00:42:34.719
.

00:42:34.719 --> 00:42:37.909
So I've worked with UNT and TWU, some local bike shops, we

00:42:37.909 --> 00:42:40.559
've worked with them to promote Bike Month.

00:42:40.559 --> 00:42:43.980
And that's where a lot of my public and private

00:42:43.980 --> 00:42:46.239
partnerships go towards.

00:42:46.239 --> 00:42:49.269
As far as funding the actual bike infrastructure, we've

00:42:49.269 --> 00:42:51.400
worked with UNT.

00:42:51.400 --> 00:42:54.039
They helped pay for a few things, I think, on Highland

00:42:54.039 --> 00:42:54.679
Street.

00:42:54.679 --> 00:42:56.980
But I don't think we could actually have somebody name a

00:42:56.980 --> 00:42:57.960
segment on a street.

00:42:57.960 --> 00:42:59.760
I don't know of anybody who's done that.

00:42:59.760 --> 00:43:01.840
>> And then one last thing, please.

00:43:01.840 --> 00:43:07.929
I think, it's okay if I'm wrong, but you gave an example of

00:43:07.929 --> 00:43:09.760
where, New Zealand?

00:43:09.760 --> 00:43:13.280
>> I'm sorry, the Netherlands and Amsterdam, where they

00:43:13.280 --> 00:43:14.519
have cyclists.

00:43:14.519 --> 00:43:16.880
>> I'm more of a practical application type person.

00:43:16.880 --> 00:43:21.780
So give me a state, give me something in the US in this

00:43:21.780 --> 00:43:24.719
area that avoids accidents.

00:43:24.719 --> 00:43:28.000
>> I think you gotta, so in the legal industry, you have to

00:43:28.000 --> 00:43:30.199
have something that's on point, right?

00:43:30.199 --> 00:43:35.389
So you have, I can't in Texas cite a New York law and kind

00:43:35.389 --> 00:43:36.079
of support it.

00:43:36.079 --> 00:43:39.019
So I'd really like to get, let's compare apples to apples

00:43:39.019 --> 00:43:41.199
just because it helps me understand.

00:43:41.199 --> 00:43:43.159
I mean, I get it, there's a bigger picture.

00:43:43.159 --> 00:43:45.159
I just, I'm narrow focused like that.

00:43:45.159 --> 00:43:45.920
>> Right.

00:43:45.920 --> 00:43:51.150
>> What in this area tells you that there are cars, and I

00:43:51.150 --> 00:43:54.000
know they can, but I'm just saying there's going,

00:43:54.000 --> 00:43:56.159
my statement was simply there are accidents.

00:43:56.159 --> 00:43:59.400
>> Right. >> And it's unavoidable in my humble opinion.

00:43:59.400 --> 00:44:04.000
So that being said, what in this area leads you to think

00:44:04.000 --> 00:44:06.719
you can avoid all accidents?

00:44:06.719 --> 00:44:09.260
>> Well, avoiding all accidents may have to take away human

00:44:09.260 --> 00:44:11.119
error at some point, which is not possible.

00:44:11.119 --> 00:44:13.119
You're right, accidents will happen.

00:44:13.119 --> 00:44:15.119
But we have to do our best to prevent them from happening,

00:44:15.119 --> 00:44:17.000
so we do that by building safe infrastructure.

00:44:17.000 --> 00:44:21.280
We engineer for bad judgments in behavior.

00:44:21.280 --> 00:44:23.289
We do it all the time, we build our roads so they have

00:44:23.289 --> 00:44:25.369
certain curves so that you're not going to get into an

00:44:25.369 --> 00:44:26.079
accident.

00:44:26.079 --> 00:44:27.719
We do that with our bike infrastructure as well.

00:44:27.719 --> 00:44:30.300
You're either going to build a protected bike lane or you

00:44:30.300 --> 00:44:31.679
're going to have a buffer so

00:44:31.679 --> 00:44:34.030
there's a little bit more separation between somebody

00:44:34.030 --> 00:44:36.360
driving their car and somebody riding their bike.

00:44:36.360 --> 00:44:37.440
It's definitely possible.

00:44:37.440 --> 00:44:40.440
It's also just educating the public that we're all people.

00:44:40.440 --> 00:44:43.639
We're not motors, we're not cyclists, we're people who

00:44:43.639 --> 00:44:46.000
choose these different ways of getting around.

00:44:46.000 --> 00:44:49.119
And if we can just be safe and kind to everybody on the

00:44:49.119 --> 00:44:50.840
roadway, pay attention to them and

00:44:50.840 --> 00:44:54.269
create everybody like people, I think that goes a long way

00:44:54.269 --> 00:44:55.960
to making us safe as well.

00:44:55.960 --> 00:44:59.469
But there have been numerous cities and states that adopt

00:44:59.469 --> 00:45:01.840
Vision Zero policy statements.

00:45:01.840 --> 00:45:06.800
And then as staff and community, we work towards making

00:45:06.800 --> 00:45:10.320
that happen of Vision Zero, no accidents.

00:45:10.320 --> 00:45:13.000
I think Utah adopted one.

00:45:13.000 --> 00:45:16.590
I want to say Portland has a Vision Zero plan of having

00:45:16.590 --> 00:45:19.039
zero accidents and fatalities.

00:45:20.800 --> 00:45:21.840
>> Okay.

00:45:21.840 --> 00:45:23.159
>> I can get more info if you want.

00:45:23.159 --> 00:45:25.119
I'm sorry I don't have any right here with me, but.

00:45:26.880 --> 00:45:31.800
>> No, no, it was more just an insight into our look into

00:45:31.800 --> 00:45:34.639
kind of another perspective, right?

00:45:34.639 --> 00:45:38.480
I mean, I just wanted to share kind of my approach.

00:45:38.480 --> 00:45:41.920
It's very, very one dimensional, if you will.

00:45:41.920 --> 00:45:45.679
It's simply, I tell my daughters when we were kids and my

00:45:45.679 --> 00:45:48.960
kindergarten now, hey, let's get out on the curbside.

00:45:48.960 --> 00:45:51.130
And we'll deal with the occasional car that's driving on

00:45:51.130 --> 00:45:51.840
the sidewalk.

00:45:51.840 --> 00:45:54.210
But we don't have to, it's like you, to have a myriad of

00:45:54.210 --> 00:45:56.590
rules that say, hey, get out, look both ways, this, that,

00:45:56.590 --> 00:45:57.159
and the other.

00:45:57.159 --> 00:46:00.320
That's effective, but it's also just as effective to say,

00:46:00.320 --> 00:46:03.320
let's just deal with the car on occasion that ever drives

00:46:03.320 --> 00:46:04.079
on the sidewalk.

00:46:04.079 --> 00:46:06.960
But we'll be on the sidewalk and kind of take that approach

00:46:06.960 --> 00:46:07.159
.

00:46:07.159 --> 00:46:08.000
>> Correct, yeah.

00:46:08.000 --> 00:46:10.860
>> That's my approach to the, I think there's an

00:46:10.860 --> 00:46:14.880
opportunity pathing wise that would then also

00:46:14.880 --> 00:46:18.360
take the brunt of the traffic and then use the streets

00:46:18.360 --> 00:46:19.760
intermittently.

00:46:19.760 --> 00:46:22.599
And I think that would increase.

00:46:22.599 --> 00:46:25.079
And so that's, I understand that's the parks department.

00:46:25.079 --> 00:46:29.119
>> Right. >> And so I may see what opportunities are there

00:46:29.119 --> 00:46:30.920
because I've seen the,

00:46:30.920 --> 00:46:33.809
I mean that is just absolutely great, the rail trail to go

00:46:33.809 --> 00:46:35.719
from Denton to across the bridge.

00:46:35.719 --> 00:46:36.800
I mean that's phenomenal.

00:46:36.800 --> 00:46:40.119
>> Right. >> And you don't have to worry as much about

00:46:40.119 --> 00:46:42.960
those intersections you have, stop signs you have.

00:46:42.960 --> 00:46:44.159
>> Right. >> An opportunity to look both ways.

00:46:44.159 --> 00:46:47.239
It's kind of a clearly marked thing, so thank you.

00:46:47.239 --> 00:46:48.320
>> Yeah, you're welcome, yeah.

00:46:48.320 --> 00:46:51.400
The goal is to make it safe for everybody to ride their

00:46:51.400 --> 00:46:52.719
bike on the street.

00:46:52.719 --> 00:46:55.019
I've gone to elementary schools and done safety

00:46:55.019 --> 00:46:57.739
presentations so that kids learn from a young age how to be

00:46:57.739 --> 00:46:58.840
safe on their bike.

00:46:58.840 --> 00:47:00.679
I just don't want people to be scared of their bikes.

00:47:00.679 --> 00:47:04.190
I want them to feel safe when they're riding, to not have

00:47:04.190 --> 00:47:05.599
to be fearful of it.

00:47:05.599 --> 00:47:06.599
>> Absolutely, thank you.

00:47:08.280 --> 00:47:09.320
>> Commissioner Bribble.

00:47:09.320 --> 00:47:09.840
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:47:11.519 --> 00:47:14.269
One more thing I'd like to add, if we do get an opportunity

00:47:14.269 --> 00:47:16.199
to see this again, and I hope we do.

00:47:16.199 --> 00:47:19.289
I know technically the name of the original document is the

00:47:19.289 --> 00:47:22.039
comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian plan.

00:47:22.039 --> 00:47:23.960
>> Right. >> It's not really a pedestrian plan.

00:47:23.960 --> 00:47:27.840
We don't have proposed sidewalk projects on there.

00:47:27.840 --> 00:47:33.039
In fact, I recall when city council was visiting this

00:47:33.039 --> 00:47:33.639
document,

00:47:33.639 --> 00:47:37.619
I had asked Councilman Rodin to ask a question about, they

00:47:37.619 --> 00:47:39.679
were doing a workshop session on it.

00:47:39.679 --> 00:47:41.679
How do people cross Hickory Street safely?

00:47:41.679 --> 00:47:44.400
This was before the Grand Street project that they did.

00:47:44.400 --> 00:47:47.000
And he was about to ask that question, but because he was

00:47:47.000 --> 00:47:49.440
leading, what we were hoping for is to lead up to this

00:47:49.440 --> 00:47:51.480
question, where are the sidewalks in this plan?

00:47:51.480 --> 00:47:53.579
>> Right. >> And the answer from the consultant was

00:47:53.579 --> 00:47:55.159
basically this is more of a bike plan.

00:47:56.159 --> 00:47:57.440
And it is really more of a bike plan.

00:47:57.440 --> 00:47:59.320
>> Right. >> And we have a challenge,

00:47:59.320 --> 00:48:02.300
high school students getting hit trying to walk to Ryan

00:48:02.300 --> 00:48:03.159
High School.

00:48:03.159 --> 00:48:06.780
And I know that the city's working on getting control over

00:48:06.780 --> 00:48:09.519
McKinney Street so we can, anyway.

00:48:09.519 --> 00:48:12.369
>> My general question is, I'd really like it if we could

00:48:12.369 --> 00:48:15.699
look at also pedestrian accommodations in the future bike

00:48:15.699 --> 00:48:17.119
and pedestrian plan.

00:48:17.119 --> 00:48:18.639
You have counts for pedestrians.

00:48:18.639 --> 00:48:21.269
We have a higher percentage of pedestrians than cyclists

00:48:21.269 --> 00:48:22.280
who are commuters.

00:48:22.280 --> 00:48:26.320
So I'd like to see that come to us in the next go around.

00:48:26.320 --> 00:48:28.800
Where are we building sidewalks and where do we need them?

00:48:28.800 --> 00:48:31.809
>> Right, yeah, and sidewalks is obviously a much larger

00:48:31.809 --> 00:48:33.239
issue than just myself.

00:48:33.239 --> 00:48:36.349
We do all of our streets department, various engineering

00:48:36.349 --> 00:48:37.320
departments.

00:48:37.320 --> 00:48:39.159
>> This would be a good time though to tackle that.

00:48:39.159 --> 00:48:40.119
>> Right, I agree, yeah.

00:48:40.119 --> 00:48:43.280
And the name, my boss absolutely hates the name.

00:48:43.280 --> 00:48:44.920
>> There's no pedestrian stuff in there.

00:48:44.920 --> 00:48:48.440
>> And I just call it the Denton Bike Plan because it's a

00:48:48.440 --> 00:48:49.719
very long name.

00:48:49.719 --> 00:48:52.690
But yeah, that's definitely something we're going to tackle

00:48:52.690 --> 00:48:52.920
.

00:48:52.920 --> 00:48:56.030
Hopefully, we get funding to update the plan that it won't

00:48:56.030 --> 00:48:57.400
have this awful name.

00:48:57.400 --> 00:48:59.170
>> Or that if it does, it does actually address pedestrian

00:48:59.170 --> 00:48:59.559
issues.

00:48:59.559 --> 00:49:03.119
>> It absolutely needs to be a separate pedestrian plan.

00:49:03.119 --> 00:49:04.159
>> Right.

00:49:04.159 --> 00:49:05.239
>> Yeah. >> Thank you.

00:49:05.239 --> 00:49:06.719
>> You're welcome.

00:49:06.719 --> 00:49:07.639
>> Any other questions for Julie?

00:49:10.159 --> 00:49:13.920
>> Well, thank you.

00:49:13.920 --> 00:49:14.440
Good job.

00:49:14.440 --> 00:49:14.960
>> Thank you, everybody.

00:49:18.559 --> 00:49:21.719
>> We've got one other item for work session.

00:49:21.719 --> 00:49:24.400
We do have food this evening, so I think what we're going

00:49:24.400 --> 00:49:25.960
to do while we're changing and

00:49:25.960 --> 00:49:28.289
getting ready for our next work session, let's take a break

00:49:28.289 --> 00:49:28.960
and get food.

00:49:28.960 --> 00:49:32.119
We're going to take a break here at 554.

00:49:32.119 --> 00:49:37.719
[BLANK_AUDIO]

00:49:37.719 --> 00:49:42.400
>> Session, our next report at 602, and

00:49:42.400 --> 00:49:48.559
our next item is going to be item B, PZ 16-040.

00:49:48.559 --> 00:49:50.760
>> Good evening, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners.

00:49:50.760 --> 00:49:53.599
Tonight, I'm presenting a report and

00:49:53.599 --> 00:49:57.449
a discussion item about the anticipated Denton Development

00:49:57.449 --> 00:49:59.239
Code Amendment Project.

00:49:59.239 --> 00:50:02.380
So just to kind of give you some background, this staff is

00:50:02.380 --> 00:50:04.079
currently exploring

00:50:04.079 --> 00:50:07.969
the option of hiring some professional services support to

00:50:07.969 --> 00:50:09.440
do a more comprehensive,

00:50:09.440 --> 00:50:12.980
a very comprehensive code amendment project that includes

00:50:12.980 --> 00:50:14.519
reformatting the code,

00:50:14.519 --> 00:50:16.909
reorganizing the code, and some general updates and clean

00:50:16.909 --> 00:50:18.639
ups that are really needed in the code.

00:50:18.639 --> 00:50:21.630
But tonight's presentation is really more focused on some

00:50:21.630 --> 00:50:23.159
staff initiated updates.

00:50:23.159 --> 00:50:25.980
We have some new staff that have really taken a close look

00:50:25.980 --> 00:50:26.679
at the code,

00:50:26.679 --> 00:50:30.530
kind of measured it against other codes that we've worked

00:50:30.530 --> 00:50:31.119
with and

00:50:31.119 --> 00:50:33.659
codes that we've learned about and at our professional

00:50:33.659 --> 00:50:35.119
development conferences.

00:50:35.119 --> 00:50:37.199
And so we've really, and then worked with the staff to

00:50:37.199 --> 00:50:39.800
really identify some of the more pressing amendments that

00:50:39.800 --> 00:50:40.760
are in order at this time.

00:50:40.760 --> 00:50:42.820
So I'd like to go through some of the things that we're

00:50:42.820 --> 00:50:44.880
proposing to bring to you in upcoming months.

00:50:47.480 --> 00:50:51.480
Just before we get started, we typically attend a lot of

00:50:51.480 --> 00:50:52.960
professional development conferences.

00:50:52.960 --> 00:50:54.920
And of course, we do a lot of benchmark studies.

00:50:54.920 --> 00:50:57.769
But a typical feature at a conference is a developer

00:50:57.769 --> 00:50:58.840
presentation.

00:50:58.840 --> 00:51:02.630
And we see those in our planning magazines and our websites

00:51:02.630 --> 00:51:04.679
that we visit for professional development.

00:51:04.679 --> 00:51:06.489
And of course, these presentations that we attend at

00:51:06.489 --> 00:51:07.840
conferences are pretty important.

00:51:07.840 --> 00:51:10.079
I usually attend those and they're a regular feature.

00:51:10.079 --> 00:51:11.949
Because I always want to hear what the development

00:51:11.949 --> 00:51:13.960
community has to say about process improvements.

00:51:13.960 --> 00:51:16.039
And I've sometimes brought that back to communities I've

00:51:16.039 --> 00:51:18.449
worked with and tried to integrate their comments into

00:51:18.449 --> 00:51:20.760
making the process more effective.

00:51:20.760 --> 00:51:23.690
So these, what we have before you are just a couple of

00:51:23.690 --> 00:51:25.159
examples, Planner's Web.

00:51:25.159 --> 00:51:28.880
And a couple other examples of some presentation slides

00:51:28.880 --> 00:51:30.960
that I requested after I came back.

00:51:30.960 --> 00:51:32.730
Said, hey, can I have your presentation and maybe use some

00:51:32.730 --> 00:51:33.280
of your slides?

00:51:33.280 --> 00:51:35.000
And they provided those to you.

00:51:35.000 --> 00:51:37.550
When I go to those conferences, we do see some reoccurring

00:51:37.550 --> 00:51:38.119
themes.

00:51:38.119 --> 00:51:41.900
And some of those include developers continually artic

00:51:41.900 --> 00:51:44.599
ulating the need for an understandable process.

00:51:44.599 --> 00:51:46.570
We need to know what it begins with, what it ends with, and

00:51:46.570 --> 00:51:48.280
we need to know what that timeline looks like.

00:51:48.280 --> 00:51:50.579
And we need to know that staff is competent in that

00:51:50.579 --> 00:51:51.239
timeline.

00:51:51.239 --> 00:51:54.119
Again, it comes up that they want predictability.

00:51:54.119 --> 00:51:56.170
They want to know that it's going to go the way it's

00:51:56.170 --> 00:51:58.360
intended, that we can stick to our timelines.

00:51:58.360 --> 00:52:01.159
They want consistency in interpretations of the code from

00:52:01.159 --> 00:52:03.880
multiple staff members if their project spans the turn up

00:52:03.880 --> 00:52:05.119
staff turnover.

00:52:05.119 --> 00:52:07.719
Or if they end up with a different project reviewer.

00:52:07.719 --> 00:52:10.360
And again and again, they repeat that they want flexibility

00:52:10.360 --> 00:52:10.559
.

00:52:10.559 --> 00:52:12.519
They want some flexibility in the code.

00:52:12.519 --> 00:52:15.190
Not so much that they can do whatever they want, but this

00:52:15.190 --> 00:52:16.719
is good and this is also good.

00:52:16.719 --> 00:52:18.559
You can do one or the other whatever works for you.

00:52:18.559 --> 00:52:19.719
And this is a repeated theme.

00:52:19.719 --> 00:52:23.719
At the national conference, our former APA president talked

00:52:23.719 --> 00:52:27.019
with multiple national developers who talked about the need

00:52:27.019 --> 00:52:28.159
for administrative approvals.

00:52:28.159 --> 00:52:31.320
It's possible to get those integrated into the code when

00:52:31.320 --> 00:52:32.159
possible.

00:52:32.159 --> 00:52:33.920
So I'll talk a little bit more about that.

00:52:33.920 --> 00:52:36.800
Again, just to highlight some of the things that we

00:52:36.800 --> 00:52:38.280
routinely hear about.

00:52:38.280 --> 00:52:41.440
The need to encourage flexibility within the code.

00:52:41.440 --> 00:52:43.480
This is good, this is good, and this is also good.

00:52:43.480 --> 00:52:45.719
You pick what works for you, developer.

00:52:45.719 --> 00:52:49.639
And this is another presentation at a national conference

00:52:49.639 --> 00:52:53.760
that in flexible processes sometimes stifle creativity and

00:52:53.760 --> 00:52:56.280
eliminate the potential for good urban design, strict

00:52:56.280 --> 00:53:00.219
standards sometimes eliminate that chance to really achieve

00:53:00.219 --> 00:53:02.960
a better and a higher site development standard.

00:53:02.960 --> 00:53:04.980
But more importantly, and this is one that really had an

00:53:04.980 --> 00:53:08.920
impact on me, and it's a summary piece that came from the

00:53:08.920 --> 00:53:09.760
planners web.

00:53:09.760 --> 00:53:11.480
Are you strangling your development community?

00:53:11.480 --> 00:53:14.010
But actually this really reiterates some stuff that I've

00:53:14.010 --> 00:53:15.440
heard at multiple conferences.

00:53:15.440 --> 00:53:18.710
Successful processes can be extensive, but it's okay if

00:53:18.710 --> 00:53:19.840
they're clear.

00:53:19.840 --> 00:53:23.070
They can be very extensive, but if they're clear,

00:53:23.070 --> 00:53:25.400
developers will respond to that.

00:53:25.400 --> 00:53:26.880
The expectations can be high.

00:53:26.880 --> 00:53:29.179
It is not the regulations that scare them away, it's the

00:53:29.179 --> 00:53:29.920
uncertainty.

00:53:31.000 --> 00:53:33.659
But if they're known, the regulations, then it conveys a

00:53:33.659 --> 00:53:36.199
certain confidence to developers.

00:53:36.199 --> 00:53:39.559
And reviews can be deliberate, but they can also be timely.

00:53:39.559 --> 00:53:42.230
So let us know what the timeline's going to be to make that

00:53:42.230 --> 00:53:43.119
happen for us.

00:53:46.360 --> 00:53:47.710
Working with staff, we have identified some potential code

00:53:47.710 --> 00:53:51.760
amendments that we'd like to bring forward to you.

00:53:51.760 --> 00:53:54.239
Again, these would be staff initiated code amendments.

00:53:54.239 --> 00:53:57.519
We look towards a larger project at some point, and we will

00:53:57.519 --> 00:53:59.719
talk more about that in the future.

00:53:59.719 --> 00:54:02.610
But these are some things as some of the new planners who

00:54:02.610 --> 00:54:05.530
are new to the team have sat down through the DRC process

00:54:05.530 --> 00:54:05.800
and

00:54:05.800 --> 00:54:10.110
identified and things that we have found really are

00:54:10.110 --> 00:54:12.480
problematic in the code.

00:54:12.480 --> 00:54:15.630
So just to talk about some of the challenges that we've

00:54:15.630 --> 00:54:18.440
identified, there are some unclear standards in the code.

00:54:18.440 --> 00:54:21.989
We have some staff here tonight that could probably give

00:54:21.989 --> 00:54:25.989
you a host of examples, but just a couple examples would be

00:54:25.989 --> 00:54:27.079
buffering.

00:54:27.079 --> 00:54:29.480
There's a couple different interpretations.

00:54:29.480 --> 00:54:30.199
Is it the use?

00:54:30.199 --> 00:54:30.880
Is it the zone?

00:54:30.880 --> 00:54:33.679
Historically, it's been the use in the community.

00:54:33.679 --> 00:54:35.800
I think I sat down with Jennifer and made a compelling

00:54:35.800 --> 00:54:38.219
argument that it's use and zone, because the language isn't

00:54:38.219 --> 00:54:38.800
clear.

00:54:38.800 --> 00:54:41.900
It's hard to tell what section is a clause of another

00:54:41.900 --> 00:54:44.840
section, and you could make a compelling case either way.

00:54:44.840 --> 00:54:48.800
And it really depends on the interpretation of whoever at

00:54:48.800 --> 00:54:51.519
that point is making that decision.

00:54:51.519 --> 00:54:53.159
Another example would be articulation.

00:54:53.159 --> 00:54:55.079
We call for non-residential articulation.

00:54:55.079 --> 00:54:57.480
We don't give any sort of standards for that.

00:54:57.480 --> 00:54:58.840
What does a projection look like?

00:54:58.840 --> 00:55:00.039
How much should it project?

00:55:00.039 --> 00:55:01.760
What does a recess look like?

00:55:01.760 --> 00:55:03.800
Architectural features, how often should they repeat?

00:55:03.800 --> 00:55:06.480
These are typical things that you find in other codes that

00:55:06.480 --> 00:55:07.599
give guidance to staff.

00:55:07.599 --> 00:55:09.360
But also give guidance to the developer.

00:55:09.360 --> 00:55:10.960
What's the staff going to expect?

00:55:10.960 --> 00:55:12.280
Let's bring it to them every time.

00:55:13.440 --> 00:55:14.480
Inconsistent standards.

00:55:14.480 --> 00:55:16.780
We have standards in our code that conflict with our design

00:55:16.780 --> 00:55:20.199
criteria manuals, which also stipulate how site layout

00:55:20.199 --> 00:55:21.440
should occur.

00:55:21.440 --> 00:55:24.159
And these manuals are used in tandem.

00:55:24.159 --> 00:55:26.679
They're more specific than the code, but there's conflicts.

00:55:26.679 --> 00:55:28.360
An example would be perimeter fencing.

00:55:28.360 --> 00:55:31.460
Higher standard is called for in the design criteria manual

00:55:31.460 --> 00:55:34.039
than it's called for in our debt and development code.

00:55:34.039 --> 00:55:37.210
And that created a little discussion at one DRC, which one

00:55:37.210 --> 00:55:38.400
should we go with?

00:55:38.400 --> 00:55:40.699
And one has the better standard, but one is the prevailing

00:55:40.699 --> 00:55:41.199
document.

00:55:41.199 --> 00:55:42.880
There's unclear standards.

00:55:44.519 --> 00:55:49.000
Another inconsistency is parking lot screening.

00:55:49.000 --> 00:55:51.710
We have a standard if parking is in front, but we have an

00:55:51.710 --> 00:55:54.559
overall standard for parking against the right of way.

00:55:54.559 --> 00:55:56.039
Which one is at play?

00:55:56.039 --> 00:55:58.820
When you have both at the same time, there's been different

00:55:58.820 --> 00:56:00.239
interpretations on that.

00:56:00.239 --> 00:56:03.530
There's a whole host of inconsistent standards that I could

00:56:03.530 --> 00:56:07.000
cite and staff could spend a good bit of time looking at.

00:56:07.000 --> 00:56:08.039
Atypical language.

00:56:09.280 --> 00:56:11.469
Our special exception language in our code that is not part

00:56:11.469 --> 00:56:13.360
of our non-conforming section,

00:56:13.360 --> 00:56:18.360
which basically exempts anything that was non-conforming at

00:56:18.360 --> 00:56:21.519
the time of the adoption of the development code from the

00:56:21.519 --> 00:56:23.239
non-conforming status.

00:56:23.239 --> 00:56:25.159
This is very atypical.

00:56:25.159 --> 00:56:28.449
Some cities like to slowly bring non-conforming uses into

00:56:28.449 --> 00:56:30.639
the fold and make them conforming.

00:56:30.639 --> 00:56:33.320
They have maybe generous grace periods.

00:56:33.320 --> 00:56:36.219
They have trigger tables that slowly integrate those uses

00:56:36.219 --> 00:56:36.679
back.

00:56:36.679 --> 00:56:39.500
I've not seen a city that gives a sort of special

00:56:39.500 --> 00:56:42.639
protection to those uses that can go on and even allow an

00:56:42.639 --> 00:56:43.360
expansion of the use.

00:56:43.360 --> 00:56:47.840
This is really an atypical code example.

00:56:47.840 --> 00:56:48.719
>> Commissioner Beck.

00:56:48.719 --> 00:56:49.440
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:56:49.440 --> 00:56:50.039
>> Excuse me.

00:56:50.039 --> 00:56:50.559
>> Yes, sir.

00:56:52.239 --> 00:56:53.360
>> Beverly, sorry.

00:56:53.360 --> 00:56:54.760
>> Yes, sir.

00:56:54.760 --> 00:56:58.079
>> Can you give us an example of conforming and non-con

00:56:58.079 --> 00:56:58.880
forming?

00:56:58.880 --> 00:57:00.400
What were you talking about?

00:57:00.400 --> 00:57:05.570
>> For example, if you had a building that was, let's just

00:57:05.570 --> 00:57:05.760
say,

00:57:05.760 --> 00:57:08.230
all metal in a commercial district, in one of our

00:57:08.230 --> 00:57:11.860
commercial districts, and there was now the zoning at the

00:57:11.860 --> 00:57:13.440
time that it was built.

00:57:13.440 --> 00:57:15.119
It may have been okay.

00:57:15.119 --> 00:57:18.210
We may not have had a standard for metal in that particular

00:57:18.210 --> 00:57:19.000
corridor.

00:57:19.000 --> 00:57:20.969
Maybe it's an important corridor that we maybe wouldn't

00:57:20.969 --> 00:57:21.920
want to see that type.

00:57:21.920 --> 00:57:24.889
But it's a use, let's just say it is a kennel that's

00:57:24.889 --> 00:57:29.019
located on an important corridor in the city and maybe that

00:57:29.019 --> 00:57:30.320
use is no longer allowed.

00:57:30.320 --> 00:57:34.579
We allow that use to have to, that particular use to even

00:57:34.579 --> 00:57:37.920
grow on site and to have special status.

00:57:37.920 --> 00:57:42.199
Typically cities that have non-conforming uses that maybe

00:57:42.199 --> 00:57:44.090
aren't compatible with the vision of that new zoning

00:57:44.090 --> 00:57:44.519
district or

00:57:44.519 --> 00:57:46.909
the way the city's going or how that road is developing and

00:57:46.909 --> 00:57:49.079
maybe it's a lot of residential occurring there.

00:57:49.079 --> 00:57:51.880
Typically cities will say, okay, we have a new code now.

00:57:51.880 --> 00:57:53.239
You are non-conforming use.

00:57:53.239 --> 00:57:54.239
You are grandfathered.

00:57:54.239 --> 00:57:56.639
That doesn't take away your right to operate.

00:57:56.639 --> 00:57:59.869
But if you expand, we're going to take a look at that and

00:57:59.869 --> 00:58:01.639
you may or may not be able to expand your use.

00:58:01.639 --> 00:58:03.750
And if you do, if you expand your building, you have to

00:58:03.750 --> 00:58:06.239
bring it into compliance with our development standards.

00:58:06.239 --> 00:58:09.030
So it takes a look at those uses that might have been

00:58:09.030 --> 00:58:10.719
legally cited at the time.

00:58:10.719 --> 00:58:14.920
But then new code revisions that reflect the comp plan or

00:58:14.920 --> 00:58:18.250
reflect the changing corridor or changing surrounding

00:58:18.250 --> 00:58:19.199
properties.

00:58:19.199 --> 00:58:24.619
It lets those slowly eventually either drop away or change

00:58:24.619 --> 00:58:25.079
or

00:58:25.079 --> 00:58:27.159
when they do change they have to come into compliance.

00:58:27.159 --> 00:58:28.880
We don't require that.

00:58:28.880 --> 00:58:30.239
>> Okay, great, thank you.

00:58:32.000 --> 00:58:34.650
>> Some other, I think, atypical language is our parking

00:58:34.650 --> 00:58:38.079
schedule doesn't match our table of uses.

00:58:38.079 --> 00:58:41.250
Typically, parking lines up very closely so that if you

00:58:41.250 --> 00:58:42.880
have this particular use,

00:58:42.880 --> 00:58:45.969
restaurants, the table of uses lines up exactly with your

00:58:45.969 --> 00:58:47.000
parking table.

00:58:47.000 --> 00:58:51.239
We sometimes have to do some kind of guess work about what

00:58:51.239 --> 00:58:51.800
applies and

00:58:51.800 --> 00:58:56.440
where in our parking ratio requirements for the city.

00:58:56.440 --> 00:58:58.639
because it doesn't line up exactly with all the uses.

00:59:01.679 --> 00:59:04.050
Overlays in most communities are used to just elevate

00:59:04.050 --> 00:59:05.559
standards.

00:59:05.559 --> 00:59:08.199
They're typically for corridors or special districts.

00:59:08.199 --> 00:59:10.800
We've used those a little differently in this community.

00:59:10.800 --> 00:59:14.780
And you might see those in a interstate overlay or a

00:59:14.780 --> 00:59:15.679
special district.

00:59:15.679 --> 00:59:18.280
And we've used those kind of more site specific.

00:59:18.280 --> 00:59:20.869
And that's really atypical for a lot of communities, how we

00:59:20.869 --> 00:59:22.280
've identified overlays.

00:59:24.039 --> 00:59:26.480
And then not developer friendly.

00:59:26.480 --> 00:59:29.489
I know we have a lot of elements in our code that we allow

00:59:29.489 --> 00:59:32.610
for some variation, but what developers want is some

00:59:32.610 --> 00:59:33.519
predictability.

00:59:33.519 --> 00:59:35.699
You may recall recently we brought to you the Dent

00:59:35.699 --> 00:59:37.280
municipal electric standards,

00:59:37.280 --> 00:59:42.480
which incorporated some routinely requested requirements

00:59:42.480 --> 00:59:44.039
from the public and

00:59:44.039 --> 00:59:48.000
from staff and ultimately from this commission.

00:59:48.000 --> 00:59:49.889
They were typically approved when the sites were brought

00:59:49.889 --> 00:59:50.320
forward.

00:59:50.320 --> 00:59:52.239
So we said, we keep approving the same thing over and over

00:59:52.239 --> 00:59:52.639
again.

00:59:52.639 --> 00:59:54.880
Let's just get this integrated into our code.

00:59:54.880 --> 00:59:56.840
We have an ADP process.

00:59:56.840 --> 00:59:59.860
I can think of at least three times in my short time here

00:59:59.860 --> 01:00:01.440
that I've sat in the DRC.

01:00:01.440 --> 01:00:04.960
And I've had developers say, we'll do whatever you say.

01:00:04.960 --> 01:00:08.150
We want to do front parking, we'll do whatever you say, we

01:00:08.150 --> 01:00:08.920
'll screen it.

01:00:08.920 --> 01:00:11.679
We will put all the landscaping you want.

01:00:11.679 --> 01:00:13.360
Don't make us do the ADP.

01:00:13.360 --> 01:00:14.719
We don't have a mechanism to do that.

01:00:14.719 --> 01:00:17.440
But we keep requiring the same things.

01:00:17.440 --> 01:00:20.639
And integrating those standards, those frequent flyer

01:00:20.639 --> 01:00:24.159
standards into our process will add some predictability.

01:00:24.159 --> 01:00:25.480
Yes, this is okay.

01:00:25.480 --> 01:00:27.239
But this is also okay if you do it this way.

01:00:27.239 --> 01:00:31.079
And maybe making that subject to conditions or limitations.

01:00:31.079 --> 01:00:33.889
Giving the developer that sense that they don't have to run

01:00:33.889 --> 01:00:35.320
the gauntlet every time.

01:00:35.320 --> 01:00:37.849
But that we have a higher development standard if you

01:00:37.849 --> 01:00:39.320
choose this alternative.

01:00:39.320 --> 01:00:41.239
Parking is another example.

01:00:41.239 --> 01:00:45.170
Allowing for giving bonuses for parking to be oriented

01:00:45.170 --> 01:00:48.199
towards the rather than mandating that parking all be in

01:00:48.199 --> 01:00:48.760
the rear.

01:00:48.760 --> 01:00:50.190
Say, well if you're going to put it in the front, it's

01:00:50.190 --> 01:00:51.119
going to be limited to this.

01:00:51.119 --> 01:00:53.909
And it's going to be landscaped with interior, median, and

01:00:53.909 --> 01:00:55.360
terminal parking islands.

01:00:55.360 --> 01:00:57.980
If you drop to the rear, we'll drop some of that landsca

01:00:57.980 --> 01:00:59.159
ping requirement.

01:00:59.159 --> 01:01:02.320
Giving some bonus and flexibility, letting the developer

01:01:02.320 --> 01:01:04.639
make the call and how he wants to do that.

01:01:04.639 --> 01:01:07.869
There's buffering that has, I know Fort Worth has a point

01:01:07.869 --> 01:01:10.400
system that they are trying to achieve an intensive and

01:01:10.400 --> 01:01:11.199
effective buffer.

01:01:11.199 --> 01:01:13.860
And the developer has to achieve a certain number of points

01:01:13.860 --> 01:01:14.079
.

01:01:14.079 --> 01:01:16.650
If he has a good masonry guy, he may integrate wall and

01:01:16.650 --> 01:01:17.599
landscaping.

01:01:17.599 --> 01:01:20.730
If he can move dirt, he may want to berm and double his

01:01:20.730 --> 01:01:22.840
intensity of his landscaping.

01:01:22.840 --> 01:01:25.789
The point is to get a good buffer and they have built in

01:01:25.789 --> 01:01:29.039
some flexibility into their code rather than mandating a

01:01:29.039 --> 01:01:30.719
strict standard on that.

01:01:33.920 --> 01:01:35.519
I'm not going to go through each one of these.

01:01:35.519 --> 01:01:37.820
It's just an overview of some of the, actually I'm going to

01:01:37.820 --> 01:01:40.599
go through each one of these but not on this slide.

01:01:40.599 --> 01:01:42.550
Overview of some of the things that we are proposing and I

01:01:42.550 --> 01:01:43.920
'll just kind of go through those.

01:01:43.920 --> 01:01:46.639
And this is just to kind of give you all a heads up.

01:01:46.639 --> 01:01:50.210
Each of these, when we bring these forward, will be fully

01:01:50.210 --> 01:01:51.199
developed.

01:01:51.199 --> 01:01:53.539
We will go through with work sessions and bring these

01:01:53.539 --> 01:01:55.039
amendments forward and look for

01:01:55.039 --> 01:01:57.539
direction from this commission about how to best implement

01:01:57.539 --> 01:01:58.559
some of these things.

01:01:58.559 --> 01:02:00.110
These are just some of the things that are on our radar and

01:02:00.110 --> 01:02:01.199
I'll go through these one by one.

01:02:03.199 --> 01:02:05.119
The I-35 widening project.

01:02:05.119 --> 01:02:07.960
There are several cities impacted by this.

01:02:07.960 --> 01:02:10.719
One of the cities that I came from was impacted by this.

01:02:10.719 --> 01:02:13.199
Lewisville was impacted by this.

01:02:13.199 --> 01:02:16.079
The top right hand corner, you can see that Lewisville

01:02:16.079 --> 01:02:19.159
adopted an ordinance that deals with the remainder that's

01:02:19.159 --> 01:02:19.719
left.

01:02:19.719 --> 01:02:22.269
They have distinguished between majorly impacted sites and

01:02:22.269 --> 01:02:24.800
minorly impacted sites and that has been used.

01:02:24.800 --> 01:02:27.199
They actually stipulate, I just read their ordinance today,

01:02:27.199 --> 01:02:29.369
that if it's a majorly impacted site, TextDOT's going to

01:02:29.369 --> 01:02:30.840
pay this much to the property owner.

01:02:30.840 --> 01:02:32.840
And they lay that out very clearly.

01:02:32.840 --> 01:02:35.409
The community I was in, I got calls regularly from TextDOT

01:02:35.409 --> 01:02:37.659
and from property owners saying, what are you going to make

01:02:37.659 --> 01:02:38.039
us do?

01:02:38.039 --> 01:02:41.719
And the answer is, what our code says is what they do.

01:02:43.079 --> 01:02:45.110
Lewisville says you're fully going to comply and here's a

01:02:45.110 --> 01:02:46.760
timeline for doing that.

01:02:46.760 --> 01:02:49.230
And if you're impacted and you need a variance, here's how

01:02:49.230 --> 01:02:51.260
that process, if your site limitations prevent full

01:02:51.260 --> 01:02:53.400
compliance, here's how we're going to process that.

01:02:53.400 --> 01:02:54.440
So they have an ordinance in place.

01:02:54.440 --> 01:02:56.039
Temple went a step further.

01:02:56.039 --> 01:02:58.630
They're impacted, nearly the entire city is impacted, the

01:02:58.630 --> 01:03:00.840
entire corridor through the city is impacted.

01:03:00.840 --> 01:03:03.159
But they took it to another dimension.

01:03:03.159 --> 01:03:05.599
They said, we're going to take this opportunity to take

01:03:05.599 --> 01:03:08.320
what has been essentially an industrial corridor and we're

01:03:08.320 --> 01:03:10.179
going to do some place making here and we're going to

01:03:10.179 --> 01:03:11.599
change the way we look.

01:03:11.599 --> 01:03:14.170
And they put a pretty onerous overlay in place that has

01:03:14.170 --> 01:03:16.820
standards that are stricter than they are in different

01:03:16.820 --> 01:03:17.880
parts of the city.

01:03:17.880 --> 01:03:20.179
Taking that opportunity to put their best foot forward,

01:03:20.179 --> 01:03:22.400
saying here's what people are going to drive through.

01:03:22.400 --> 01:03:24.880
People are going to decide, make decisions about what our

01:03:24.880 --> 01:03:25.920
community is about.

01:03:25.920 --> 01:03:28.420
We're going to put some pretty strict standards about artic

01:03:28.420 --> 01:03:31.199
ulation, architectural, landscaping, and a method for

01:03:31.199 --> 01:03:34.079
dealing with sites that aren't completely compliant.

01:03:34.079 --> 01:03:37.079
So a couple cities have gotten ahead of that.

01:03:37.079 --> 01:03:39.039
We can ask for full compliance.

01:03:39.039 --> 01:03:43.980
We need to come up with a method for dealing with sites

01:03:43.980 --> 01:03:47.130
that can't comply and perhaps explore the possibility of an

01:03:47.130 --> 01:03:47.679
overlay.

01:03:47.679 --> 01:03:52.239
So these are some things that we can take a look at and

01:03:52.239 --> 01:03:55.159
to a certain degree improve the negotiations that occur

01:03:55.159 --> 01:03:57.360
between property owners and textiles.

01:03:57.360 --> 01:03:59.789
When we have a consistent standard that's clearly out in

01:03:59.789 --> 01:04:01.639
the code, our code is silent about it.

01:04:01.639 --> 01:04:03.449
In some cases, we have said you don't have to comply

01:04:03.449 --> 01:04:05.159
because you're affected by the widening.

01:04:05.159 --> 01:04:08.079
That has actually been some staff direction in the past.

01:04:09.199 --> 01:04:12.480
We do have the authority to ask for full compliance.

01:04:12.480 --> 01:04:14.719
We probably should look for better compliance.

01:04:14.719 --> 01:04:15.840
>> Commissioner Dadovich.

01:04:15.840 --> 01:04:17.320
>> I'm sorry. >> Yes sir.

01:04:17.320 --> 01:04:20.610
>> Don't we have a subcommittee set up to work on this

01:04:20.610 --> 01:04:21.360
issue?

01:04:21.360 --> 01:04:25.179
The issue of ordinance, not ordinance, zoning where it has

01:04:25.179 --> 01:04:27.840
been impacted by the 35 widening?

01:04:29.559 --> 01:04:31.389
There were three of us that were supposed to be on a sub

01:04:31.389 --> 01:04:32.440
committee.

01:04:32.440 --> 01:04:36.639
>> I think that's just in some of the rezoning in the city.

01:04:36.639 --> 01:04:37.199
>> City initiated.

01:04:37.199 --> 01:04:38.199
>> City initiated.

01:04:39.400 --> 01:04:40.679
>> Yes, city initiated.

01:04:40.679 --> 01:04:41.360
>> Zoning.

01:04:41.360 --> 01:04:44.760
>> Zoning with regard to the 35 project.

01:04:44.760 --> 01:04:45.840
>> Right. >> Yes.

01:04:45.840 --> 01:04:46.519
>> Correct.

01:04:46.519 --> 01:04:49.360
Absolutely, there is the committee that's leaving next week

01:04:49.360 --> 01:04:50.000
, in fact.

01:04:50.000 --> 01:04:53.599
And that will give you an opportunity, it's an avenue to

01:04:53.599 --> 01:04:56.760
discern what land parcels need to be brought into

01:04:56.760 --> 01:05:00.480
compliance with the comp plan as it relates to zoning.

01:05:00.480 --> 01:05:03.639
What Beverly is discussing with you is creating a corridor

01:05:03.639 --> 01:05:06.760
or an overlay district with specific design criteria and

01:05:06.760 --> 01:05:07.639
mechanisms.

01:05:07.639 --> 01:05:13.329
The question is, does our subcommittee work in conjunction

01:05:13.329 --> 01:05:15.960
with this or help in any way?

01:05:15.960 --> 01:05:18.639
>> What you would be looking at is a zoning perspective.

01:05:18.639 --> 01:05:21.340
Do you want, does the city want to initiate zoning on a

01:05:21.340 --> 01:05:22.599
specific, correct?

01:05:22.599 --> 01:05:23.599
>> Okay.

01:05:23.599 --> 01:05:27.019
>> And I hope for an overlay, but I think at the minimum we

01:05:27.019 --> 01:05:28.800
need to address how we deal with that.

01:05:28.800 --> 01:05:31.210
Because right now we don't have a consistent standard and

01:05:31.210 --> 01:05:33.760
so it definitely impacts negotiations, what we ask for.

01:05:33.760 --> 01:05:37.150
Because they, TextDOT will reimburse them based on what

01:05:37.150 --> 01:05:38.800
city requirements are.

01:05:38.800 --> 01:05:41.289
So getting consistent standard and addressing in our code

01:05:41.289 --> 01:05:42.360
is pretty important.

01:05:43.440 --> 01:05:44.320
>> Can I ask you a question?

01:05:44.320 --> 01:05:45.400
>> Yes sir.

01:05:45.400 --> 01:05:48.460
>> Has the time kind of already passed on that since a lot

01:05:48.460 --> 01:05:51.840
of the right of way has already been acquired for 35?

01:05:51.840 --> 01:05:54.699
>> I think there is still, I understand that the

01:05:54.699 --> 01:05:57.650
acquisition is getting close to complete, but there are

01:05:57.650 --> 01:05:59.639
still some acquisition occurring.

01:05:59.639 --> 01:06:02.719
But as redevelopment occurs, I think we can still use this

01:06:02.719 --> 01:06:03.440
overlay.

01:06:03.440 --> 01:06:08.320
It is such an important corridor for the city.

01:06:08.320 --> 01:06:09.840
It is the most important corridor.

01:06:09.840 --> 01:06:12.309
There is visitors and commuters and travelers passing

01:06:12.309 --> 01:06:13.719
through our city every day.

01:06:13.719 --> 01:06:16.019
So I think that it needs to, if it is not the most visible

01:06:16.019 --> 01:06:17.679
corridor, it certainly is up there.

01:06:18.880 --> 01:06:20.920
>> And 377 is probably the next one.

01:06:20.920 --> 01:06:21.440
>> Absolutely.

01:06:24.039 --> 01:06:25.519
Plan development.

01:06:25.519 --> 01:06:26.599
We had it.

01:06:26.599 --> 01:06:28.840
I don't know that we effectively used it.

01:06:28.840 --> 01:06:29.440
We got rid of it.

01:06:31.599 --> 01:06:33.639
>> The staff is hoping to bring it back.

01:06:33.639 --> 01:06:36.559
And let me just talk for a second about how it can be used.

01:06:36.559 --> 01:06:38.170
I've worked in communities where it's been used poorly and

01:06:38.170 --> 01:06:39.360
I've seen where it's been used well.

01:06:39.360 --> 01:06:41.320
And I think it's all in the code, how you write it.

01:06:41.320 --> 01:06:43.039
And you use it to elevate standards.

01:06:44.480 --> 01:06:47.750
It is, we have a master plan community which allows for

01:06:47.750 --> 01:06:50.690
large scale developments to basically incorporate some

01:06:50.690 --> 01:06:52.320
flexibility, drop.

01:06:52.320 --> 01:06:54.159
Everything can be on the table with the plan development.

01:06:54.159 --> 01:06:56.480
You decide that in your ordinance.

01:06:56.480 --> 01:07:00.119
Dimensions, uses, all types of things can urban design.

01:07:01.280 --> 01:07:03.829
All kinds of things can be addressed and adding a degree of

01:07:03.829 --> 01:07:04.679
flexibility.

01:07:04.679 --> 01:07:06.400
Our surrounding communities have this.

01:07:06.400 --> 01:07:08.269
They are using this and I'll talk in a minute about how

01:07:08.269 --> 01:07:09.079
they're using it.

01:07:11.079 --> 01:07:14.659
Right now in our code, we allow for sites that are greater

01:07:14.659 --> 01:07:16.880
than two acres to drop dimensional,

01:07:16.880 --> 01:07:19.480
not all of them, but some of the dimensional requirements.

01:07:19.480 --> 01:07:21.900
But what we didn't get was the corresponding increases in

01:07:21.900 --> 01:07:23.599
open space and better urban design.

01:07:23.599 --> 01:07:26.480
We let them drop dimensions, but we didn't get the better

01:07:26.480 --> 01:07:29.559
urban design, the place making aspect that can come with it

01:07:29.559 --> 01:07:29.679
.

01:07:29.679 --> 01:07:33.460
The natural resource protection, the respect for the top

01:07:33.460 --> 01:07:35.489
ography of the land, we didn't get any of those ones, we

01:07:35.489 --> 01:07:36.760
just dropped the dimensions.

01:07:36.760 --> 01:07:38.159
Developers are worried about yield.

01:07:39.360 --> 01:07:42.280
Plan developments can help us to achieve the same yield and

01:07:42.280 --> 01:07:44.639
work with them to respect the topography and the natural

01:07:44.639 --> 01:07:46.079
resources that are located on the property.

01:07:47.760 --> 01:07:49.769
The other thing that has come up many times is that

01:07:49.769 --> 01:07:54.090
straight zoning does not allow us to fully explore better

01:07:54.090 --> 01:07:55.440
urban design.

01:07:55.440 --> 01:07:57.760
I can think of a couple of occasions and one that's going

01:07:57.760 --> 01:07:59.079
to be before you very soon.

01:07:59.079 --> 01:08:02.559
The developer is basically being pushed to a higher zoning

01:08:02.559 --> 01:08:03.400
category.

01:08:03.400 --> 01:08:05.789
He only wants one aspect of it, he doesn't want the full

01:08:05.789 --> 01:08:08.440
aspect of it, he just wants to do one more story.

01:08:08.440 --> 01:08:11.420
But he's going to be pushed to the full degree to a higher

01:08:11.420 --> 01:08:12.679
intensity zoning.

01:08:12.679 --> 01:08:15.730
We do not have a mechanism, nor should we, to condition

01:08:15.730 --> 01:08:16.399
zoning.

01:08:16.399 --> 01:08:18.170
Plan development allows us to look at the site

01:08:18.170 --> 01:08:20.989
comprehensively and say, all right, let's see what do you

01:08:20.989 --> 01:08:22.399
want and what can we get?

01:08:22.399 --> 01:08:24.640
We want a better relationship with the street.

01:08:24.640 --> 01:08:26.760
We want to see a little bit more amenities on the site.

01:08:26.760 --> 01:08:28.729
Let's work through this and get a better urban design with

01:08:28.729 --> 01:08:29.079
this.

01:08:29.079 --> 01:08:32.279
So offsite compatibility can be addressed and the

01:08:32.279 --> 01:08:35.079
limitations that are inherent with straight zoning can also

01:08:35.079 --> 01:08:35.920
be addressed.

01:08:35.920 --> 01:08:38.840
We talk about mixed use, we talk about it all the time.

01:08:38.840 --> 01:08:42.279
It's in our comp plan, we embrace the idea of mixed use.

01:08:42.279 --> 01:08:45.869
Plan development allows us to deal with the offsite

01:08:45.869 --> 01:08:49.960
compatibility issues and to tackle things from a form base.

01:08:49.960 --> 01:08:52.539
Rather than always looking at use, then operations, and

01:08:52.539 --> 01:08:55.020
then form at the bottom, we flip it on its ear and we take

01:08:55.020 --> 01:08:56.560
a look at form first and say,

01:08:56.560 --> 01:08:58.199
how can we make this work?

01:08:58.199 --> 01:09:01.960
How can we start to mix these uses horizontally and make

01:09:01.960 --> 01:09:06.960
our community drop some of those trips,

01:09:06.960 --> 01:09:09.050
vehicle trips and maybe even bike trips and let people get

01:09:09.050 --> 01:09:11.739
to the places they want a little quicker, a little easier

01:09:11.739 --> 01:09:14.359
and mitigate for the offsite and compatibility.

01:09:14.359 --> 01:09:16.159
Plan development can help us with that.

01:09:16.159 --> 01:09:17.359
And so we're hoping to bring it back.

01:09:17.359 --> 01:09:21.000
So just for those of you who aren't familiar with it,

01:09:21.000 --> 01:09:24.479
it allows us to drop some of the dimensional or general

01:09:24.479 --> 01:09:28.229
zoning requirements for the site, including development

01:09:28.229 --> 01:09:30.039
elements and in some cases uses.

01:09:30.039 --> 01:09:32.239
That depends on how we write it.

01:09:32.239 --> 01:09:34.760
It goes through the entire process of a rezoning.

01:09:34.760 --> 01:09:36.840
So when you do a plan development, you do the notification.

01:09:36.840 --> 01:09:38.600
It is essentially rezoning.

01:09:38.600 --> 01:09:40.439
It has been supported by the courts.

01:09:40.439 --> 01:09:42.159
It is a frequently used tool.

01:09:42.159 --> 01:09:45.039
On the upper right hand corner, you can see the Lake Shore

01:09:45.039 --> 01:09:47.859
PUD in Austin, Texas has some transit orient development, a

01:09:47.859 --> 01:09:50.479
good mix of residential, non-residential.

01:09:50.479 --> 01:09:51.600
It's a 20 acre project.

01:09:51.600 --> 01:09:53.640
It could not be done here in Dutton.

01:09:53.640 --> 01:09:58.960
It doesn't meet the 150 acre of contiguous property and

01:09:58.960 --> 01:10:01.079
single ownership threshold.

01:10:01.079 --> 01:10:01.880
It could not be done.

01:10:01.880 --> 01:10:02.960
So we have two standards.

01:10:02.960 --> 01:10:07.819
We have a 300 acre requirement and we have a 150 acre

01:10:07.819 --> 01:10:10.239
requirement, but it has to be under single ownership.

01:10:10.239 --> 01:10:11.720
So that could not be done.

01:10:11.720 --> 01:10:14.159
That Lakeview PUD could not be done.

01:10:14.159 --> 01:10:16.960
The canals at Grand Park in Frisco, Texas.

01:10:18.840 --> 01:10:21.720
It potentially could be done if it was all under one single

01:10:21.720 --> 01:10:22.479
ownership.

01:10:22.479 --> 01:10:25.909
Some of the plan developments I've processed have not been

01:10:25.909 --> 01:10:27.600
under a single ownership.

01:10:27.600 --> 01:10:29.710
They have been under multiple ownerships as they bring that

01:10:29.710 --> 01:10:32.680
together and we've had to have multiple property owners

01:10:32.680 --> 01:10:34.800
enter into the plan development as they work through it.

01:10:34.800 --> 01:10:38.979
So some of these things, I think, could ultimately be great

01:10:38.979 --> 01:10:39.680
tools.

01:10:39.680 --> 01:10:42.609
And then again, the big one, I think, we dropped dimensions

01:10:42.609 --> 01:10:45.239
, but we didn't get corresponding increases in open space.

01:10:45.239 --> 01:10:47.789
Conservation development or cluster development, you may

01:10:47.789 --> 01:10:48.640
have heard of it.

01:10:48.640 --> 01:10:51.640
It allows the same yield, but it allows the developer

01:10:51.640 --> 01:10:54.680
essentially to concentrate and drop dimensions.

01:10:54.680 --> 01:10:58.079
I think it creates an overall better community.

01:10:58.079 --> 01:11:01.420
I think it ultimately creates a more livable space for the

01:11:01.420 --> 01:11:03.840
residents and generates the same yield,

01:11:03.840 --> 01:11:07.079
which is essentially what I think developers want to see.

01:11:07.079 --> 01:11:08.840
It works with the land.

01:11:08.840 --> 01:11:12.109
It's a tool that isn't often used and we don't have a tool

01:11:12.109 --> 01:11:14.800
for encouraging it anywhere in our code.

01:11:17.720 --> 01:11:21.319
Alternative development plan, I mentioned that earlier.

01:11:21.319 --> 01:11:22.960
What is the intent of the ADP?

01:11:22.960 --> 01:11:24.560
It's really to elevate standards.

01:11:24.560 --> 01:11:27.810
It's really to achieve better urban design and provide some

01:11:27.810 --> 01:11:30.760
flexibility, some relief to the property owner.

01:11:30.760 --> 01:11:32.840
Again, we have some frequent flyers.

01:11:32.840 --> 01:11:35.520
The front parking orientation is a frequent flyer.

01:11:35.520 --> 01:11:37.439
The building oriented towards the street.

01:11:37.439 --> 01:11:38.520
We have some that come through.

01:11:38.520 --> 01:11:41.380
I'd say I looked back all the way to, I think, the last

01:11:41.380 --> 01:11:46.560
three years and I'd say probably 30 to, I think, 40%.

01:11:46.560 --> 01:11:50.039
We had some withdrawals of the request had to do with front

01:11:50.039 --> 01:11:51.479
parking orientation,

01:11:53.039 --> 01:11:55.609
parking, I mean, building oriented towards the street and

01:11:55.609 --> 01:11:57.199
then front parking.

01:11:57.199 --> 01:12:02.130
These were some typical concerns that people brought and we

01:12:02.130 --> 01:12:03.359
recommend the same remedies.

01:12:03.359 --> 01:12:07.539
And you typically have been in agreement and have approved

01:12:07.539 --> 01:12:08.239
the same remedies,

01:12:08.239 --> 01:12:11.979
which is better material design of the building, maybe

01:12:11.979 --> 01:12:13.880
three sided architecture, better landscaping.

01:12:13.880 --> 01:12:17.239
All these things have been routinely approved.

01:12:17.239 --> 01:12:22.159
If we can, if these sorts of requests can be addressed by

01:12:22.159 --> 01:12:23.359
better site design,

01:12:23.359 --> 01:12:26.250
can we codify that and make those subject to administrative

01:12:26.250 --> 01:12:27.000
approval?

01:12:27.000 --> 01:12:29.359
This is good, but this is good too.

01:12:29.359 --> 01:12:31.739
And maybe this third option is also good, find one that

01:12:31.739 --> 01:12:33.119
works for you, developer.

01:12:37.119 --> 01:12:41.050
And what you see is the advanced auto parts and this is an

01:12:41.050 --> 01:12:43.199
example of, I think they asked for both things.

01:12:43.199 --> 01:12:46.970
The front building orientation and also the parking located

01:12:46.970 --> 01:12:49.560
in the front of the building.

01:12:49.560 --> 01:12:53.409
And you can see that there was a pretty nice landscape plan

01:12:53.409 --> 01:12:54.800
was put in place and

01:12:54.800 --> 01:12:57.380
pretty nice looking auto parts store, I think, if you were

01:12:57.380 --> 01:12:59.880
to compare it to others and other communities.

01:12:59.880 --> 01:13:03.239
I think it looks pretty sharp and we treat that through an

01:13:03.239 --> 01:13:03.560
ADP.

01:13:06.960 --> 01:13:08.840
Non-residential material requirements.

01:13:10.600 --> 01:13:13.829
Currently the DC exempts industrial uses from the material

01:13:13.829 --> 01:13:17.800
requirements allowing metal to be allowed.

01:13:17.800 --> 01:13:20.100
There's some exceptions to that depending if it's located

01:13:20.100 --> 01:13:22.800
within 200 feet, I think, of a collector and a minor arter

01:13:22.800 --> 01:13:23.319
ial.

01:13:23.319 --> 01:13:28.279
But essentially, it exempts them from the material

01:13:28.279 --> 01:13:29.840
requirements required in the code.

01:13:29.840 --> 01:13:35.680
So we do get industrial uses to ECI, ICG, ICI, all

01:13:35.680 --> 01:13:38.840
industrial or allow for industrial uses.

01:13:38.840 --> 01:13:41.029
Which are pretty, located pretty close to some of the city

01:13:41.029 --> 01:13:42.279
's most important gateways.

01:13:42.279 --> 01:13:44.319
Again, it's about place making.

01:13:44.319 --> 01:13:48.199
Do we want, is this how we want to present our community?

01:13:48.199 --> 01:13:51.270
And the idea that we need to basically develop more context

01:13:51.270 --> 01:13:53.439
sensitive material requirements for

01:13:53.439 --> 01:13:56.920
our community and maybe decide where this is appropriate

01:13:56.920 --> 01:13:58.520
and take a look at that.

01:13:58.520 --> 01:14:00.819
Non-residential building requirements don't address new

01:14:00.819 --> 01:14:01.880
engineered materials.

01:14:01.880 --> 01:14:05.279
I was asked to make a determination about cementitious s

01:14:05.279 --> 01:14:05.920
iding.

01:14:05.920 --> 01:14:07.359
I looked through the list.

01:14:07.359 --> 01:14:10.239
I said, none of these are cementitious siding.

01:14:10.239 --> 01:14:13.119
I don't know how we can say that, that it's allowed.

01:14:13.119 --> 01:14:14.119
There's nothing in the list.

01:14:14.119 --> 01:14:15.279
The list is very clear.

01:14:16.439 --> 01:14:18.539
And then the same day I heard that the preservation board

01:14:18.539 --> 01:14:20.840
was considering it, I said, good grief.

01:14:20.840 --> 01:14:23.199
Well, if they're looking at it, then how can we say that?

01:14:23.199 --> 01:14:26.979
And we kind of, I think, made a different determination

01:14:26.979 --> 01:14:29.560
because it was too hard to stand on that ground.

01:14:29.560 --> 01:14:31.079
We don't look at engineered materials.

01:14:31.079 --> 01:14:35.199
There are some, I think, you can address percentages,

01:14:35.199 --> 01:14:36.000
whether they should be allowed.

01:14:36.000 --> 01:14:41.039
Most codes have talked about EFAs, have talked about cement

01:14:41.039 --> 01:14:42.840
itious siding.

01:14:42.840 --> 01:14:46.149
Other split block tilt wall, these sorts of things are not

01:14:46.149 --> 01:14:47.800
talked about in our code.

01:14:47.800 --> 01:14:49.800
These are common building materials.

01:14:49.800 --> 01:14:52.270
We need to take a look at how we can maybe think of where

01:14:52.270 --> 01:14:53.600
those are appropriate.

01:14:54.720 --> 01:14:59.949
And the most important thing, I think, is that our building

01:14:59.949 --> 01:15:03.079
materials standards are really not context sensitive.

01:15:03.079 --> 01:15:06.029
What is essentially appropriate for a neighborhood

01:15:06.029 --> 01:15:07.439
commercial district or

01:15:07.439 --> 01:15:10.689
a neighborhood service district is not what you want to

01:15:10.689 --> 01:15:13.800
look for along a major arterial or on an interstate.

01:15:13.800 --> 01:15:16.319
They look different, they should look different.

01:15:16.319 --> 01:15:19.590
So looking at that in a context sensitive way, neighborhood

01:15:19.590 --> 01:15:22.550
commercial should fit in with the neighborhood in scale, in

01:15:22.550 --> 01:15:24.880
material, in form, in set back.

01:15:24.880 --> 01:15:27.899
It's different, you can use different types of products on

01:15:27.899 --> 01:15:29.720
an interstate, and you should.

01:15:29.720 --> 01:15:32.670
Some folks might say, you know, siding is appropriate in

01:15:32.670 --> 01:15:33.720
neighborhoods.

01:15:33.720 --> 01:15:36.020
Some folks might say, that's not really appropriate for the

01:15:36.020 --> 01:15:36.600
interstate.

01:15:36.600 --> 01:15:39.109
There's probably maybe tilt wall, maybe different types of

01:15:39.109 --> 01:15:40.600
products are more appropriate.

01:15:40.600 --> 01:15:44.880
So taking a look at context sensitive development standards

01:15:44.880 --> 01:15:45.239
for

01:15:45.239 --> 01:15:48.210
our non-residential districts is pretty important, and you

01:15:48.210 --> 01:15:50.359
can see the difference in these images.

01:15:52.920 --> 01:15:57.760
This was a request from Commissioner Briegel, and

01:15:57.760 --> 01:16:02.439
apparently something staff supports the idea of integrating

01:16:02.439 --> 01:16:05.479
bike parking into our development standards.

01:16:05.479 --> 01:16:08.390
This of course will encourage and support alternative modes

01:16:08.390 --> 01:16:10.640
of transportation, bicycling, and pedestrian.

01:16:10.640 --> 01:16:13.050
But more importantly, I think it'll help to accommodate the

01:16:13.050 --> 01:16:16.079
growing population that already exists in here that is

01:16:16.079 --> 01:16:19.479
utilizing cycling to get to their destination point.

01:16:19.479 --> 01:16:21.869
So encourage a mode shift in our community, but also

01:16:21.869 --> 01:16:23.760
accommodate the existing cyclists.

01:16:23.760 --> 01:16:25.630
And I put an interesting bike rack there, because I thought

01:16:25.630 --> 01:16:26.800
that kind of was sharp looking.

01:16:28.760 --> 01:16:30.970
Use table, we need to take a look at our use table and

01:16:30.970 --> 01:16:36.159
integrate new uses that are common development requests.

01:16:36.159 --> 01:16:39.000
We get some, one of the big ones is auto storage.

01:16:39.000 --> 01:16:41.840
I think Peter Belt may have multiple facilities here, but

01:16:41.840 --> 01:16:43.479
we get this idea that they're,

01:16:43.479 --> 01:16:46.470
this is just a place where we hold them before we customize

01:16:46.470 --> 01:16:47.000
them.

01:16:47.000 --> 01:16:49.640
We have a commercial parking lot, and we have auto sales.

01:16:49.640 --> 01:16:51.720
We just don't really, where do we put it?

01:16:51.720 --> 01:16:52.760
It's neither.

01:16:52.760 --> 01:16:54.960
So we have to make some calls, and this is something that's

01:16:54.960 --> 01:16:57.439
usually in the transportation section, a lot of use tables.

01:16:58.319 --> 01:16:59.880
Office warehouse comes up a bit.

01:16:59.880 --> 01:17:02.760
We have warehouse, which is a distribution, and we have

01:17:02.760 --> 01:17:03.319
office.

01:17:03.319 --> 01:17:05.689
But we see, and it's a pretty common thing in business

01:17:05.689 --> 01:17:08.170
parks to have a warehouse that has an office, and we need

01:17:08.170 --> 01:17:11.000
to figure out how we can put that, where we can put that.

01:17:11.000 --> 01:17:14.520
Manufactured housing, is it a land lease community?

01:17:14.520 --> 01:17:16.840
Is it a single manufactured home on a site?

01:17:16.840 --> 01:17:17.640
What are the standards?

01:17:17.640 --> 01:17:20.159
We don't reference HUD code.

01:17:20.159 --> 01:17:23.399
Manufactured housing, which is a staple in most codes,

01:17:23.399 --> 01:17:25.199
making a distinction between

01:17:25.199 --> 01:17:27.869
what is approved by HUD and what is an acceptable

01:17:27.869 --> 01:17:29.279
manufactured house.

01:17:29.279 --> 01:17:31.930
We don't have current language when it comes to dealing

01:17:31.930 --> 01:17:34.869
with manufactured housing, and we haven't looked at it that

01:17:34.869 --> 01:17:35.439
way.

01:17:35.439 --> 01:17:38.840
Assisted living, we still call it elderly housing.

01:17:38.840 --> 01:17:40.979
This is an area that is going to continue to grow in

01:17:40.979 --> 01:17:43.619
importance in this community as we have baby boomers matric

01:17:43.619 --> 01:17:45.960
ulating into different types of facilities.

01:17:45.960 --> 01:17:48.260
We need to get our ordinances lined up with state and

01:17:48.260 --> 01:17:50.670
federal regulations as they relate to group homes, assisted

01:17:50.670 --> 01:17:52.119
living, these sorts of things.

01:17:52.119 --> 01:17:54.760
We have some good standards that the state has some

01:17:54.760 --> 01:17:58.239
guidance that the state has given us, and sometimes in case

01:17:58.239 --> 01:18:00.569
there's been some federal guidance we'd love to legal to

01:18:00.569 --> 01:18:01.199
help us.

01:18:01.199 --> 01:18:04.090
Get those a little bit more closely aligned with standard

01:18:04.090 --> 01:18:07.479
language, typical language, and state and federal language.

01:18:10.119 --> 01:18:11.729
I just want to throw this in, and I hope this isn't too

01:18:11.729 --> 01:18:15.729
preachy or anything, but ultimately the code is designed to

01:18:15.729 --> 01:18:16.760
do placemaking.

01:18:16.760 --> 01:18:18.560
This is what our code is for.

01:18:18.560 --> 01:18:19.199
What is that?

01:18:19.199 --> 01:18:21.869
It's a unique collection of qualities and characteristics,

01:18:21.869 --> 01:18:24.199
something that is distinctive in your community.

01:18:24.199 --> 01:18:27.050
Something that when someone drives in, they know they're in

01:18:27.050 --> 01:18:27.640
Denton.

01:18:27.640 --> 01:18:30.710
Yes, I know Denton has a wonderful sort of urban grittiness

01:18:30.710 --> 01:18:33.600
to it, and I wouldn't want that to change in any way.

01:18:33.600 --> 01:18:36.760
But where is that urban grittiness, uniqueness appropriate?

01:18:36.760 --> 01:18:38.159
Is it appropriate on our interstate?

01:18:38.159 --> 01:18:40.439
Is it appropriate in our new subdivisions?

01:18:40.439 --> 01:18:45.319
So really figuring out how we want to brand our community.

01:18:45.319 --> 01:18:48.090
It's not about, you certainly want to respond to market

01:18:48.090 --> 01:18:48.680
forces.

01:18:48.680 --> 01:18:50.800
I think our code doesn't necessarily do that.

01:18:50.800 --> 01:18:53.199
Always be aware of what the market's driving.

01:18:53.199 --> 01:18:56.220
But then to a certain degree when you incorporate that

01:18:56.220 --> 01:18:57.159
flexibility,

01:18:57.159 --> 01:19:00.390
you use your standards to sort of brand those that are

01:19:00.390 --> 01:19:03.159
coming to your community and say this is our standard.

01:19:03.159 --> 01:19:05.720
This is what makes us unique and distinctive.

01:19:05.720 --> 01:19:07.600
Put our best foot forward on our corridors.

01:19:07.600 --> 01:19:10.539
People make decisions every day about where to put their

01:19:10.539 --> 01:19:13.359
businesses, where to live, where to shop.

01:19:13.359 --> 01:19:16.109
Based on the impressions they get when they drive through

01:19:16.109 --> 01:19:18.659
our gateways, this is our most important place.

01:19:18.659 --> 01:19:20.520
So place making needs to occur.

01:19:20.520 --> 01:19:22.470
I put the word dividend because there was an article that

01:19:22.470 --> 01:19:24.199
actually called it the place making dividend.

01:19:24.199 --> 01:19:26.529
Because I think it yields economic development and I think

01:19:26.529 --> 01:19:28.199
that they work in tandem together.

01:19:28.199 --> 01:19:29.880
Quality development brings quality development.

01:19:33.119 --> 01:19:35.720
And I think this is, we don't have a timeline for these.

01:19:35.720 --> 01:19:38.560
I think we're going to start to work on them one for one.

01:19:38.560 --> 01:19:41.399
I think the I-35 one is kind of pressing.

01:19:41.399 --> 01:19:44.000
And I think I presented that one at least towards the front

01:19:44.000 --> 01:19:44.239
.

01:19:44.239 --> 01:19:47.390
So, but as we bring these forward, we'll have more thorough

01:19:47.390 --> 01:19:49.399
discussions to address all of these.

01:19:49.399 --> 01:19:53.680
And hopefully be able to get your guidance and

01:19:53.680 --> 01:19:57.720
support as we move these staff initiated updates forward in

01:19:57.720 --> 01:19:59.079
the code and

01:19:59.079 --> 01:20:03.119
incorporate them as part of a larger code update process.

01:20:03.119 --> 01:20:04.520
So I'd be glad to answer any questions you have.

01:20:07.199 --> 01:20:08.000
>> Commissioner Denowitz.

01:20:08.000 --> 01:20:11.439
>> I'd just like to say I really enjoyed this and liked the

01:20:11.439 --> 01:20:12.399
direction.

01:20:12.399 --> 01:20:16.520
And if we need to push this forward faster, I think it's

01:20:16.520 --> 01:20:17.560
not soon enough.

01:20:17.560 --> 01:20:20.739
Because everything you said is exactly what I'm hearing

01:20:20.739 --> 01:20:22.159
from this community.

01:20:22.159 --> 01:20:26.239
And it was refreshing to hear your presentation.

01:20:26.239 --> 01:20:26.739
Thank you.

01:20:29.000 --> 01:20:29.800
>> Commissioner Bruegel.

01:20:29.800 --> 01:20:31.199
>> Thank you, Chair.

01:20:31.199 --> 01:20:32.079
>> I absolutely agree.

01:20:32.079 --> 01:20:34.239
That was a really great presentation.

01:20:34.239 --> 01:20:36.479
My mind's going like a million miles a minute right now.

01:20:36.479 --> 01:20:38.159
Just like I've got all these great ideas.

01:20:38.159 --> 01:20:40.560
I'd like to think they're great ideas.

01:20:40.560 --> 01:20:42.319
I've got a lot of ideas.

01:20:42.319 --> 01:20:44.869
I'm wondering how the public might have an opportunity to

01:20:44.869 --> 01:20:46.479
chime in with some of the ideas that they may have.

01:20:50.760 --> 01:20:53.840
We're going to obviously see this come to us, but as staff

01:20:53.840 --> 01:20:56.239
is coming up with suggestions as well,

01:20:56.239 --> 01:21:00.340
is there a place where people, just whoever, could give you

01:21:00.340 --> 01:21:01.720
some more ideas?

01:21:01.720 --> 01:21:03.359
I have so many in my head.

01:21:03.359 --> 01:21:04.279
Where do we go?

01:21:04.279 --> 01:21:07.760
>> Well, I know code amendments all require public hearings

01:21:07.760 --> 01:21:09.760
, so certainly there's that opportunity.

01:21:09.760 --> 01:21:13.130
And they don't have the same notification because they

01:21:13.130 --> 01:21:15.720
really are affecting the entire code.

01:21:15.720 --> 01:21:17.850
But every time we bring a code amendment, as we did with

01:21:17.850 --> 01:21:21.479
the DME process, we do go ahead and work with the normal

01:21:21.479 --> 01:21:24.279
public hearing process.

01:21:24.279 --> 01:21:27.079
In addition to that, with each code update that you bring,

01:21:27.079 --> 01:21:29.909
it's always, and it's been my experience, to really work

01:21:29.909 --> 01:21:31.640
with stakeholders on it.

01:21:31.640 --> 01:21:34.550
If it is stakeholders likely to be impacted, certainly we

01:21:34.550 --> 01:21:38.310
'll work with the development community here to vet some of

01:21:38.310 --> 01:21:39.319
these ideas as we work through.

01:21:39.319 --> 01:21:41.539
Some of them have even prompted us on some of these things,

01:21:41.539 --> 01:21:43.350
when can you do this and when you do, can you bring it, as

01:21:43.350 --> 01:21:44.680
we'd like to talk about it.

01:21:44.680 --> 01:21:47.079
And plan development is one, and the ADP administrative

01:21:47.079 --> 01:21:47.520
stuff.

01:21:47.520 --> 01:21:49.600
So those things that incorporate more flexibility are

01:21:49.600 --> 01:21:51.539
things that have been invited from our development

01:21:51.539 --> 01:21:52.479
representatives.

01:21:52.479 --> 01:21:54.979
But working with community stakeholders is, you know, an

01:21:54.979 --> 01:21:55.880
effective party.

01:21:55.880 --> 01:21:58.699
Other departments, very important also, and helping

01:21:58.699 --> 01:22:01.119
identify who their stakeholders are as well.

01:22:01.119 --> 01:22:04.000
Anticipate working very closely with legalists, we bring

01:22:04.000 --> 01:22:06.659
these forward to make sure that we use the best language

01:22:06.659 --> 01:22:07.920
and the most appropriate language.

01:22:07.920 --> 01:22:11.609
And then, of course, look to you to guide us any other

01:22:11.609 --> 01:22:15.520
additional stakeholders that we could incorporate into each

01:22:15.520 --> 01:22:17.760
set of events might have a different group and we would

01:22:17.760 --> 01:22:20.239
look to maybe some guidance as we move forward.

01:22:20.239 --> 01:22:22.399
>> Would there be a, sorry.

01:22:22.399 --> 01:22:23.119
>> Continue.

01:22:23.119 --> 01:22:27.039
>> Would there be a possibility of, obviously, the red line

01:22:27.039 --> 01:22:28.920
versions and what not will end up in our backup.

01:22:28.920 --> 01:22:31.220
But that really only gives us and the public, you know, a

01:22:31.220 --> 01:22:33.520
couple of days to kind of look it over before we either

01:22:33.520 --> 01:22:34.399
workshop it,

01:22:34.399 --> 01:22:36.489
in which they don't have an opportunity to really

01:22:36.489 --> 01:22:39.100
participate, or the public hearing process, which is kind

01:22:39.100 --> 01:22:40.399
of farther down the line.

01:22:40.399 --> 01:22:44.140
So as staff is working on drafts, could that be maybe

01:22:44.140 --> 01:22:47.000
posted to the city website somewhere with a link of just,

01:22:47.000 --> 01:22:49.439
you know, let us know your thoughts or chime in here.

01:22:49.439 --> 01:22:50.399
What are we missing?

01:22:50.399 --> 01:22:51.159
What do you like?

01:22:51.159 --> 01:22:52.479
What don't you like?

01:22:52.479 --> 01:22:54.779
Just so that we can really get a really good conversation

01:22:54.779 --> 01:22:56.560
from as many stakeholders as possible.

01:22:56.560 --> 01:22:57.279
Is that?

01:22:57.279 --> 01:22:58.239
>> I'll let Manal address that.

01:22:58.239 --> 01:22:58.800
I'm not certain.

01:22:58.800 --> 01:23:00.239
>> Yeah, Manal wants to jump in.

01:23:00.239 --> 01:23:03.909
>> Thank you, Mr. Bruegel, and obviously the rest of the

01:23:03.909 --> 01:23:04.960
commission.

01:23:04.960 --> 01:23:08.329
One of the takeaways from Beverly's presentation tonight is

01:23:08.329 --> 01:23:11.829
that the development community is actually willing to work

01:23:11.829 --> 01:23:14.039
with the ordinances.

01:23:14.039 --> 01:23:16.340
The issue is that the ordinance is sometimes a little conv

01:23:16.340 --> 01:23:18.659
oluted and it's difficult to find the right information in

01:23:18.659 --> 01:23:19.600
the right place.

01:23:21.439 --> 01:23:24.420
So when it comes to what are we doing with the DDC, what

01:23:24.420 --> 01:23:26.760
are these code amendments that we're bringing forward, or

01:23:26.760 --> 01:23:28.840
these piecemeal code amendments that we're bringing forward

01:23:28.840 --> 01:23:29.000
?

01:23:29.000 --> 01:23:33.960
We're merely to address to a great degree information that

01:23:33.960 --> 01:23:36.449
is perhaps littered throughout the ordinance and we're

01:23:36.449 --> 01:23:37.640
making it more concise.

01:23:37.640 --> 01:23:40.119
So you're not taking away anything from that.

01:23:40.119 --> 01:23:42.590
We are enhancing it where we've heard from our development

01:23:42.590 --> 01:23:45.170
community through our development review committee meetings

01:23:45.170 --> 01:23:45.279
,

01:23:45.279 --> 01:23:47.880
through conversations, through reconnaissance meetings with

01:23:47.880 --> 01:23:49.199
our development community.

01:23:50.279 --> 01:23:52.750
The effort and the intent right now that you have seen

01:23:52.750 --> 01:23:56.840
before you today is actually on a very expeditious path.

01:23:56.840 --> 01:24:00.159
We want to get these amendments done very, very quickly.

01:24:00.159 --> 01:24:01.720
We have all seen them.

01:24:01.720 --> 01:24:04.149
Our team that has been working here for many, many years

01:24:04.149 --> 01:24:04.520
too.

01:24:04.520 --> 01:24:07.079
We just haven't had that opportunity.

01:24:07.079 --> 01:24:10.060
We also understand that the workload is extensive, yet we

01:24:10.060 --> 01:24:13.239
understand the importance of moving forward with these.

01:24:13.239 --> 01:24:16.189
One of the things that Beverly mentioned, prefacing her

01:24:16.189 --> 01:24:17.119
presentation,

01:24:17.119 --> 01:24:22.159
was we're going to have an overhaul review or an overview

01:24:22.159 --> 01:24:25.239
review of the Denton Development Code.

01:24:25.239 --> 01:24:28.199
That will more than likely occur through consultancy.

01:24:28.199 --> 01:24:30.800
That being said, that opportunity will be available.

01:24:30.800 --> 01:24:34.300
So when we talk about is the land use missing or is this

01:24:34.300 --> 01:24:35.279
happening?

01:24:35.279 --> 01:24:37.720
In this instance, what Beverly is bringing forward to you,

01:24:37.720 --> 01:24:40.199
let's use the ADP for example,

01:24:40.199 --> 01:24:45.640
is the intent of the ADP is very clear in the DDC.

01:24:45.640 --> 01:24:48.539
Yet you have to read several pages to determine what that

01:24:48.539 --> 01:24:49.279
intent is.

01:24:49.279 --> 01:24:51.840
So why don't we make it more concise, understand, in fact,

01:24:51.840 --> 01:24:53.479
Commissioner Taylor at one point had said,

01:24:53.479 --> 01:24:58.439
why is the intent of an ADP is to have a higher criteria

01:24:58.439 --> 01:24:59.279
associated with,

01:24:59.279 --> 01:25:01.489
if you're compromising something, how are you going to

01:25:01.489 --> 01:25:03.199
offset that and what is that criteria?

01:25:03.199 --> 01:25:05.239
And we understand that clearly too.

01:25:05.239 --> 01:25:07.739
But there's some aspects of it that don't need to come

01:25:07.739 --> 01:25:08.680
before the PNZ.

01:25:08.680 --> 01:25:11.600
So let's streamline what actually comes before the PNZ.

01:25:11.600 --> 01:25:14.399
Let's streamline how someone comes in through the process

01:25:14.399 --> 01:25:17.170
and what they have to do ultimately to secure their

01:25:17.170 --> 01:25:18.880
certificate of occupancy.

01:25:18.880 --> 01:25:21.909
So that opportunity that you want will be available when we

01:25:21.909 --> 01:25:25.279
do the comprehensive review of the Denton Development Code.

01:25:25.279 --> 01:25:30.279
In this instance, I would really look to the Planning and

01:25:30.279 --> 01:25:32.649
Zoning Commission to work collaboratively with us to at

01:25:32.649 --> 01:25:34.840
least get these moving forward so we can start

01:25:36.960 --> 01:25:40.039
introducing ordinances that are concise and bringing things

01:25:40.039 --> 01:25:42.159
together from the DDC.

01:25:42.159 --> 01:25:48.079
And again, the DDC was adopted in 2002.

01:25:48.079 --> 01:25:49.680
I'm sorry, was I wrong?

01:25:49.680 --> 01:25:50.920
>> No. >> 2002.

01:25:50.920 --> 01:25:53.560
And this is a good opportunity to now go ahead and move

01:25:53.560 --> 01:25:54.199
forward.

01:25:54.199 --> 01:25:57.989
But the standalone amendments that we want to bring forward

01:25:57.989 --> 01:25:58.199
,

01:25:58.199 --> 01:26:00.210
we would recommend that you help us move those through to

01:26:00.210 --> 01:26:01.479
City Council expeditiously.

01:26:01.479 --> 01:26:04.270
And please, if they have any questions, please feel free to

01:26:04.270 --> 01:26:05.760
address those with them too.

01:26:05.760 --> 01:26:06.760
>> And if I could just one more point.

01:26:06.760 --> 01:26:07.720
>> Sure, continue.

01:26:07.720 --> 01:26:08.640
Commissioner Bruegel.

01:26:08.640 --> 01:26:12.720
>> And I also, I do agree with Commissioner Jodowich that I

01:26:12.720 --> 01:26:16.710
think it's the I-35 thing that really needs to get

01:26:16.710 --> 01:26:17.319
addressed.

01:26:17.319 --> 01:26:20.289
I recall a couple years ago we had a lunch with City

01:26:20.289 --> 01:26:22.640
Council, it was like two years ago.

01:26:22.640 --> 01:26:24.920
And we're like, let's move forward on this I-35 thing.

01:26:24.920 --> 01:26:25.760
And then it was like crickets.

01:26:25.760 --> 01:26:28.439
So I really, this really needs to happen.

01:26:28.439 --> 01:26:30.359
So I second that.

01:26:30.359 --> 01:26:31.159
>> We brought that up.

01:26:36.319 --> 01:26:37.279
>> And we're very aware of the matrix that we've

01:26:37.279 --> 01:26:39.560
established.

01:26:39.560 --> 01:26:45.640
In fact, I foresee that matrix being, I don't think it will

01:26:45.640 --> 01:26:47.279
continue in the force that it's continuing now.

01:26:47.279 --> 01:26:50.960
Because we're going to be bringing forward a lot more to

01:26:50.960 --> 01:26:54.329
you and the purview of the PNZ will in reality be the pur

01:26:54.329 --> 01:26:55.239
view of the PNZ.

01:26:55.239 --> 01:26:58.520
Happy to see it move forward.

01:26:58.520 --> 01:26:59.359
>> I want to make a comment.

01:26:59.359 --> 01:27:02.159
I think it's right on spot to have the stakeholders,

01:27:02.159 --> 01:27:02.880
development community.

01:27:02.880 --> 01:27:06.279
I know sometimes that's a pushback sometimes.

01:27:06.279 --> 01:27:08.300
I think those are the people that are in this all day,

01:27:08.300 --> 01:27:09.159
every single day.

01:27:09.159 --> 01:27:10.760
They do it in lots of different areas.

01:27:10.760 --> 01:27:13.079
I think they bring lots of times very good ideas.

01:27:13.079 --> 01:27:16.079
I think it's, to your point, critical to do it in a very

01:27:16.079 --> 01:27:19.000
timely manner because as Denton continues to grow,

01:27:19.000 --> 01:27:21.689
people that are familiar with working with Denton may be

01:27:21.689 --> 01:27:24.590
more familiar with some of the intricacies and areas that

01:27:24.590 --> 01:27:26.279
we have flexibility in our code.

01:27:26.279 --> 01:27:29.100
But a lot of the people that are not typically working in

01:27:29.100 --> 01:27:31.319
Denton, that may be in Dallas or

01:27:31.319 --> 01:27:34.640
other places that are coming in here, totally unfamiliar

01:27:34.640 --> 01:27:36.960
with it and then we're having issues.

01:27:36.960 --> 01:27:37.960
And so I agree.

01:27:37.960 --> 01:27:40.710
I think it's a very timely thing that needs to move forward

01:27:40.710 --> 01:27:42.079
as quickly as possible.

01:27:42.079 --> 01:27:45.689
And I'm glad to hear that it brings some of the developers

01:27:45.689 --> 01:27:47.399
into that process to help them.

01:27:47.399 --> 01:27:49.239
Because ultimately, that's who this is for.

01:27:49.239 --> 01:27:53.890
To make their jobs go as expeditiously as possible, have

01:27:53.890 --> 01:27:56.359
successful projects, and hopefully do some more.

01:27:56.359 --> 01:27:58.640
So I think it's a great idea and I look forward to seeing

01:27:58.640 --> 01:27:59.159
it soon.

01:28:00.279 --> 01:28:01.479
Commissioner Dedowitz.

01:28:01.479 --> 01:28:04.659
>> Just lastly, I think the matrix that you brought up

01:28:04.659 --> 01:28:08.239
needs to be looked at constantly and reprioritized.

01:28:08.239 --> 01:28:11.569
And here is a situation where we think this needs to be

01:28:11.569 --> 01:28:13.000
brought up higher.

01:28:13.000 --> 01:28:15.000
Yeah, so conclude this.

01:28:15.000 --> 01:28:15.520
Thank you.

01:28:15.520 --> 01:28:17.159
>> Anybody else?

01:28:17.159 --> 01:28:23.279
>> With that, we've run a little bit long.

01:28:23.279 --> 01:28:25.760
We wanted to get through this presentation.

01:28:25.760 --> 01:28:29.640
I'm going to close our work session at 641.

01:28:29.640 --> 01:28:33.520
And let's try to, we have a very short schedule tonight.

01:28:39.079 --> 01:28:43.880
Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and

01:28:43.880 --> 01:28:48.760
Zoning Commission meeting for February the 24th, 2016.

01:28:48.760 --> 01:28:54.720
It is 646 and this meeting has been duly posted and we have

01:28:54.720 --> 01:28:56.760
a quorum present.

01:28:56.760 --> 01:28:59.159
I call our meeting to order.

01:28:59.159 --> 01:29:02.310
And our first order of business is to give the pledge to

01:29:02.310 --> 01:29:03.960
the US and the Texas flag.

01:29:03.960 --> 01:29:04.560
Please stand.

01:29:04.560 --> 01:29:10.840
>> We pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

01:29:10.840 --> 01:29:11.880
America.

01:29:11.880 --> 01:29:15.529
The territory and republic for which it stands, one nation

01:29:15.529 --> 01:29:17.000
under God,

01:29:17.000 --> 01:29:20.000
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

01:29:20.000 --> 01:29:22.279
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:29:22.279 --> 01:29:24.319
>> I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag.

01:29:24.319 --> 01:29:29.180
>> I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God

01:29:29.180 --> 01:29:30.760
, one indivisible.

01:29:30.760 --> 01:29:38.439
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:29:38.439 --> 01:29:43.640
>> Our next item on our agenda is approval of our minutes.

01:29:43.640 --> 01:29:47.119
And I'm going to make a note, point of order, that this is

01:29:47.119 --> 01:29:48.319
our January 27th,

01:29:48.319 --> 01:29:51.600
2016 minutes, it's not in our agenda that way.

01:29:51.600 --> 01:29:53.720
Chair will entertain a motion.

01:29:53.720 --> 01:29:58.319
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:29:58.319 --> 01:29:59.960
Commissioner Hussman.

01:29:59.960 --> 01:30:01.239
>> Move we approve.

01:30:01.239 --> 01:30:03.640
>> Okay, Commissioner Dudowitz.

01:30:03.640 --> 01:30:04.600
>> I second.

01:30:04.600 --> 01:30:08.720
>> Okay, Chair has a first and a second, any discussions?

01:30:08.720 --> 01:30:10.079
Any changes?

01:30:10.079 --> 01:30:14.520
Okay, seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

01:30:14.520 --> 01:30:24.520
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:30:26.359 --> 01:30:28.159
Motion passes five to zero.

01:30:29.720 --> 01:30:31.960
Next item is our consent agenda.

01:30:31.960 --> 01:30:34.880
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:30:34.880 --> 01:30:36.039
Commissioner Beck.

01:30:36.039 --> 01:30:37.960
>> I motion we approve the consent agenda.

01:30:37.960 --> 01:30:39.520
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:30:39.520 --> 01:30:40.439
>> Commissioner Dudowitz.

01:30:40.439 --> 01:30:40.960
>> I second.

01:30:42.199 --> 01:30:43.880
>> I have a first and a second.

01:30:43.880 --> 01:30:46.439
Any discussion on consent agenda items?

01:30:46.439 --> 01:30:48.680
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:30:48.680 --> 01:30:50.560
Seeing none, call for a vote on the board.

01:30:50.560 --> 01:30:57.119
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:30:57.119 --> 01:30:58.640
Motion carries five to zero.

01:30:58.640 --> 01:31:01.159
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:31:01.159 --> 01:31:04.239
Next item of business is our public hearings.

01:31:05.359 --> 01:31:11.579
And at this time I'm gonna open the public hearing for Z16-

01:31:11.579 --> 01:31:12.960
0001.

01:31:12.960 --> 01:31:15.439
I'll turn over to Manal for who's gonna present or

01:31:15.439 --> 01:31:17.640
we just gonna go ahead and table that, okay?

01:31:17.640 --> 01:31:19.399
>> The applicants requested a continuation so

01:31:19.399 --> 01:31:21.039
we'd have to open the public hearing and

01:31:21.039 --> 01:31:24.149
that the next PNC, at the requested PNC date it would be an

01:31:24.149 --> 01:31:25.039
IC item.

01:31:25.039 --> 01:31:28.800
>> Okay, at the request of the applicant this agenda item

01:31:28.800 --> 01:31:29.720
has been continued to

01:31:29.720 --> 01:31:34.239
March the 9th and at this time I will close the public

01:31:34.239 --> 01:31:34.960
hearing and

01:31:34.960 --> 01:31:39.600
we will reopen at that time and that will move us to

01:31:41.840 --> 01:31:44.000
concluding items in our project matrix.

01:31:44.000 --> 01:31:54.000
[BLANK_AUDIO]

01:31:55.920 --> 01:31:58.359
Anybody have any concluding items or want an update on

01:31:58.359 --> 01:32:00.000
project matrix?

01:32:01.000 --> 01:32:06.279
Okay, seeing none at 6.50 I will close our meeting tonight.

01:32:06.279 --> 01:32:06.779
Thank you.

01:32:06.779 --> 01:32:16.779
[BLANK_AUDIO]