Sep 18, 2018 City Council on 2018-09-18 1:00 PM

Welcome everybody to this meeting of the Denton City Council. It is Tuesday, September the 18th, 2018. It is 1 a 1 0 2 p.m. and we do have a quorum. I'll call this meeting to order. Our first item on the agenda is citizen comments on consent agenda items. Do we have any citizen comments on consent agenda items? All right. Move on to request for clarification of agenda items list on agenda for September the 18th, 2018. Any request? Yes, Council Member Briggs. I would like to pull item C, Y, BB, and CC. Okay, hold on. Say the agenda item C. C, Y, BB, and CC. And then I have a couple of questions. Okay, let me look at these real quick. Okay so what level of presentation are you wanting on these as an item for individual consideration? Well, on C I just have a consideration to ask maybe and add in just like a reorganization of the words for that manual. Okay. Why that is the water rate and I would like to have a separate vote for that because I was in favor of the rate reduction and that's not included in that. Okay. So are you wanting a presentation on that or are you just pulling it just to sort of so we can vote on it individually? Yes, that one. Okay, all right. Yeah. Let's see. BB? Yeah, I'm going, this is such a long list so I have to scroll pretty big. I don't know which one that one is. Oh yes, that's the utility for deposits and so I wanted to pull that one for a separate vote as well with our discussion of the percentage of the deposits. Okay. Yeah. Any presentation or no? No. No? Okay. And then CC is just for the confirmation of Frank Dixon, Police Chief and I just would like to take that as a public vote. Okay. All right. So let me make sure I have those. It's agenda item C with a presentation or you want to maybe make a suggestion or a proposal on certain wording. Well, I think she wants to do that as an individual item for consideration. Is that what you're wanting to address or? George Morrow, BMA General Manager. So we've made some revisions to clarify in accordance with your comments and so we'll be bringing back tonight as our intention in the individual consideration a new amendment that's cleaned up and has those additions. So just wanted to give you a heads up there. So we'll have a revised ordinance that's different from our backup. Correct. At the dais. And I'll have a copy for you tonight. Okay. All right. All right. And so we'll have a small presentation on that. And then the other one is why? And that's just a present. That's just a boat separate boat and CC is because it's a ratification for new city, city police chief. So some comments there and then there's one more thought BB BB. Yes. Just for a no presentation. Okay. And then I have yes, go ahead. I have a question on to Q regarding the the sidewalks. I know that mobility committee at one time had a list of sidewalks listed by importance and priority. And I'm wondering if the ones listed in this map follow that follow that guide. Pretend they spoke city traffic engineer. And yes, we are using that list and we came up with the first package which was 2018, which is currently under design. It came back a couple months ago to council. And then this is the next phase, which is 2019. And we are currently constantly updating the list. So as new come in, we're adding and that would be the 2020 package. Okay. Thank you. Let's see. W. For the fire department fees. Just a couple of questions about the emergency base rate of $900. That's the the flat fee. Give pages for chief and that that's come up. I've mentioned that a couple of times throughout the presentation and I realized that that is not a feat. We have not increased that in in a long time. But I just want to follow up and ask because I know that insurance doesn't cover that and that is the a lot of times the citizens are responsible for that amount. And do we allow a payment plan for that and the timing to pay that off if we and do we turn that type of fee over to a collection agency? Yeah, so the process is the after 72 hours it is sent to the billing company within seven to 14 days the billing company as she issues a bill to the patient. We are very open on payment plans is very flexible will work with the patients whatever insurance does not cover in the patient responsible for we have a variation of payment options. In other words, if the patient patient is paying something, it will not go to collections. After 90 days if it's not no payment made it is sent to the collection agency. Okay, thank you. Okay. All right. Who else clarifications of agenda items. Councilmember Hotspot. Thank you. I just would ask for a brief presentation now on J if that 's an option. Versus this evening I guess that sounds bad. Okay, so you want on item J. Yes, sir, I just had a couple of questions that I think can be easily addressed so not so much pull it but. Do you want to answer now. Yes, sir. Okay. Yep. Yep. Pretend a smoke city traffic engineer. I don't have a brief presentation but I can answer all your questions or if any particular items that you need to know. Okay. I just could you please talk about the purpose of the study and what it's going to support because my concern is that it I don't want it to be misleading that we're going to go and re work all the ADA curves because that's not to bring them up to code when they're code compliant at the time they built and so as that system changes we make adjustments. So if you can just talk about our process so it's not misleading to think so people don't think we're going to go rework all the curves. Correct and there is it is slightly misleading but the way it's set up the ADA or the Americans with Disability Act has it inbuilt that all they want to do is simply said they want to make sure that if you're providing public infrastructure for able bodied person you do the do the same for disabled person. So under that whenever you go in there is old infrastructure that the city has that was constructed before this act came into place and there is new infrastructure so every time we construct new infrastructure we're compliant with the new standards that are existing at this time. As in any design guidelines engineering design they keep on developing they keep on evolving so ADA guidelines and standards have evolved and every I think it's evolved three or four times but every time the new guidelines come in it does not mean that whatever we've constructed based on the old guidelines is invalid. It is still we're not going to go and fix that. What we're going to do is if ever in the future it reaches its usable value or lifespan then we go back and maintain it we have upgraded to new standards. So when we're assessing this is a study that we're assessing existing infrastructure to see if it's ADA compliant. We'll focus only on the pieces that are really old and are not compliant to even any standards. So if it doesn't have a ramp that means it's out of compliance. If it has a ramp with old standards that is still considered compliant when it was constructed. So that's the way the study is going to look at it and then lay out what our implications are in a long term how do we fund the compliance issue. Yes of course. And then that study will be used for what? That study would plan out it is going to lay out what infrastructure needs we have and what are we ready to budget as far as for example the total dollar amount is $10 million. How do we want to budget that $10 million over the next 10 years, 20 years, 30 years whatever the number comes out. So the study will give you a final cost and then we can break it down and come up with the transition plan pretty much. Okay and one last thing. Thank you. And then if you can guesstimate not I'm not going to hold you to the number. I know that's your favorite. Could you just briefly touch on maybe the number of intersections either that are non-compliant at all or the standards have changed since because again it helps support that we can't go tear up every curb right now. It has to be a phased approach. So if you have that number in mind that's helpful. That's a very out there number. I mean we it's only been 30 years since the act came into play. So any infrastructure that was constructed within the last 30 years we can still continue using that until the point we decide to go and maintain it back. Anything older than 30 years definitely there are no ADA ramps at those intersections. There are miles and miles of sidewalk. I think there's a close to 300 or 400 miles of sidewalk that we need to really make it ADA compliant at each and every intersection. It's not this signalized but unsignalized. Does that answer your question? Yes thank you very much. I appreciate that. Councilmember Briggs you had a question on this topic. Yes. And so I remember we've been discussing this for around two years. At least maybe three. And so I recall in the conversation that there was a requirement actually and that there was a fine if the city did not comply with this. So yeah a little bit of explanation on that. There is a requirement. Legally we have to have a transition plan for old infrastructure. If we don't and there are complaints if there are lawsuits then legally and correct me if I'm wrong that legally we're liable that the federal government will step in and do a consent decree which means they will come up with a plan for you with their stipulated time which is typically three to five years and then the city is stuck with paying that kind of money or up running. And the recent case was city of LA 1.2 billion dollars. So this is really important for us. It's very important to have a plan. They don't force us to implement it in certain time if we already have it. Thank you. Okay any other questions for Preetam on this? Yes. So obviously ADA compliance is the law but within ADA compliance there's some flexibility as to how to go about it and you probably know what I'm about to say but I'll say it anyway that I strongly recommend and I know that staff is enthusiastically behind this but I recommend that a committee of citizens with disabilities you know including also citizens who care for people with disabilities who are experts through experience on the issue can go through all of these projects with you and you know I'll just throw this out there again what you already know but just to mention for the public you know I know that Todd Estes when he was in Fort Worth he had mentioned to me that he talking about you. No you don't have to get up. Well you can get up. There he is. But he had mentioned an anecdote where the I think it was a mayor's advisory board with disabilities had actually saved the city money in their recommendation so that's I'm just mentioning that also for the public again you already know that ADA compliance it's the law it's also better for everybody and it can sometimes and when we really get citizens involved and get creative can end up saving the city money too so I want to thank you all for being open to that and looking forward to making that happen. Thank you. Okay any other questions? Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Any other requests for clarification? Seeing none we'll move on to our work session reports. Item 3A is a received report from Texas Women's University regarding their master plan. Hold the discussion and give staff direction. We'll wait I'll go ahead and introduce Dr. Corinne Faiton who is the chancellor and president of the Texas Women's University. She's going to share I think she'll be introducing the presenter but she's going to let her off the hook a little bit. Welcome Dr. Faiton. Thank you. And thank you for giving us this audience. You might remember that it was maybe a year ago we came in front of the council to present the idea and actually really get your input also on the closure of the golf course. Remember we had that piece of land and we had done research on this and found out that only 3% of the rounds on the golf course were utilized by faculty staff and students at TWA U. And so but student fees support the golf course so we came to the conclusion that and with your input and input from the community that it was best for the university to close the golf course and really utilize the land for the mission of the university. So since we now almost doubled our footprint we really wanted to be intentional about the use of that land and not just start building and then later on think oh I wish we had put that building somewhere else because that's a little hard to do. So what we did is we hired a firm that does planning and it 's HKS from New York and they brought in a whole team of people and we wanted to look at everything. Roads, the enrollment growth, projections, the values of the university meaning we want to maintain as much green space as possible, the health and well-being initiative, just a variety of issues and Rob will talk to you a little bit more about that. But we really wanted to consider all of that as we were planning for the land. So this is a campus master plan for 20 years and it really was all encompassing and we learned a lot. It was very, very interesting but the main reason we wanted to share this with you is because obviously this also impacts the community and it's land that we want to make sure that the community can be proud of. We see this as an attraction to Denton and I really appreciated your input and support last time with the closure of the golf course and so we thought we would share with you what we have learned so far in terms of our campus master plan. Again this is a plan meaning it's not etched in concrete as you know but we look at it as our strategic plan and when our strategic plan has evolved and we actually have versions with version 1.0 and version 1.2 etc. which implies that there's going to be, it's a living document and it's something that evolves. And the same thing with the campus master plan. If new needs were to come about or new partnerships then obviously that would be something we would revise and look and evaluate within the values and the criteria that we established for the plan. So I just wanted to give you that little introduction and I 'm going to introduce to you Rob Ramirez who is our… Thank you. And he knows everything about the plan so pretty much he's in charge of all facilities and construction and he's done a fantastic job and we've had folks from the city also who are on our committee by the way and I'm sure you will be talking more about that so thank you. Thank you again Robert Ramirez associate vice president for facilities at Texas Women's University. We thought it was important that we start with this slide as Dr. Fainton was introducing how we kicked off the master plan. You can see this is basically our current campus and as we were going through the master plan process it was more like a canvas because you know the sky is the limit and in terms of future development and what we want the campus to be. I think it's important moving on to this next slide. When we assembled the committee for the master plan this slide was shared very early. We are part of a community. You can see Texas Women's University it's very close to downtown. It's in the heart of Denton. So this is something that we kept near and dear to our hearts in terms of making sure that any development we have would benefit the community in the long run in addition to TWU of course. So moving on the process was actually in phases and we're going to cover these briefly. So we had three phases analysis, exploration and plan. So one of the things that we did is when we brought the HKS group they had a myriad of consultants with them landscape architects, academic programmers, infrastructure folks, traffic engineers. But the first phase was really just about gathering data. So we had I'm going to just guess around a dozen or more focus group meetings with faculty, staff, community members and so on and it was just about gathering data. We had the city of Denton and we had DCTA just to try and make sure that we were very inclusive in our data collection. Phase two was about taking that data and starting to create a little mold, exploring what would happen if we did this. And then of course the plan is actually what comes out at the end in terms of once we refined all our exploration models. So Dr. Fainton mentioned we were including the city of Dent on, that is correct. We had Ron Mengida, capital planning individual for the city of Denton. Very inclusive. We had groups from faculty, staff, graduate students, undergraduate students and we met with a ton of folks just to make sure that we gathered all the data from the right places. One of the things that was shaken out is how are we going to separate these individuals and how are we going to look at this plan and make sure that we're all inclusive again. So we broke it up into the users, those on campus, we're looking at students, staff, visitors, families that come to visit not just during graduation but also during recruitment times or those just using our community amenities. The investors, the city of Denton and our partnerships that we have going on right now as we continue to develop. The community, the residential folks that are our neighbors and then of course the earth. Dr. Fainton, whenever she came on board at TWU I think introduced everyone to the triple bottom line concept in terms of people, planet, profit. We want to make sure that everything we do is sustainable and that we are environmentally friendly in our development. So with these in mind, one of the things we had to do was create an organizational framework with all this data. So it's now, here's the vision. How do we take 257 acres comprised of three distinct zones and we're going to cover those in a second and create one campus. But in order to do that we had to create some guiding principles, some core values, core principles that will keep us focused in terms of what we're trying to accomplish. So here are the three guiding principles that we established during this process. One is to create flexible campus growth and strategically planned open spaces and I have a very nice slide later on to discuss open spaces. I think we achieved a lot of these principles very, very well. We're all very proud of this plan. Prioritize on-campus pedestrian experience and we have number three to reinforce our campus identity and we have another slide where we're going to elaborate on that. In addition to our principles, we established six goals that we can try and hone in on specifically ways that we can achieve our vision. So we're going to prioritize well-being design and we do this in terms of how we design our buildings but we're also looking at how are we designing our open spaces outside those buildings. How are the students walking from one building to another? Are they getting the resources they need? Pre-student peer-to-peer engagement. This is also about resources for the students whether it's housing, dining, and other amenities. Tame and transform Bell Avenue. This is something we've been working with our city partners on probably for a couple of years. Todd, if that sounds about right. Make it easier to get around campus. This is about that pedestrian experience. Right now it's very difficult and I'm going to try and elaborate on that shortly. Elitify the campus identity and connect with the Denton community. So here are the three zones that we have on our campus. When people think of Texas Women's University, for the most part you think of West Campus. This is where the primary development has been from our academic core to a lot of our student life functions, student union, the library. So a lot of it runs north-south and the central campus has predominantly been for traffic. Lots of parking. I don't think this was a joke when they used parking lot as the image for the central campus. And then of course we have the East Campus which is basically an open 106 acres of just a blank slate for us to do something good with it as we continue to develop. You can see here from an aerial image here's some of the buildings and structures that we have. This is our historical core where we've developed a lot of our older buildings. So how do we take these three zones and create one campus? Because that really was the goal. We have three distinct environments and we're trying to just create one TWU, not just West Campus or East Campus. And a lot of times we still call it the golf course which it isn't. But here we have Redbud Lane. We technically would like to expand this. This is on our west part of the campus. Up high on the northwest part of this we have a tree grove which is a great opportunity to expand the pedestrian experience from north to south. We have the need to tame and transform Bell Avenue. We have a lot of development going on right now. Some of you may be aware of what some of those projects are . We have a student union renovation. We have a dining hall. We have a housing. We have a science building. And a lot of that's just going to increase pedestrian traffic on Bell, especially as we try and tie this campus together from east to west. We have the creek environment. Until recently I think a lot of individuals looked at the creek as kind of a dividing line but we see it as an opportunity. We think we can use the creek to create a natural environment, trail systems, and just a pleasant environment for athletics and TWU stakeholders. We have the campus mall. This idea came about as we were again trying to tie these three zones together. What kind of development could we create that would have distinct pieces of it and at the same time still be part of a whole? So we have bookend, gateways. A lot of this is conceptual. So just please remember that. We have a creek environment. We have housing and we have a quad concept. And of course we have a grove and some natural elements in here. But all of it together could be considered a mall, a place where graduation ceremonies could be held and many additional events. Then of course the tree groves. Trees are actually very, very important to us on our campus . We have here four distinct tree groves that we continue to maintain and take care of. But one of the concepts that we discussed was trying to tie them together. If we were going to create an environment for not just students but community members to enjoy our campus, how can they go from west to east and still enjoy this kind of natural environment? And we were looking at the tree groves as a way to do that. Design guidelines. This was part of maintaining our campus identity. I think it was important, especially as we go through this next phase of our development, our current development and our future development, that we continue to maintain our campus standards. And when people think of Texas Women's University, they think of that Georgian architectural style and a traditional campus feel. So we just didn't want to get away from that. Here's an open space plan that we were talking about. I kind of like this image and I thought it would be appropriate to share this with you because it ties a lot of the concepts together. So we have Redbud Lane here. You can see them with kind of highlighted trees going north and south. We have this mall area going east-west with gateways. And here's our current housing development that's actually going up right now in our dining hall. So a lot of this is actually in the works. We have a sports complex that we're trying to finalize. We've already put a soccer field out there and an intram ural field out there. Great potential to tie it in with the natural environment. We have a green belt. Now, again, this is a 20-year plan, but I think it's also important that we look at our plans for an eastern perimeter parking plan. One of the things we want to do to enhance the pedestrian experience is to create perimeter parking, get the vehicles out of the center of the campus. And I think that's a pretty traditional concept right now. And we hope to achieve that. We're actually going to start this plan. We have one parking lot that we've already built for the soccer field. And we'd like to just keep that momentum going and actually start phasing that part in. And we think that could have a lot of benefits, not just for our students, but for the community as well. It should make it easier for students to come into campus, especially if I can create a partnership with TechStot to use our Frame Street entrance on 380 and just get vehicles off of Bell and out of the residential areas. Here we have a transition slide, basically current campus with plans for future development. I love the fireworks. We had some little discussions that, you know, this is an exciting time. This presentation in more detail was given to our Board of Regents last month. Everyone's very excited about our plan. It is version 1.0, as Dr. Fainton mentioned, because it is a living document. We will continue to refine it as our needs change. But I think we have a very solid master plan to help us through our next development phase. Council Member Riggs? So if you wouldn't mind going back to that last slide and then. I'm assuming. Yeah, well, that one works too. So my concern from seeing this, it looks it's really great. But the development across the street up there, which is in District 2, is squeezed into that tiny, which is a neighborhood where we have single family homes and there are small streets around and there is recently a parking lot has been put in place. And so just without lot, the cars have just creeped into that area for street parking. And when I look over there and you can go to the very last slide where you can see how big the developments are across there with the how tall and large. And so I would I'm curious about if you're going to sell that land because it's labeled mixed use and senior housing. And if so, would that we need to be appropriate appropriately zoned. So I just I'm just going to share my concerns right now for that much development in that tiny area, which is single family homes right now. I appreciate you sharing your concerns. I don't think I can readily answer that. This is a long term vision. Well, I'm just trying to get my voice heard soon. Early. So right. And yeah, so I mean, I'm just the the parking lot has has been fine. I'm just with those cars. But I I see that over there and I can just hear future calls and emails. And so I just wanted to if it helps, we have about 106 acres on the golf course. I think this is where we're focusing our current development. Okay. So but obviously, we probably need to talk about future development plans across three eighty. Yes, sir. Yeah, this is a lot of this conceptual at this point. Okay, I appreciate that. Thank you so much. That's my monitor. So first, congratulations on this. Thank you, plan. I do have a big concern, but I first want to say what I love about it. And I hope you can tell how sincere this is. First, I think that the campus as is is beautiful. Think about it every time I drive through and I can see by looking at the plan how this already beautiful campus is being improved upon. I love what you're doing with the creek. So I'm really excited about a lot of it for the students and also for people in the community who can walk and bike through and and take advantage. I know there is a lot of community events that also take place at T.W.U. So my concern is about the closure of a bell or the cutting off a bell to to to car traffic. And while I love the idea of pedestrian having just this pedestrian area on the one hand, that street is a major thoroughfare that connects two different sides of town and also what I'm getting ready. But I'm listening. That side and that side. So I want I wanted to read a comment from a resident and I thought this was I like the way this person put it. They they diagnosed a condition called closingitis, which they referred to as inflammation of the desire to close the principal thoroughfare through a campus to vehicular traffic, despite it's important to city emergency vehicles and dentin citizens here. Bell Ave serves as a major street for access through the campus by both emergency vehicles and dentin citizens. This isn't the first time T.W.U. has proposed closing bell and it won't be the last bell is one of only three streets streets and dentin that connect with both I-35E and U.S. 380. It must stay open. Now I do understand that there are serious pedestrian concerns and I know that some measures have been taken traffic calming devices. So I'm deeply I'm not trying to stake out that street for the cars, but I would really love to see a more of a compromise between the cars and the pedestrian and bikes. And again, I've seen some really wonderful measures taken and I want to know what what else could be done short of cutting off that thoroughfare. I'd like first I'd like to say I think we have a great partnership with the city and we're we're continuing to have discussions about that. But I think Todd considering this a city street still might might be a better voice on that. Well, I'm going to I'm going to step in here because we've been meeting about this and I share a very different view than that. And I know the person who wrote the email and I appreciate their input. But I think until we flush out all the options, I think it 's a premature discussion on on that because there's been, you know, discussions with both universities about this and there's there's unique factors and criteria to each university. So we're working on bringing some options to the city council on this. Obviously it's not something that happens right away because that's been a request and there hasn't been a policy, obviously discussion or decision made. But before we come, we want to make sure that we have all the facts in play. So can I just say, I mean, obviously, as mayor, you get to decide, but to me, it seems a really relevant question about this project. To me, this seems absolutely the right time. No, I'm going to disagree with you because we don't even have all the facts yet. Your opinion has been noted and we're going to come back and have a discussion because they don't. I've been in these meetings. I mean, I'm sure you have. We have we don't we don't have enough information. It's all a conceptual discussion. So obviously, if people want to express their concerns and and their their issues with that, which you've done, and I appreciate that, and that's duly noted, but we're going to have a discussion and it's going to go circular because we don't have enough hard factual information to be able to even give direction. And that's not the purpose of this particular of this particular presentation that your issue is noted. If you guys want to make some comments, but this this presentation isn't meant to be turned into a policy discussion on whether Bell should be open or closed. That's I didn't realize that. Any other questions? You guys want to add something, that's fine. That would be different. That would be different than what I said. But I mean, that's sort of where we are. We don't taught us city engineering. The mayor said exactly that. We're still going through the early phases of just understanding the dynamics of this whole area. We're working very closely with TWU yet to be determined exactly what the ultimate fallout and impacts in the area. It's a much more comprehensive look at this than I think has ever been put into place before and that is something we're doing now. Yes, Councilmember Lipscomb. So I have a start with I emailed you a question a citizen had. Did you have a chance to take a look at that regarding parking that sort of thing? Residential parking? Yes, sir. Well, we think our current plan to try and expand our parking and move our parking out of the core and onto the east part of campus benefits everyone. So I think that's where our current master plan is going. We are finishing up a parking garage which is going to create a centralized area for parking but from there on we're going to continue to work on east campus solutions. And again, we think that helps everyone, especially if I can partner up with Tech Stop to get us an eastern entrance. Okay. So what I'll do is though I may press you and get an answer . So afterwards I'll get your email address or something to make sure you have it and then you can just reply succinctly or you can elaborate. Whatever you need to whatever answer best fits that question and then I can get that back to them. And then if I may, Mayor. Sure. Thank you. Do you happen to have a picture of the dorm? Pardon me, not the dorm. First, the student union. We're both. Student union and dorms going in. I know I was there for the groundbreaking but I'd like to have a visual of that. I know you have the aerial view but do you have anything other views of that, the construction currently? I have a flash drive in all full disclosure where I might have something if this is where we'd like to try and pull up an image or we can email it to you. Yeah, if you would. And then I can share it that way. And then lastly, I would just ask that it be noted for M ingo Road that we kind of have those conversations on what that would look like. I really would welcome conversations sooner than later regarding walking and what y'all have observed or there's options to feel that currently or act on that faster than you would with the rest of the project. Same thing with almost like a Ryan High School thing for those that understand. But I mean, we have people walking in the street now or if there's Arts and Jazz Fest, they're walking because that's so narrow. So if there's an opportunity to feel that even temporarily in the meantime, I would absolutely maybe see if there's something we can do there or push the fence in a little bit to give someone a path that would get them out of the street. I really would like that. I think there's a lot of topics that we are having in some of these meetings. Mingo is definitely one of them. Pre-TAM has already been in communications with me about some of the city's desires to try and improve pedestrian traffic along Mingo. I think very similar to Bell, we have a long way to go before we know what that could look like. Todd, do you want to elaborate? Part of the solution that we had come to council not too long ago to talk about Roodale and repurposing some of that funding was to reevaluate the entire Mingo corridor, including looking at more immediately what kind of pedestrian and bicycle facilities we could provide. That's another conversation that we're having with TWU as we look at that golf course and the Mingo corridor. What can we do to kind of be partners on this and make this thing a much better scenario for whether they're students or residents to utilize that corridor? Yeah. So for me, I get it. And that to me is more of a long term. But today... It's both things. We're having a conversation about both things as part of that. Got it. Then I look forward to hearing that. Thank you. Any other questions? Any other questions? Yes. Councilman Nelson. First, yeah, it's a very impressive and attractive vision. And I'll take some guidance from you, Mr. Mayor, if you think there's going to be a different opportunity for us to learn about what TWU's vision is as far as acquiring residential properties, particularly in the south and west. It appears that what someday will no longer be referred to as the golf course... We hope. The East Campus. The East Campus. You know, it gives so much kind of development opportunity that kind of takes pressure off the need to go south and west. Absolutely. But is that sort of appropriate to explore at this time? Go ahead. Yeah, I think I can share that. Right now with the repurposing of the golf course land, I know the Eastern Campus, we think we have a lot of opportunity there for our current development. I will say residents have contacted us in the past and given us right of first refusal, not solicited and certainly not pressure from TWU. And those requests will be considered as we receive them. But we have, I think, a pretty blank template right now for our current development. And as you mentioned, we don't have any pressure to try and acquire any property at this point. But Dr. Fainton, yes? I think this is a very interesting question because when I came to TWU, I was told that we were landlocked, which if you think about it, if you think of the university as the golf course and the buildings, it was landlocked. There was nowhere to go. Right? But that's different now. We've rethought that whole pattern. So now the golf course is no longer a golf course. So it's a whole... We're not landlocked. We are probably one of the very few universities in the country that just doubled our footprint. So we're in a very fortunate position and we're not anxious to acquire anything unless somebody really comes forward and said, "Are you interested rather than somebody else?" But we are not out looking for anything. I mean, we have plenty on our hands right now to do that. But it's a fair question. And it's one... When I came here, that's what I was told, but it looks completely different now. Thank you for sharing your perspective. Sure. Ms. Member. Thank you. Well, I absolutely love President Spayton. People, planet, profit. I think those are probably in the order in which they're important. And so for me, I relate to that. I think it's fantastic. But I have a question because it wasn't mentioned and I just assumed that it's going to stay and that it's protected as the little chapel. Of course. Of course. Because I was married. I've been married on campus and I just want to... It's hard to see in there and I feel like that's extremely important to the campus. It would be right about here. Yeah. And so I just wanted to make sure that's part of your future. It's part of my past. It's one of the treasures. Yes. Yes. Okay. Little chapel isn't going anywhere. Awesome. Thank you so much. Is it fair stating that? I think it is, right? Absolutely. Yeah. Dedicated by Eleanor Roosevelt. It's a treasure on our campus. Any other questions? I mean, obviously, as stated in the beginning, the master plan, you came to present it to give an indication of what your vision is as a partner with the City of Denton. So anything that's going to impact the City of Denton will certainly come back before this body, whether it's this one or one five years from now , with the facts, the analysis, the options, the impacts that this master plan may have. So I appreciate that. We do too. We certainly appreciate the partnership that we've had with the City of Denton. Any other questions, comments? Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. All right. We'll move on to agenda item 3B, which is Received Report, Hold Discussion, Give Staff Direction Regarding Alignment Options for the Bonnie Bray Phase 4, Widening and Improvements Project from I-35 East to Scripture. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. So we're going to have a little bit of a tag team presentation today as we talk about one of my favorite topics, which is Bonnie Bray Phase 4. So we have a bit of an impasse with the project itself that we need some direction on today. That's really the point of today's discussion is this project has a bit of a hold on it from the standpoint that we need an agreement on an alignment. An alignment meaning where we're going to line that road up through the center line of the road along the corridor from I-35E north to Scripture. Soon as we have that, we are poised to proceed very quickly to move into complete the design phase and go into construction. That also impacts several right away implications that will come for discussion at a later date as we define what that alignment is. So 2015, three alignments were brought to Council that looked at a fairly narrow bandwidth of what could be accomplished with the roadway. Of those three alignments, there was one chosen. So on this slide, you'll actually see those three align ments. There was a red alignment. The red alignment was pushed, if you think of this as I-35E to the south, Scripture. This little piece of the map is actually what would extend over here, but to make it a little easier to see, we broke it into two pieces. So Scripture is this road right here. It goes all the way up to Panhandle as we draw the picture here. So red would have encroached further into the east. This blue alignment would have gone over. You can see the apartment complex is the text out right away. Would have pushed a little bit further over. And then green kind of split the difference. It used as much of the existing roadway that is Bonnie Bray . It used as much as it could and then built off to the sides as needed. Council in '15 gave direction to go with that green alignment, and that was where engineering and capital projects had gone since then, was down that pathway to design the project that you see in green. So we had a request here recently as we started looking at the right-of-way impacts going to last fall to what kind of impacts could we analyze, what kind of alignments could we look at with this project to better utilize what we have and have as minimal impact as possible. We also heard safety was a primary concern, and there was a concern that we were moving people too fast, too quickly, too much at one time. So how do we minimize the safety impacts? How do we minimize impacts to certain property owners on one side of the road versus another side of the road? So we have gone back and analyzed all of those things, including looking at what would the future growth that we anticipate coming down this roadway impact the corridor clear on out to 2040. So we looked at what today's volumes, travel volumes, are impacted, what that impact on the corridor is, and then what it is 22 years from now. We evaluated that based on the right-of-way impacts, total construction cost, and we come back with several options that we wanted to present to you today. Yes, sir? >> I have a question on it so that I'll have an understanding of it. >> Sure. >> In the presentation where you list the cost comparison of all four alternatives. >> Yes, sir. >> You showed the original alignment just in your previous slide. That one there. Is that one of the alternatives? >> We have one that's kind of a hybrid of that green alternative. >> Let me do that again. Mike was off. So got a question before we get started on the slide with the alternatives. You showed this slide was the original decision, council direction, for the alignment. >> Yes. >> Do you have a cost breakdown and all the different other metrics that you have for the all four alternates for this one? >> It's a modified version of this one. So modified only in that our transportation guidelines, our design guidelines have modified some of the curves in the road so they're not as shallow as before. So we could go a little bit steeper with the nature of the corridor which would help calm traffic but it generally aligns with this green alignment. >> Got you. Okay. I didn't see it. I just wanted to make sure I understood where it fit into the alternatives. >> Absolutely. >> All right. Thank you. >> So again, as we analyze all four of these elements and each one of these options, this is where we're stepping forward and we want to run through these options with you and then pre-TAM I'm going to hand off to him to work through the traffic piece, what the impacts to traffic throughout the corridor, expected volumes and what level of service you might expect. So our first alternative is that option that you were referring to, Mr. Mayor, is very close to the original green alignment, the primary difference. It's really not any different along the entire stretch until you get to scripture because our guidelines, our design guidelines have recognized you don't have to flatten this curve out as much. We've gone to the maximum amount of curvature that you could go that safely for the speeds that we anticipate on this roadway and that pushes the intersection just a little bit further to the west, not a whole lot further but just a little bit. It's still essentially the same project. Still impacts the same number of parcels, 28 parcels, total of about three acres that we're looking at along the corridor. So if you can imagine that's roughly about 15 to 20% on average of a parcel that it touches is what we're really talking about needing for the project. You have a right away estimate there. Just to give you a comparison on each one, the actual impact on right away, we project could be from a budget number somewhere around the four and a half to five million dollar number. Projective two is essentially the exact same alignment until you get into this northern segment, get very close to scripture. The difference being that we held the curb line on the eastern side of the road. So all the homes that are on this east side of the roadway, we didn't do anything to them other than the road is going to be a little different. It'll be a little higher or lower depending on where it is today as we design the roadway. So we anticipate we're going to be rebuilding some drive ways if we go down this pathway. But it pushes the western edge of Bonnebrae back over to the west significantly. So in this instance, we would actually impact a total of 31 parcels instead of the 28 we're originally looking at. You have a net anticipated increase in what we think the parcel amount, what the total cost would be to acquire all those easements and rightaways , push it in the six and a half to $7 million range. So it goes up significantly plus you've got some offshoots on that and you see these driveways extending much further out. That's because those buildings are much lower than the road way. And once we start pushing the road that way, we have to do significant amounts of offsite work, retaining walls, a lot of grading, some extension into driveways and parking lots would have to relocate. Councilmember Riggs. On this one though, the 28 homes that you mentioned earlier that would be extremely impacted in the first alternative are although you would have to still acquire some rightaways and do the reconstruction of driveways, the degree of impaction would be significantly less to those homes. To these seven or eight right here on the end, yes. The other 20 would still be experiencing the same level of impact. Which would mean going away. Well, some would go away. The vast majority are we're encroaching into their front yards or some of them are apartment complexes, their retail establishments. There's several different varieties of parcels all along that corridor. Councilmember Ryan. The difference in price is that strictly on the acquisition of the property or you mean you mentioned offsite work? We're factoring in the other elements that we would also have to do. So that would be anticipated all in if we were to acquire all the parcels that go with that alignment. It's all the other things we have to do as well. Okay. Thank you. So just so I understand, the difference, primary difference between alternative two and alternative one. Yes, sir. As far as impact on property owners, is this little section here between scripture and is that Hickory or West Oak? West Oak. Right there. Yes, sir. And you the impact primarily you've got what eight single family, nine, ten single families there. Yes. And so they would be impacted in alternative one. Yes. In alternative two, they would not. But other than that, we are going to impact a medical building, a parking lot, apartment building. Yes. Those are all those are all impacts will stay the same. Yes. Okay. So the west this red line you see here, right, our DME utilities, those are power poles, power lines, they would all have to be relocated. Okay, so this is my question, because Bonnie Bray wasn't like this before. I mean, it was two lane probably like it is down there past Apogee. So when they came in and widened it, they moved to the west and put in all the utilities, put in everything there and expanded it that direction. Yes. So it probably wasn't my hunch is there probably wasn't anything there. Whereas now, since that's been established, all these other businesses have built up around there. Okay. All right. Okay. All right. So that that would be alternative to it's still at the intersection of Scripture, all the way down to I 35. It's the exact same alignment. We've just shifted this northern segment to the west. Is that still signaled at Scripture and Bonnie Bray? Yes, which is a great segue into the next. So the next option is essentially the same project all the way up until you get to Scripture. And that that would be where we've looked at a roundabout option, that would be what we call a modern roundabout. It would be two lanes in each direction north south and to the west. But as it goes into the residential neighborhood near the park, it would narrow it down to one lane in each direction. So it's it's also what we call a hybrid roundabout. So this impacts roughly the same number of parcels total cost is very similar to what option one would be, which is the signalized intersection, but not moving the roadway to the west. Pre times going to get into the traffic analysis here soon. So I'm just going to lay out the overall alignment options of what they look like. And then the last option, this is our option. Todd, let me just clarify. Sure. So that's three, that's what the roundabout no signal. The only difference between that and alternative ones. That is the only difference. Yes. So the impact on the the homes, those seven or eight homes would be the same impact as alternative one. Yes. Okay. The biggest difference is is when you get into the big curve over here, this this is a concept drawing, this could be tweaked to where we could utilize more of the existing curve, you're still going to impact the property on the corner. It doesn't really change that, but it does give more potential parkland down the road. So there's some benefits to each of these. Okay. Council member, no sir. Yeah, we were focusing on the homes, you know, long body brain, which is important. But the significant difference with this one is the difference in the impact of the land just west of McKenna Park. And I wonder if you wouldn't mind just going back to one and two so we could see how those impact that bit, you know, just to put our attention on because that's that's the main reason that I think you would do three. Right. So So one, you can see it swings a little bit further to the east. And one of the advantages of the roundabout conceptually, we have it shown lining up with the very similar to what we saw an alternative one. But the reality is it's more advantageous of the roundabout if we can push it further this way. So this is really a concept layout, you're still going to impact this property, but it would hug closer to the original alignment of the roadway. So it would push it farther to the west. But you're I'm sorry, anybody else have any questions comments. But what I'm hearing you say is that it did. Oh, did you I'm sorry, didn't see your hand. Oh, you sure. Okay. Okay. All right. But what I'm what I'm seeing at least here in an alternative one, and I think an alternative to because it's some of the concern, at least what I remember hearing was that somehow this was going to encroach on the parking area there that's east or what east of the house there on the corner. This right here. Yeah, that right there. But so that's being preserved in this alignment. It could be preserved on either alignment because even when you go back to alternate one, we've been able to push that further to the west. Okay. Well, I guess I guess I got confused because I thought there was some discussion that we were going to eat into the parking lot with East McKinney with with Bonnie Bray and take away so the very first one green alignment you were going right. Okay. Oh, gotcha. And that's where we have that little small segment west. Yes, and taking gotten more the curve instead of straight ened it. Correct. Gotcha. Okay. Well, I appreciate that. Appreciate that. Okay, I'm sorry, Councilmember. I mentioned that this roundabout in option three on scripture is you call it a modern roundabout, a hybrid roundabout. So a hybrid of what and what and I'm asking not for trivia because I really want to understand the different kinds. I'm going to get into that engineering jargon. Awesome. So when we talk about a modern roundabout and a hybrid roundabout, a hybrid and a modern roundabout are the same thing. The only difference is in a modern roundabout, the circles tend to not be as large a circle, which is designed to keep traffic moving much slower. We keep it no bigger than what we can maintain a 20 mile an hour speed limit within the circle itself. That's the advantage of modern roundabout, which you've seen in other countries where or even in Fort Worth, if you go to what people call the Weatherford circle down in Fort Worth, that's what they call a high speed rotary. People confuse it with a roundabout because it is circular, but it's designed to let traffic move through that circle at 45 to 50 miles an hour. So that's a high speed rotary. What we're doing is specifically calming traffic, slowing it down coming into the intersection, but you never have to truly stop, which is the advantage of the roundabout. Plus, it's got some long-term impacts from maintenance of signals, timing, things like that that reduces our overhead long-term. This roundabout is what we would call a hybrid modern round about, I guess would really be the technical term for it. All that means is a roundabout typically has the same number of lanes all the way around. So if I have two lanes coming in north and south and east and west, I'd have two lanes going around inside the circle. Sometimes at a roundabout, it's a very good way to reduce lanes on certain roadways. So the way I do that is I would have two lanes in the directions I need to, but as I'm moving cars into say this southern leg down here, it would be the eastern going into the McKenna Park in the neighborhood, this cut through right here is one lane. So if you're on the outside, you'd hug the outside and you 'd move to the outside and continue straight. Or if you want to turn left, you would come around the corner in one lane only and that narrows down how many people can actually go through. Does that make sense? Yes, but it's kind of like a unwinding spool of thread. Yes. That gets smaller. If you sit in our rooms, you'll hear us talk about the spiral and spiraling out and all this kind of stuff. That's cool. It sounds a little space kid. It works. I don't mean to jump ahead to number four too much, but while I have this in my head, in number four, and you don't even have to go to the slide, but are those all the same kind of modern hybrid roundabouts with them? Okay, thank you. Yes. Councilman Briggs, did you have a question? Well, just more of a comment. So I'm glad to hear you say that because scripture from going near the park is still going to be one lane in one lane, right? Yes. So you're inviting the traffic up ahead of time. You're not creating that congestion. Exactly. Yes, ma'am. So that is alternative three. Alternative four was we kind of took to the extreme the absolute safest configuration of the roadway. Now it's also the most expensive configuration of the road way, both from a right away standpoint and a construction standpoint. So you will see five roundabouts in succession. There are a lot of negatives to this project in that it dates into this DME substation, the proposed DME substation. That would cause a delay in the middle. If we propose to go down this pathway, you'd have a three to five year delay just as you take one substation offline, build a new one. It takes time to make all that work. But it does restrict all the turning movements at these intersections. It reduces, we would skinny the lanes down to 11 foot lanes . It would calm traffic through the entire corridor and would reduce total number of locations where you could have accidents. That being the case, that's still not the one that we would recommend for this project. But it is that ultra safe option. Council Member Ryan. I was just gonna say, I refer to this as the back end parking alternative. What are you saying? I'm saying that a council in the past decided on back end parking was a good idea. We've seen what our residents think of back end parking. I think if we thought that this was a good idea, that our residents would probably tell us the same thing, that it was not. Okay, yeah. I agree. The only question I have on this one is, if you go back north on Bonnie Bray from Panhandle Street, forget the roundabout there, but the challenge is gonna be, because you have, go back to it if you would, option three. You've got to where you've got median cuts at these drives on whatever, Hickory, West Oak, Prairie, all those coming down through there. So I don't know on the north side, because you've got Pan handle, Ector, not Ector, Linden, and a couple others there, that right now with no median there, it's impossible to almost turn left most of the time. So are those all gonna be right turn only? So the way that corridor would work with multiple round abouts. Well, I'm not, okay. And if you're talking about this one, we're still working on the median spacing and where those right turns and left turns would be, that would be a part of the defined project itself working on those cuts. Okay, so this isn't necessarily a representation. There might not be all those median cuts at these streets. There might not be, part of the evaluation process is how important are those pieces? Do you restrict some of the left turns or right turns? Because when you go with a four lane divided roadway, you want to restrict, which is the whole point. Right now we have a four lane undivided roadway and when people stop to turn left, it's correct, congests the roadway. So in this, in any of these alternatives, there's not enough median to have a dedicated left hand turn lane? All the alternatives you see here, other than option four, the left turn lanes, we didn't change from what was the original alignment. Those are the same left turn lanes. But there are left hand, there's enough space to where you 've got your other traffic moving forward and somebody's moved over to turn. Yes. Okay. And that's part of these parcel takes that you see here is we're getting, we have to get the right of way to put the median in, especially in this segment south of scripture all the way down to 35E, there's just not that much space. So then on the western, and so I guess that's a different phase from scripture to university drive because there are a lot of residential streets that T N to Bonnie Bray. So then it's possible that some of those may not, depending on traffic counts and so forth, may not be right turn. They may be right turn only, but one of them, or one of them, let's say may have a signal to where if somebody wants to go to the signal, because there's enough, there's enough cross traffic cross streets in that neighborhood to, to allow movement to a signal like that. That's my only concern is, but then also if that slows traffic down, this is really meant to move people from I-35 to university all the way out to loop 288. Correct. And not at 20 miles an hour. I mean, is my understanding. So as we did the corridor analysis and Preetam is going to be coming to talk about that. One of the things that you see as an advantage with a round about is that it actually restricts flow less than a signal does. So two things that happen with a signal, you've got to sit and wait. Plus I've got to build a bigger roadway to handle all the cars that wait. With a roundabout, because there's constant flow, I actually have less roadway I have to build for a much longer period of time and I can keep traffic moving. So even though they slow down to 20 miles an hour at the intersection, they're not stopping for a minute and a half. Well I know at scripture, because I drive that often, I've been backed up all the way back to almost West Oak Street. Sure. At the four way stop. Okay. All right. Any other questions so far? Yes, Councilmember. Yeah, I'll just point out. So I agree and I laughed at your point Councilmember Ryan about the back end parking. Because I thought that was very relevant also in that this option I think is pretty too as is the back end parking. And so I see the impracticality for all of these round abouts. But I will say that the roundabouts in that sense you were just describing is the least like a parking lot because of the way that it moves traffic . Whereas you can even be, and that's why it, you know, maybe the next time this comes to us you could have some little like a pinball kind of a, you know, demonstration where we could see the, you know, a moving demonstration where you can see how you can be going slower but get from point A to point B. We actually have that if you'll have a second. Oh you do? Oh cool. Yeah, awesome. Say that would be great. Yeah. Because you can get from point A to point B within the same time even though you're going into slower speed. Yeah. And it's safer. So on the left you have what would be a signalized scripture and bonnie berry intersection. On the right you have the roundabout that we're proposing or at least a concept of what that roundabout be. You'd even see that it's one lane in and one lane out. What segment was it? 32. So we're going to push to a yellow car that will be coming on screen here in just a second. And you'll see it come from the left and both illustrators. So here it is on the roundabout. There it is on the signal. And if you'll watch the car in the roundabout and the car in the signal, the car at the signal will not even move through the intersection until this car has turned left and gone all the way off the screen. Yeah. So the yellow car is moving through the roundabout now. This car is still stationary. So it's still moving north. Yellow car is almost off the screen and we're still waiting here at the red light. Yeah, Preetam says he's frustrated. He's still waiting at the red light. I took the roundabout and I'm already gone. So we're still waiting and it's moving through now. Better for road rage too. So that just shows you how as a roundabout performs, you're moving through. So even though I'm slowing down to 20 miles an hour, I'm still moving through. There's even, if you ever want to look at it, there's even a Mythbuster segment where they talked about roundabouts versus standard intersections . And they can, they will talk about how many cars go through the intersection that much faster. So there's also a truck, 207. The council is going to pass a policy that you have to have cool animations like this at every presentation, even for the budget. So you see the big truck coming north. It has not had to stop and move straight through the intersection. That truck on the signal is still waiting through the congestion to get north. And this truck is off the screen and gone up to university drive. This one is just now clearing through the intersection. Good. Very cool. Thanks. Very helpful. That's right. Yes. Yes. All right. So with that, unless there's more questions about the alignment, I'm going to hand it off to Preetam, which is really the show you all wanted to see anyway. Oh, I'm sorry. Council member Hudspeth. Yes, sir. Sorry. Have the alignment that you've laid out. Yes, sir. Factor in razor ranch developments. Yes. Factor in panhandle going into that development. Yes. And I guess my last question is, and I don't know if this is a pre-tamp thing when he gets to the numbers, I'm on the fence on the traffic on scripture versus motivating everyone to go down the oak, pardon me, hickory or oak, depending on which way you're going, which would then decrease traffic on scripture more. Any thoughts? The biggest issue you're going to have on scripture, especially going to west with the razor ranch development is that there's no real good direct connection between hickory that oak hickory couplet, as we would call it, going back to the intersection. You'd have to get out to the frontage road before you can tie back in. So what's going to happen is a lot of folks are going to come all the way up Bonnie bray, then take a left on scripture to get to Andy B's to Cheddar 's to rooms to go. Some will take the service road, but others that want to stay away from I-35 and the traffic that will be coming off there will stay on Bonnie bray until they get to where they want to go. And any thoughts on, because scripture, you have to make that kind of that, ultimately that job to get to yes to Carol versus panhandle to straight shot, I do believe. Yes. One intersection before the park, less traffic going right alongside the park. Any thoughts to that? Am I wrong? It depends on which way you're wanting to go with panhandle . So panhandle will take you right through the neighborhood, which is one of the things that we're trying to minimize is auxiliary traffic moving through the neighborhood to get somewhere and try to keep them on to the roadways that are ready to receive them like Okan Hickory University Drive. Panhandle going back to the west through the development. So panhandle will daylight right at where the current on ramp for interstate 35 is actually just slightly offset. So as you move off of, you're gonna have a lot of folks who want to go down panhandle and try to make a weird movement in the one way frontage road to get on to I-35. And we're trying to discourage that traffic because it would be very unsafe. Got it. That's even with the new on ramp by rooms to go coming online? I don't believe they've adjusted that. Preetam may be able to handle that on ramp. So I want to go to the next slide. I think it has a bigger nice picture. Preetam Deshmukh, traffic engineer. Preetam, before you get started. I know we've had three or four options presented. I haven't heard a lot of cheerleading for option four, which is the, as someone referred to it as the back end parking of the options. So unless and even if one of you wants to do it, you've got four of these laid out for each alternative. But if alternative four seems to be not an interest, I don 't even know why. So start going through these and we'll decide that when we get to alternative four. If there's somebody that wants to see the explanation of that as you present here with these other three. Okay. Yep. So. The Bradford hair. Yeah. So I'll briefly go over the corridor analysis. This is specifically focused on traffic, how the vehicles will travel northbound on Bonnebray between I-35E all the way to EUS 380. What's their travel? What are the delays? Now, these colors represent levels of service. For green, it's anywhere between up to 20 seconds of delay at each of these locations where there's green. Between 20 and 55 seconds is this yellow. So if someone comes in and you saw that yellow car, it would sit there 55 seconds on an average during the peak hours before it clears off. And then the red effectively says that there is quite a bit backup and by the time you release it's more than 55 seconds from that particular approach. So this is how it is currently? Correct. This is existing conditions. So help me understand then because I think maybe ideal istically all these arrows should look green. I mean, the intersection at Bonnebray and University Drive has been there for a long time. I mean, it was designed and built for a certain capacity and it's already almost failing. So is there something I'm missing? So well. And I don't want to delve into it too much because maybe it 's like, well, this is just this is typical and if it's typical, it's no big deal. Now it's more of when you build they will come kind of tendency. If you have a roadway built, if you widen the capacity, increase the capacity and there is congestion somewhere else, people try and start using that. So that's why we designed typically for 20, 25 years in the future for that type of growth. Okay. Thank you. So this is what it looks like. These are the colors that represent the delay. So if we start going north, the arrows fairly go smoothly and as Mary pointed out that you wait at the stop sign going northbound for a long time and you can see that red arrow at scripture because it's an always stop. At 30 miles an hour, which is the speed limit along the segment, typically it takes about a little bit less than a minute to travel this corridor. If I'm traveling at a constant speed, this is a 1.6 mile corridor between 35 and 380 and it should take you less than a minute to travel this. Today with all the friction, the stop signs, the signals, it takes about five minutes in the northbound direction to travel to US 380 and about three and a half minutes to go the other direction. And we're talking about the PM peak, which is the worst peak hour. So this is existing conditions and all the slides following for different scenarios are set up the same way. This is what would happen if we don't do this project. So I would want to focus on what the conditions would be in the northbound direction. We're talking about a 21 minute travel time the minute you leave this off ramp and you're trying to go through this corridor all the way to university. It will take 21 minutes by the time you get to 2040 in the next 20, 22 years. And that's why we should be ahead of the curve and plan this project and get this project done. Any questions on this slide? And then we'll jump into the alternatives. So this is the 2040 time frame? Correct. Okay, at 2040. Correct. Not right now. So they're going to be up until that point, they're going to be better than what you're representing on here. Correct. Okay. Slowly go worse and worse. Yes. So alternatives one and two, the travel times are not that off because there will be considerable there will be a signal here that would help a lot for these alternatives. And the other issues there will be signal optimization, some of the cycle lengths will be changed and will improve progression. So there will be the time frames are if we do the improvement, also we're adding capacity, we're putting in a four lane divided, which means you're moving the turning vehicles out, you're taking that friction away. That's why the times are back to normal. And that's the reason why we need this project. Alternative one and two, alternative three, where you have one roundabout at scripture. You see the and I think the video went before this. So it was a great demonstration there. You see most of the vehicles that come in are really within the next 10, 15 seconds, 20 seconds, less than 20 seconds they're cleared. So they don't have to wait at that intersection. You can see all the approaches green. But some of these approaches at the cross streets where you have signals, you can actually see that they start getting into a higher delay. This particular alternative, it's about four minutes in the northbound, almost five minutes in the northbound and three and a half minutes. It's not that much off. There is considerable safety associated with this round about here. And also the cross traffic is much slower along with Bonnie Ray approaching this. So that's the difference in the last alternative. I can continue talking or we can. Yes, Council Member Briggs. So the intersection at University and Bonnie Briggs never seems to get better. It gets okay and it gets worse and it gets okay again. But there's not ever any real solution. And when I'm driving in this, I don't really have any issues or problems personally until I get to that intersection. And I don't know if it's because of the way that the traffic is with the turn lanes and that just there's something that causes the congestion there. And so looking at this, I'm not seeing a solution to that. So yes, as part of this corridor project, we will look at this intersection. The main issue here is the north-- I'm sorry? In phase five, we will upgrade this particular intersection . The main issue and delays associated with the left turns, there's only one left turn pocket which is not long enough. And the amount of volume that's going through that intersection really needs dual left turn lanes. And it will be as part of that phase five. Okay. Council Member Armitage. Not to get too much ahead, but I am still trying to link everything together and see the big picture. Is one of the proposals going to be around about there? At University and Bonnie Bray? Well, at this time, we don't see that. Given that this corner is already developed, I think all these corners are developed, first thing. Second thing, TechStat owns or has jurisdiction over US 380 . So there are several aspects that we need to look at. They went through a widening project recently. So given those aspects, we will definitely take a look at the analysis. But as far as the feasibility, when we go through different steps, it may not make sense to put it here. But I'll let Todd jump in. Yeah, I think the only constraint we'd be worried about at University is that it is a six-lane facility. So which translates to a three-lane roundabout. So I would only feel comfortable at this stage of the game talking about no more than two lanes in a roundabout. When you add a third lane, that's multiple lanes that people can cross back and forth. Is it feasible? Sure. I think pre-TAM is right there. A lot of other issues that really make the feasibility not as workable or desirable as you would want. It could be cost prohibitive. Space is definitely going to be an issue. And just the sheer confusion once you get too many things happening at one time could be a problem. Sure. Of course. So when I attended a neighborhood meeting a while ago that two of you were also at, and there was a lot of concern by the residents about a new development that was coming in that area. I take it you've probably learned a lot more about it since then. Or maybe not, but wondering if you could just say a little something about how that impacts the situation. Has that affected your-- The roundabout in the Deenier area? No, that development. I think they're going to apartments. I forget the name of it. You know about the ones on Scripture? No. I think those apartments are way south. They're just south of Rose Lawn along Bonnie Bray and it's currently under construction. Yes. I don't remember the name of the street. Correct. Side streets. Yes. So it's way south of the university area down there. And the impacts, I mean the impacts were looked at by the development and they have access off of Bonnie Bray. We'll get back with the residents with specific answers when we get there. Okay, thanks. So all of that down there doesn't affect this part of the-- No, it's way south of 35. And I know that it's not in this picture, but I also know how everything, you know, one thing affects the next exactly. So I just wanted to make sure. Thank you. So observation on this one, which I find interesting. The time, travel time is greater than alternate three, is that right? Yes. Yes. Now, I will say this though. I would be interested because you have it on here on Pan handle's or Roundabout. I understand about not putting roundabouts at Oak and Hick ory and what is that, Prairie. But this is the only, from Scripture to University Drive, that roundabout at Panhandle is-- it is at least conceptually the only way without you showing more curb cuts in that-- what is-- is that the same phase as what we're talking about or is that a different phase? It's a different phase. When will we see in that phase? That phase will be coming up soon. That's actually part of the contract under consideration. Well, it's subsidiary to the contract under consideration later tonight. It's hard to consider one-- you know, these is-- I mean, I know they're different phases, but they're basically the same segment from University Drive to I-35, so it's hard to bifurcate those. Yeah, we did the corridor analysis because it is one continuous segment, but the construction project is done in phases. It only goes up to Scripture and then we'll move past Scripture with phase five. Okay. Well, then I'd like to see as part of that phase five analysis what that additional cost is. Sure. So it's a hand-handled roundabout included in the estimated cost of the alternative four alignment even though it's not in that segment? It's not. No, it's not in that one. Okay, gotcha. This is purely just phase four which is down to here. Okay. Fantastic. All right. Okay. Questions, comments? Councilmember Briggs? Oh, just on the-- on the cost-- on the direction, like for the alternatives, that's I guess it's-- I just kind of wanted to-- Okay, let me get to the next slide. Yeah, yeah, I'm just waiting. I think I'm going to take over from this point. Yeah. So now we're talking about just the different alternatives and just from a rough cost perspective, our budget estimates for these projects, these are total cost estimates. So if you're looking at the project itself, alternative one which would be generally what the original alignment was with a few modifications, you're looking at about $13.5 million budget. If you look at alternative two which is originally what the original alignment was but it holds the eastern curb line and pushes everything to the west as you near scripture, it starts to push the budget into roughly a $19 million budget. We're not funded to that amount right now. We can absolutely handle the $13.5 million range. Option three with the roundabout at scripture, we're estim ating around $13.6 million. So it's a marginal increase and that's mostly into the actual redesign of that intersection which designed currently as a signalized intersection. This would just be the redesign of that. And then when you get into alternative four, there's the cost. It's over $19 million. It's far and away the most expensive and to do back end parking essentially. Great. Lovely. So our recommendation at this point would be to go with alternative three. We feel it delivers the best long term output for traffic calming. It's got a cost estimate that's within the realm of where we currently are. It has some advantages, some that are very similar to what the original alternative was but it just has a better way of moving traffic through the corridor. Councilmember Briggs, you had a comment? So my recommendation and I'm not sure which alternative it is. I don't know that it is there but my concerns of course are protecting the neighborhood because it's going to be, I guess as the mayor said, the intention is not to be 20 miles per hour on that street. And so protecting the character of the neighborhood, saving the homes and reducing the speed around the park. Those were my three main concerns. Is there an alternative recommendation that fits those? This alternative would do that because the advantage that you don't see in the concept and again this is the concept drawing would be that if you chose this alternative we would actually take this roadway and push it further to where it 's closer to the original alignment of Bonnie Bray as it sits today which will slow traffic down. It'll slow it down a great deal. You want that anyway coming into a roundabout. You're trying to set up the driver for a slower speed coming in. You slow them down by putting in those curbs and making them do that unconsciously. Signs of putting a speed limit sign up, they are effective but that's generally to the person who's paying attention to it. When roadways are set straight and they're wide, I don't care what the sign says, you'll look down even if you are really diligent about paying attention to the sign you will look down and you'll notice you're going a little faster than you think but that's because you feel comfortable doing that. What we're trying to set up is the geometry, the physical barriers to make you feel less comfortable going faster and these curves and that round about will help set that up. The importance of that being around the park was that originally this was a proposed ADA park to convert and so that's another reason why making sure that the traffic in the area, if we may choose another park but if that's the case and it still goes to this one, it's going to be important. And so the other two concerns it also addresses? Yes. Okay. So I want to make sure because I know one of your concerns is it let me make sure before I assume anything. One of your concerns the houses along Bonnie Bray Street. Yes. Okay. So the meaning is this alignment will either require an entire taking of how many parcels are there of the homes that she's referring to? So this option right here would still constitute the same take that we've been looking at through the entire options. So I wanted to make sure that that was pointed out because I know that that's been important to you. Right. And I think option two was the one that impacted those less . Right. Right. Okay. Yeah. That was I forgot how much it was more five million or something like that. Yeah, but it's important. Yeah. So and I understand that. So my question becomes I don't have a problem with option three. And I think because if I understand correctly, correct me if I'm wrong, but some of those homes are owner occupied, if there are any, there's several that are owned by one individual that I think are not owner occupied. They're rented. There are a few out there. Yes. Okay. All right. Yeah. I mean, I'm going to go with option three because I think it provides the most cost effective means and we have done some horse trading, so to speak, from the original option with getting it away from the park, with trying to move it over. I just, I'm having a hard time spending the kind of money to preserve six or seven or eight single family developments that when you look at that , and I can't see the map real well, but behind those parcels, it looks like either there's a lot of green space. They don't look like there's a lot of, there's any homes that are directly behind those, except maybe on the corner, except maybe on the corner. And when this got built originally, is my assumption again, and if somebody has some historical context on that, that'd be great, is there wasn 't anything on the west side and obviously that was the least impactful to a lot of different things. And now it would create a tremendous, a tremendous project to, so, you know, it's a balancing act and we all have our different, our different perspective on that. So which is fine. So I'm going to, I think alternative three for me is better just because it addresses all the concerns that council member Briggs had save that one, which is the, the homes there on Bonnie Bray. Yeah, no, it affects, it doesn't affect the park. Okay. So you're saying the, the taking of those would destroy the character of the neighborhood. Okay. I, I, okay. Well, I disagree with that, but I appreciate that. I was wrong. Sorry about that. Okay. Council member, yes. Originally, as far as I can remember, Tiffany left, Lee lived on across the street on Bonnie Bray. So it was, it was houses and horses. There's a farm there. And so, but then that's a very good point because the city came in and widened Bonnie Bray and to the, to the west, but it also came to the east and took off the front of our property to put in the sidewalk. And so this process began, you know, once you're down that road, you've already taken that property on the front end of those homes. I mean, it's already there. I don't think there's any easement there because they, yeah , they gobbled it up the first go around. And so this ball has been rolling for a while to your point . I can get behind alternative three as well. I think it's one of the, no matter what you do, there's precious few parks that have that own, their own little parkings, whether the Mack park has it. I mean, so no matter what you do, that is truly unique to that park. Not to mention if you had to come in a ways, there's plenty of space to come in and that's the least of your worries, that intersection. The primary concern is where it comes back down and the park absolutely butts into Bonnie Bray street. And when you're coming down that hill, when it snows, you 're in that first lane, you know, so that's your concern, not that stretch where you park everything. You're good to go there. And everyone parks kind of on the side on scriptures, less traffic. So people have been managing that park for a very long time . So I don't have the same concerns about the park. I do appreciate the roundabout. That was one of my concerns that there is a constant flow through there because I think your point is valid. Andy B's will be absolutely busy. That kind of that segment of things will be absolutely busy . And so I think that meets most of the usage needs that I foresee. And then I guess I would ask that we dovetail understanding there's a different phase to come, but that we would start planning to make the timing of the lights at university be a study once this is up and running or kind of make those make sure those go together because it's kind of pointless to run more cars to the end and then have them wait longer. So I guess we need to time that up. Absolutely. Thanks. So I for me in terms of priorities, you know, the minimal impact on homes where people live, that's number one. And I also love the roundabout for getting traffic through. And so obviously this is one of these situations, you know, where you can't have your cake and eat it too and my and I know where my priorities are with the homes first. But so I take it and this question has probably been asked before in previous council meetings. But if you could go back to the number two picture. Yeah. Yeah. So it's a number two without the roundabout is there really I take it the answer is yes, but just a little explanation as to why there's no other place that would be feasible to put a roundabout that would not impact the impact properties, but that would still have that positive safety safety effect and and also I'll add also an aesthetic effect because I think roundabouts they end up being pretty. I know that's not the purpose of but you know, you put stuff in it's like a big planter in the circular planter in the middle of the road. So the biggest issue with a roundabout when you start pushing to the west is that the cost goes up quite a bit more to build a roundabout. Because if you think about how that roundabout works, this piece must come into the side of the roundabout and you're going to have to push the circle out here. So you're going to impact this property even more. So you've got another office building here would be getting out there doing significant impacts to putting in retaining walls, relocating parking potentially impacting enough of the business plus you get the same on the other side where there's a significant drop off from the road. It's getting extremely cost prohibitive to do the round about in this option. That is so that is just a -- I know that can change over time. Okay. That's our data medical offices. Okay. Yeah. I mean for that reason I prefer number two. Yeah I wish it wasn't so cost prohibitive to do that. Remind me what the cost would be roughly. You're going to push upwards to 19 million so we'd be looking for an additional $6 million to make that project whole. $5.5 to $6 million to make that project hold in that pathway. Now the -- but the alternative four wasn't around 19 million. That wasn't considered cost prohibitive. No it was. That's all roundabouts throughout the entire -- Oh yeah. No I know. Okay. So you made it onto the list right this other option two with the one roundabout didn't make it onto the list. Option three with one roundabout is 13.6 and then the signalized alignment as we currently have it played out and not going to the west is roughly the same cost. So if option three is then option two with a roundabout I mean where does the kind of the more impact on the residents is come in. So option three again is -- -- where people are living. Again is not changing at all from option one in the alignment here. It's just we're putting in the roundabout as a traffic control. Option two you're taking this entire roadway and you're shifting it this way. Yep. You're moving it to the north. If I put in a roundabout here I've got to go even further to the west on this drawing which has got some more so there's a drop from the road down. Yeah I see it. And I'd have to push a lot more dirt put retaining walls it just gets more expensive so it gets even more expensive than that number. Okay okay thanks. So your yours is option two. Yeah. Okay all right. Yeah right okay. Councilmember. Well I think I've obviously spoken on option four is a no- go for me. I originally was option one and but after having seen the traffic analysis based on the future flow of traffic I can definitely get behind option three. Okay. Councilmember Duff. Well I don't I have never liked roundabouts it's just a personal thing but option three looks like the best choice here. I hate to see those homes be taken out but you know we can 't afford the cost. All right. Councilmember Milser. First of all I think you know what credit goes to you know staff for taking in a lot of community input. Originally the you know the plan was to barrel right through that cap on McKenna Park you know which would I think would very significantly alter the enjoyability of that and you know as we grow our green spaces are more precious you know not less. I lean to option three I think it's a creative solution. You can't have everything in every solution but I think you know all considerations taken together go to three. Yes Councilmember Briggs. So I don't know if our new council members received Romans. We did a historical analysis of all of those homes and sent that to us. I don't know if anyone had ever seen that but I think it's worth looking at. None of them have a historical designation is that correct. Well no but they've all they all have history. No no I understand that but I mean I think half of our city has history. I mean we've got you know a ton so I mean I did see that actually. I did see that. One question I have though in alternative three we've had on a prior agenda it may even be on a closed session that piece of property. Yes. If we move this if we move this west is that something that is still needed or is that something. It won't change. It won't change the need for the parcel. Okay so it sounds like the direction is option three. Okay all right. Okay thank you. Let's take any more comments questions. Yes Councilmember Hussbett don't choke. Yeah right I know it. I'll just say I think your point about the houses is is is very I don't know if everyone understands that those houses have been torn down systematically and no one said anything. I mean there's been two or three in the last two or three years that are getting torn down by the owner and there's been nothing said. And so I think it's important to maybe go back and source the motivation or the research or the data whatever that is. I'm just I'm certain that Josh Holt's house or I mean I mean I grew up in a neighborhood and I'm telling you the large house that faces Oak that had the tennis court and the skateboard ramp half pipe behind it is gone and it was there maybe a year or so ago. Then there's a house two houses down from where we grew up. It's gone. It used to be there. You know so this this call to arms I just asked those that are listening or watching to go back and research there. There's the homeowners are doing it already. You know the landowners and so and most of those houses are vacant and have been for the past six years or so. Okay all right. Okay now the questions are coming. Yes. So I just wanted to put in a note move you know moving forward I know that I mean you mentioned that the whole those DME lines would have to go down and I know that that neighborhood has been through some really extensive DME trauma of past years. And so what there were things you know I'm it's always traumatic having any kind of construction but with that in mind you know be extremely important to kind of listen to the residents kind of specifically and I guess this would be more for DME but as a you know holistic view of this area what they're at the time with their negative experiences were having these the power lines put in and you know including some situations where you got poles coming up you know from the sidewalk and things that just to make sure maximum can be you know input from DME because that's another piece of this puzzle which the residents they're going to experience it is all part of the same thing. So thanks. Anything else? Okay before we move on to our third agenda item we'll go ahead and take about a 10 minute break. Welcome back to this meeting of the Dent City Council on September the 18th 2018 it is 2.58 and we are on our last public work session agenda item which is agenda item 3C receive report hold discussion provide staff direction regarding City Council priorities for upcoming work session topics. Okay good afternoon Brian Langley Deputy City Manager I wanted to spend a few minutes with you today talking about our strategy for prioritizing work session items and the reason this is important is as we've talked to you about before we have a lot of these coming through various requests either through the departments or through council for information right now we have over 60 requests almost 61 I think the last time I counted these are items that we have needs to come before the council for operational reasons to operate some of the departments and functions that we have we need some direction from council others that we've gotten consensus from various committees that you're on from the council itself or others that we've just gotten requests for so again the purpose of this item today is to talk about how do we bring those forward what items are important to you and how do we prioritize them. So in terms of background just a little bit of history on this we did have the retreat with council back on August 25th and all day retreat we identified a lot of key priorities for the council over the next 12 to 18 months and we also discussed a process for prioritizing these work session items. I won't go through all of the key priorities that are listed here but again these are the things that you the council told our facilitator and us in that meeting that these are the things that you wanted to focus on so one of the things we want to try to do is develop a series of work session topics and a work plan for the council committees that will address these priorities over the next again 12 to 18 months. We had a discussion with you back on August 28th just a couple weeks ago to talk about how we would handle some of the work session topics and one of the things that we talked about is trying to again align the work session topics that we have with the retreat priorities that you gave us on the 25th. You also told us that you were open to receiving more information as informal staff reports rather than simply just having a work session on each topic and we heard from several of you commenting on the length of the meetings that starting at 10 or 11 in the morning and going all the way to 10 or 11 at night was really long. I'm insulted. So I think some of you want to try to address the length of meetings and so from that what we tried to do is come up with a recommendation to address those things and what we recommended is that we start the work session no earlier than one or two o'clock unless there's some unusual circumstance and try to limit the work session presentations to three to four per meeting given the complexity maybe the length of any particular topic. It is somewhat difficult to estimate the time for each of the work sessions sometimes we think they'll take shorter amounts of time they end up being really long items other times we expect them to be fairly short discussions they take long so it is a little bit of a guessing game of trying to estimate how long they are going to be. But then the other thing we wanted to do is on a monthly basis get back together with you and have these strategy sessions and talk about here are the things that we see coming over the next few weeks maybe the next couple of months and talk about again prioritizing those so you can see this real time coming forward every month and we can talk about again are we meeting your priorities that you've identified from the retreat. So this is the schedule of topics that we have I do want to point out there's a few changes on these from what I had in your backup and at your table I've given you an updated version of this the ones highlighted in yellow are the updated ones and it's reflected here on this slide so it's a little bit different than what you had in your backup but again we've tried to map these out with what we know is coming some of the operational decisions that we know are out there and when we think these items will be ready to have three to four per meeting so you would be able to schedule these out . I do want to point out on September 25th we don't currently have an item scheduled for work session and when I get a little bit later in the presentation we can talk about if you want to move some of the items that you've got an informal staff report signed to have a work session discussion next week you can do that or if you want to try to move one of these up we could try to accommodate that as well. A couple of notes here too on the ninth and on the 23rd we have your council appointee reviews. Real quick just so I understand on September 25th we don't really show anything listed here but you're saying there's a slot for one other than what y'all sort of already have planned is that what you said? I'm sorry there's four slots I mean you could have up to four work sessions if you wanted to do them on the 25th. That's open we don't have anything scheduled for work session and we do have some closed session items scheduled for that day. I'm sorry thank you council member I mean Mayor Pro Tem. And I believe in our audit finance committee meeting this morning we discussed bringing something forward from our city auditor. That's right and so that would be for the audit plan that's not here so that's a possibility to have it on that was number 61 so that was that's a possibility to have that on the 25th if you wanted to do that or if you wanted to reorganize we could certainly do it. So the other thing I wanted to point out is I did put a couple of these closed session items here on the list they're really not work session topics but typically these have taken a little bit longer than it than your average work session or exceeding your average closed session topics is the appointee reviews that you have for all the council appointees so just to kind of a planning purposes again trying to look at that constraint of managing the time length of the meetings I wanted to put those on the list for you. Here is November that we have and again I think is six to eight weeks is probably the right kind of focus for us to talk about as we get a little longer out it gets harder to plan these but November 5th is a luncheon. We typically try to keep those meetings relatively short 11 30 to around 130 or two and so I've had two topics on that that meeting day to try to manage that for you. Sorry. Yes Councilmember Briggs. So I see downtown design standards there and we've already had a work session on that from what I can recall and so I know what that would be another work session for and is that not something that we could just move on through. I think the discussion on that one is to bring back after looking at that here the specific standards that we'd recommend for the downtown area and we could look at trying to give that to you alternatively and to be an ordinance that will follow that discussion as well so we want to make sure the council understands these are the standards that we would recommend especially with some of those areas coming out of the flood plain some of the redevelopment what do you want it to be like. Well yeah I mean I would just I know that it has been a while since that has come to a work session and we discussed it and went over it and I believe there was consistency and so I thought consensus so I thought it would be coming to us just as an action item I mean but if that's I mean I would prefer that that move up closer with just so that we could go ahead and discuss that if there were changes that's just my preference. Okay I'll get with Scott McDonald we'll talk about that. So let me make sure I understand so you're wanting to have a work session on it not just it come for an action item and then discuss it at that time . If there's significant changes from the previous work session then yes but if not and to have that come through as an action item. Okay I guess when you get a little older your memory fades a little bit I'm trying to recall that conversation or I might not have been here but when you say design standards when I think of design standards I think of how buildings how things are going to look in general sort of a high overview and sort of a general concept plan so that's what so staff got direction on that and or. We've had some direction I think we went back and we have been refining that and wanted to really come back with some specifics to you. Okay work session. We can certainly look at that and see if if it's as clear perhaps as is Councilmember Briggs is remembering maybe we could look at an alternative way to get it to you but let me go back and look at that with our planning department and we can talk about it make sure we have that. I think I was just asking about her request that if it's if it's getting into a much different level and layer specificity because I'd hate to have that discussion in an action item at the day as when you know because then we'd start sort of we can look and see if we can bring it forward a little earlier. Okay. That's a concern. So this is November that we have planned out this is the December schedule at this point again we have the luncheon on December 3rd couple just a couple of items that we try to focus on and on those and then these are all the other items that we have coming forward in the December timeframe that we have. We also have some future work session topics scheduled really early 2019. We know these are out there and will be coming so every month when I come back to you and a work session I'll update the schedule. Yes sir. What is the employee ethics policy update. I mean we just passed that I guess. You did and so one of the things that we've been doing is noting when we've seen some issues things need to be revised. Start issue. Right things that we hadn't anticipated in the policy and so we've got a running list of those items and we want to come back and address those with you. Councilmember Briggs. So on November 6th that is the National League of Cities and so I will not be here and I don't know who else is not going to be here so that may be something to keep in consideration. I just want to put that in now. Good point. Do we know who's going who's signed up to go so far. National League of Cities Councilmember Briggs you are. Councilmember Husspeth are you going to National League of Cities Councilmember Melser. Okay all right okay. And yes I'm going but. Are you leaving Tuesday or Wednesday. I don't know am I in charge of that. I have not nailed it. Yes you are. I mean I can be if you want me to. No no I don't want that. No I've not booked flights yet so I don't have it nailed down. We can certainly update that if there's going to be a few. Yeah I mean if there's going to be several out but we still have a quorum maybe we could move some things around that are more administrative not as maybe a high level of interest and so really work with those who may be going if we decide to have a meeting that we're not considering something that they really want to be part of the conversation on. It may just be some things for staff or something like that . Absolutely. Yeah okay. Back into December I don't think there were any questions on this. So these were the again some other items that we know will be coming to you probably first quarter of next year. We don't have a specific date for these but as we get a little further in we'll schedule those out for January February March you can kind of see how these are kind of layering in but lots of different topics that are going to be coming back to you in that time frame as well. So I'm sorry on December 11th so the strategic plan for homeless shelters that will be sort of a presentation from the shelter work group through the homelessness leadership team is that what that is. That would be the plan yes sir to have some updates on where we are with that process we'll be able to update you on that. And again if we need to move these back a week or up a week we'll certainly do that but that's the plan at this point. Questions comments? If I could I think it might be better if I could go through some of the other items then maybe we could talk about the overall prioritization. I'm sorry yeah I was just looking at this one sheet of paper. That's great so here are the other requests that we've had. These are ones that we've given you informal staff reports on the dates of those informal staff reports originally these were talked about as work session items. I think what we talked about last time with you is give you the informal staff report and let the council decide after you have all that information if you want to see this as a work session topic. I want to be careful here that we're not asking you to tell us if you want to vote yes or no on these items. We're not really here to debate these items per se. I'm just curious from these items are you wanting to bring these forward for a work session discussion and if so what's the priority that you have for them. There's other items that we have on this list we're going to have on the next slide I'll show you all the other items that we're going to be providing you with informal staff reports on and then I'll be asking you those questions the next month. These items that you've gotten informal staff reports on are there any that you want to bring forward. I'm sorry Council Member Milster. At the risk of you know being like promoting back in parking I'm willing to meet longer to cover more items when we look you know so booked up already but as far as what we fit in whether we do that or not what we fit into whatever gaps there are beyond these kind of like you know must do's. I think where we should go first is that list you know that came out of the what do we call it retreat. I want to call it an offsite retreat. You know it's rare to get complete agreement you know around the table and those are all super important for the city so that's where I'd go first. So the process I'd suggest is figure out how many slots we have if in fact people are willing to meet longer or not and then look at that list to see which of those could be ready soonest but if you know what we said was we want to work on those in the next 18 months so I think we got to start chipping away at them if that's if we're serious about it. Well I think to that point you know all of the key priorities that we have in this next three month period we've got some discussion that touches on at least a component of those priorities that you have. Any of these items that I have listed here is an ISR that we've provided to you we could certainly bring that back next week on the 25th if that's something that you wanted to talk about. If it's something again that you want to talk about and it 's important to the council in context of those priorities that you have. We want you to be able to look back in 12 to 18 months and say these are the things that you said were important and we've accomplished them or addressed them in some way. I'm going to go to councilmember okay okay who's all got requests to speak so I'm going to go around the horn councilmember Riggs I'll return the councilmember Hesbeth and then Ryan I didn't see your hand raised you got to raise it up high yeah get it up there. Just on this slide right here I have a couple of questions so the information on traffic calming we did receive a staff report I don't know as far as council goes but I'm wondering if the traffic and safety commission can I think that a presentation for that group on the traffic calming may be better for them than coming to us and how they can I guess take requests for that. So I'm just wondering because some of these can go to separate committees that for me I'm looking at but the one here that sticks out the most is the committee on disabilities. I think that's really important from my perspective we just had a conversation about a roundabout and afterwards a gentleman came up to me and said well that 's where MHMR is and there's going to be a lot of issues with managing that roundabout with you know walkability and other mental issues and so just having somebody there to run things like that by so that when it comes up we're familiar with the issues I think is important. And there was a staff report which gave some recommendations and so I didn't know if you received emails back on. I've not received any information I think that's one of the also one of the questions for you is what is the question is it a general briefing just here's what this information is or is it is there some direction of what specific information you want to have. I guess a question as we bring these forward. So the process question so what if we do get a staff report and that's sufficient for our initial request and then it gives us options so then do we just email back our I mean it would have to eventually come back would it come back to a work session to get direction anyway to get direction. Okay right. All right. Absolutely. But I think if in those cases if you're interested in hearing that topic if you can send something to us that helps us understand where you are. Councilmember Ryan. Mayor Pro Tem Ryan. Excuse me. Thank you Mayor. I think in yes we did get an informal staff report but the only one up there I would be interested in is the information on the traffic calming options because I would say about a fifth of my total emails are about speeding through neighborhoods and that type of thing that it would allow me to refer someone back to a video you know after talking to them that says here's some of the you know here's where we discussed it and since a roundabout is a traffic calming device in some ways maybe the interaction of pedestrians and roundabouts would be a good add-on to that. Okay got it. Councilmember Malmgren. Okay so a couple things. The top 20 taxpayer issue which was one of my issues is connected to another issue on the list we have here of the planned requests and that is the use of project names and they both I mean they're two different topics but they both fall under economic development and kind of you know reforms of or whatever you want to call it you know changes to economic development policy. So I think I mean I'd be curious to know what I imagine Caroline would be the one presenting it you know what she would think how she would feel about putting those two together you know moving that one bundling it with the other one. I think it'd be good to even though there are two different issues because they're within the same department I think that would be a good way to have a bigger discussion about issues in that department they just tend not to come up in our public meetings and let's see I had a thought about the traffic calming options session I mean I agree you know it sounds like something that to me I mean yeah and it's a huge issue for many neighborhoods with every neighbor every neighborhood has you know a particular problem and their overlaps if it is mostly an information gathering session if that intention if that's the purpose as opposed to something where we're going to be giving staff direction then maybe there might be some other forum for that then a work session and I don't have anything in particular in mind you know but you know maybe have in other words in an event that we all attend where we could where we're not discussing where it's not a violation of Toma because we're not discussing you know things that are active items on the agenda but I think it would be beneficial for all of us to go to a meeting where somebody presents to different neighborhoods maybe we could have a series of them and I mean and this kind of overlaps dovetails with things that I know that Preetam and Todd have already talking about doing going to different neighborhoods and looking at different traffic calming options in those neighborhoods so I'm just wondering if there's something we could do with that if the point is just to present information because I agree it's extremely important but if we're not being asked for direction then I don't see why it would have to be a work session. Okay. I'm not saying I'm opposed to having it as a work session I 'm just throwing that out there wondering maybe it's a bad idea I just wanted to know and just since it's my turn I wanted to go the you know for me the two most important are the the legal services for immigrants and low-income residents there was an excellent staff report that was done on this looking at the San Antonio model it and it's and I feel like there's you know there's misunderstanding about this this issue and I think it would be really educational for all of us to get the information and then give some sort of direction based on the answers that we get together to those questions but people we have people who need legal services and who can't afford them and our city attorney's office cannot provide those services but they can contract out so so that's your number one priority and then I understand tied with tied with the disability and I've already spoken a lot about so I won't say more you know about the committee on disabilities you know for me those are tied for top priority I think the first one would I'm guessing be a longer discussion so but for me they would be tied for the top priority I can't imagine the committee would take that much time as far as guessing the committee discussion how much time that would take so those are that's my assessment of these issues right here there's the thing about the diversity in the fire department is that should we just go by well I guess what I want to do what I would recommend is that if we could first talk about the ones that we've getting giving you is ours on and then the next page when we get to the ones that were playing to give you I think these are the ones that we've already given you information the question is it for the council do you want to have here these discussions or not so now's not the time because there's some of things on the other list like the fire department I 'll get to that I'll get to that list and then a question I have for you should any of those be eliminated got it got it thanks okay yeah I'd like to ask us to if correct me where I'm wrong understanding the designation it says give direction priorities for upcoming work sessions and so I wanted to try to get in before we got down this track that we're on we're individually itemizing and each person's going around and saying what's most important to them but we're not saying how we're going to thin the herd so we we're still at 61 and growing and we've not done what we're supposed to what we're asked to do which is give direction on how to prioritize those and so that because I don't need I think Aaron's explanation on representation in the conflicts is sufficient if I if I trust him which I do then I think his answer is succinct for me personally and so I would I just want to I don't I do want to hear how others want to process this or what is the process to especially before we get to a list you know because you because if you imagine 60 someone said it so someone's for it so then how do we then check that amongst the for consensus and so that's what I I don't know what that process is I but I will I will lend a suggestion I think it should be reviewed and then if the individual that requested just like you do with the consent agenda item then narrows the scope so for example just grabbing the top and work session funding the provide city-sponsored legal services then I would take that and narrow it to say are we willing to contract out local turn outside of council for citizens that live here to then go to court against our city attorney and that 's what I want to consider right and so it forces so we have informal staff report and then from that I boil that down to my succinct question that I want presented to us almost like in a consent agenda item where you'll ask hey what do you want the presentation to be about and so then we're addressing a specific concern specific question versus opening this topic up for an a conversation that everything comes into play so that's just my thought on how to narrow those scopes or narrow the list to get it get we've got to get 61 will will never get there right right council member and I have a response to that as well yes yeah for me I I why don't we just go down the line and see if we have four people on the council that want to address that that's what is it just on one of the things as you're going through this I know that you are this item is a little unusual that you're getting all these topics presented before you typically you all provide consensus on direction on what how your what direction you want to go to in this case you would be giving consensus as to which of these do you prioritize to have move up as priority items to have work sessions and if that involves others that are not prioritizes highly then then that's the consensus of the council it's not about it's not about for against it it's just a more of a direction of do we move this to a November meeting a September meeting or do we put it down the list because we this list is going to keep growing I mean we're going to we're not going to be able to pull as many off of this list as comes on to this list so I think that I think the process is a very important thing to really nail down how do we want to do this because we can spend another three hours two and a half hours talking about this and that's what I want to try to avoid because that's what my one comment is we've got you 're saying we need three or four items on a work session well if we're starting at these a one or two o'clock one or two yes sir one o'clock we start at one o'clock leave a couple items for closed session maybe an hour hour and a half so we got about four and a half hours you know four to four and a half hours for three or four sessions folks I think this is as much on us as it is anybody else to be succinct to be prepared and if you don't have something that you don't have an answer to get the answer to staff ahead of time the questions come up in the midst of the discussion I get that I really do but I think we can get through more than three or four items in a work session but we've got to be able to hone it in and I'll commit to you that I'll do that and it you know some of you might get a little upset with me and I understand that but I think we can get through these things so I think it's more about us as well as it is trying to figure out this process go ahead and then I'm gonna have councilmember I think councilmember Briggs did you have a comment before councilmember Armatyr asked to be recognized it was just an informational question or clarification about the the Toma training isn't there an online version of that that's available that council members can take outside that's correct yes okay I think we had a request for to bring in an outside facilitator to do work session training was the request that we had so I think it's the point I was going to make is not only are we looking for if you have some priorities or an interest in some of these topics but are there some of on some of these topics that you just want to eliminate we're not interested in hearing these and we don't want to just push them to the bottom of the list we just don't want them on the list we've gotten information we're ready to move on and we're looking to as we go around the room ask you're getting information to see if there's three or four head nods on each one of these if there's not then those would be ones that we wouldn't bring forward that's kind of the idea that we had so I just want to be just to return to a point that was made earlier about how important it is to whittle down I completely agree and just to reiterate so we had making sure I heard correctly that council member Br iggs had suggested the possibility of having traffic calming go through the traffic safety committee seeing what happens with that you know I raised another possibility that I don't know if that's a good idea or not but I raised that as a suggestion for how to take that off the list I raised the idea I'm just going over to see how we've we've I think been more successful in suggesting these how to whittle it down than it than it might seem I suggested just this one with the top 20 taxpayer lump it in with something else that's already scheduled having to do with economic development if other people are fine with that and and that you know Toma training it's a similar kind of issue it could be done even though I was the one who I had brought that up early on because it I felt that we all needed more education on Toma it's something that's done online anyway there could be a public information session and a matter I think you've gotten to the point where you 're sort of repeating what you said earlier yes so that's I think that's part of what we're trying to do is get our ideas out and then as they come up for discussion so we were certainly clear on what what your suggestions are okay good I just okay I just want I want I 'm so sorry I didn't mean to repeat I wanted to make sure it was heard because I didn't know if it was heard that we're whittling these down okay so but if as long as you as long as staff has gotten these whittling suggestions excellent okay so so I'm gonna give my if we're working on this list I don't really have an interest in I think the the staff report from legal was sufficient on the sponsoring legal services that I just don't think the city needs to be in that business I do think the information on the potential establishment of a citizen advisory committee on disabilities is important we've got an open slot on September 26th if that's something the consent council would have a consensus on I think you'd go fairly quickly information on calming devices we've got a committee that can deal with that reconsideration top 20 taxpayers I don't necessarily have a need to do that specifically unless it comes in context with another change to the maybe the the economic development policy ordinance to that ordinance the Atoma training we all have to go through it when we get elected it there's there's numerous online opportunities to learn about the Texas Open Meetings Act and I'm almost certain that you know we will continually be updating ourselves on that as we try to make sure that we don't violate the Texas Open Meetings Act so those are that's my direction on that and the only one that I felt that I personally wanted to see on an org session fairly quickly was the establishment of the citizens advisory committee on disabilities so I'm gonna go around councilmember Messler hasn't and then we're gonna go get you councilmember Duff I agree with you okay all right if you could indulge me and just save us all the ticking and tying could we look at the retreat items and just indicate which of the ones that are not already somehow represented on the calendar yeah is okay and that's that's a good and in our backup you have council priorities is that what is that the list as a result of the retreat yes sir okay all right so all of those if you'd like I can go through it I have a feeling this might come up the Denton Development Code December 18th a master plan December 11th and November 13th we've got discussions city planning our city facility planning City Hall West is October 16th police and fire facilities are December 4th mobility plan we had the Bonnie Bray discussion today which was a good discussion the new bond program will probably be in early 2019 potential subject downtown master plan we've got the design standards coming in November 27th we're also looking at bringing forward again the new street study for you that'll probably be in the early part of 2019 so we do have both of those on tap nothing yet for open space planning but the tree canopy strategy is November 13th so again all of those for the most part the touch later scheduled the one piece I didn't hear in downtown master plan really reflects the you know the big expansion of downtown development footprint related to the floodplain deal so you know we can look at that so so all right at least you know if anyone else I hope you know finds this helpful we have things that were on our list we're open space and that and then if we only have you know two slots I mean I really think that's not enough slots so I'm like I'm repeating myself I don't want to that Councilmember Duff oh you already said yeah I'm sorry usually very short sweet I apologize forgot Councilmember Husband thank you no so my input is that that yes the information on potential savage from the citizen advisory committee on disabilities absolutely if that one's if I don't even think it needs to go through the other committee I think it can come to us if on traffic calming right if you want to delay it and run it through the committee before it gets to us that's their prerogative my instruction is just bring it to us and then the rest I don't see a need for any of the I personally am okay working with staff to get additional information on those other topics to you know questions that I may have from the staff report. Councilmember Ryan. Well in I concur with with what was just said when asked originally it was the only thing I see us needing bring forward was and so I felt like I was given clarity I just wanted bring that up that it was okay we're not yeah him in and on around on right okay yeah I'm okay with traffic calming on there too but so I think the consensus topics well Councilmember Armitage and then I think Councilmember Meltzer. Just request for clarification so I heard a couple people mention that the report the staff report on the contracting with legal services for our constituents who are immigrants and low income people also tenants rights was another part of it I was hearing from two people that the staff report you got the impression that the staff report said this is not feasible that's not it's not the impression that I got from that same staff report so I'm wondering. I can clarify my comment okay whether it's feasible or not I mean I don't think I'm not in agreement that we need to spend our time right now looking at that process because I think I just don't think that the city's job is to get involved in those private litigating matters so whether it's feasible whether it's doable or not or legal or not okay so you okay okay so now and can the person who wrote that report maybe reiterate the well before we get down that road is there more than is there is there four people that think that I mean if we got to go down this list and try to give some direction that's fine but so that first one is there who thinks who needs to who would like to see that as a as a work session okay two all right okay information on potential establishment of city advisory committee on disabilities before you just go to vote on that may suggest we're not voting we're giving direction well whatever that thing is that you're about to do before we do that yeah what I would like to know if if anyone would object to that going directly to the you know to a vote not now but you know to that part of the agenda rather than a work session which one the citizen advisory committee on disabilities sure that's a that's a that's a good idea are we who needs a work session on that based upon the information informal staff report about just bringing it as a action item is that councilmember if I recall there were three options in that staff report and so I don't know if staff needs direction on which option before it comes to a vote or or how that would since yeah and that's fine so the work session would probably be very quick on something like this so so who would like to see that as a quick work session sooner than later yes I think we can schedule that for probably that's everybody work session information on traffic calming option go ahead I don't know what that means does that mean you send it to the committee first is that well it was my original request but it it is in turn just an informational educational type of okay presentation that we really can't give direction on and so that traffic safety can and so they can make those implementations in the items that they see so I thought maybe it would be worth their committee seeing something like that okay councilmember I rather like councilmember Armitage suggestion of having some kind of because it is a topic of general public interest and having some kind of a public session I'm sure you'll you'll get to hear you know lots of individual roads that people think need calming options but you know I suspect to be well attended to be informative for everyone and I don't see that benefit greatly from using our time here okay all right my only thought about that is okay we're going to take a input from the public and then what are we going to do with it and I think that's what this I think that's what this work session I mean I think we all know what probably some of the the arguments are I don't I mean if y'all want to have your own individual public town homes on traffic calming devices you're certainly more than welcome to do that informally but I think as far as a formal setting of town I mean I think we all pretty much know what what's out there and then what are the possible options because there's some that work and some that don't for some neighborhoods and some for not for some not for some other neighborhoods so councilmember Briggs so are you suggesting that there may be policy discussions and decisions that come along with this work session as far as if the city wants to start implementing or not well but that's a question I mean if I'm hearing you say it's just educational well I don't know if I want to spend that kind of real estate time giving us an education when we can get it through informal staff reports and all that so if there's some education that needs to happen in the public there's a different form to do that but if the traffic calming discussion will present right policy discussions and policy options then by all means that's a discussion that that we need to have but what I'm understanding is that's not where it is right now or is it well I think there's some options that we'd probably need to roll out to the council and see what direction overall that you're looking for we could certainly take that to the to the traffic safety commission first and do that there too but it might be helpful to understand where does the council want to go what is the direction you 're given a traffic safety I'm sorry yes councilmember has been I think succinctly it 's it's the conversation could absolutely pivot on road humps that every email I get it's like hey can I get a road hump yes or no and why not and that's really what it comes down to it's no one's asking for curbs or bushes that come in on the road and slow it down that way it's all about can I get a road hump there's a road hump two blocks over and I don't have one and and that's really I mean that if we had a work session on that that option I think you you would you would address a lot and provide a people provide a lot of answers to a lot of questions okay what I don't want to do is go through these individually and begin to try to discuss them deliberate on them right you know in the meeting so we 're at information on traffic calming options who's interested in a work session on that we talked about it okay work session on it reconsidered top 20 taxpayer board member category for the economic development partnership board at this time is who's interested in it well yes go ahead but the proposals made to lump it in with other economic development things so if there's something else that that fits in with we probably would want to talk about economic development yeah but maybe not well I would I would I would disagree with those are I mean they have the economic development in front of them but topically they're very different I mean one is a pretty highly profile issue where this one is the first one to bring it up has been used so I think we need to think a little bit further about lumping those in together in my in my own opinion councilmember Hudson yeah my answer is no even if you lumped it in with some it's just I'm not I don't think you need a work session on that topic I personally do not know who else yes I think we could actually just have a presentation on the actual board member makeup I know that we made some changes in the past with the timing and the council members rolling off and so just maybe an update or or I don 't know just just an actual overview of that board who it consists of and I wouldn't mind getting a refresher course that I mean if you're identifying who's on the board and doing analysis of the ordinance I think that could happen in an informal staff report I mean unless we 're going to debate the basic gist of this request is to change that provision of the ordinance yes I have a request for the board to address this issue if she's prepared to address this issue discussed briefly yes Caroline Booth director of economic development the ISR that was prepared and sent out did have a rundown of the board composition and where all of those people come from and why they're selected as well as the evolution over time of the board composition okay so that information has been sent out it has been the specific factual aspect correct who's on the board the historical context and which slot they represent in the board makeup correct okay yeah all right so we're back to that question yes yes yes I'm in favor of that obviously okay all right yeah yeah so so on this one specifically I know that we're not supposed to deliberate or get too much into it but having a conversation about the seats I think from from my recollection it was that there wasn't a small business or a seat on that so if this discussion could incorporate adding a member or changing one of those members to a not I mean I just think it's still worth you know maybe not that specific one but kind of morphing it into something all right councilmember Duff no councilmember Nelson yes with the broader discussion how should the membership evolve if it should councilmember Hussbett no sir I think that information could be I mean let me let me let me I don't think a work session is necessary for someone that tailoring can be done outside and brought back so there can be research done independently by council members and rephrase it and that's what I was getting it earlier bring it back rephrased and succinct and sure but but as phrase now no and I don't think we should we can't craft it on the fly so it just has to come back more succinct so I'm hearing the consensus to not move forward with this specific request but if there's a request that comes forward later that looks at something more of a broad overview that's something that may be considered and I know some of you disagree with that well I think that was your request actually and that was that was your consensus councilmember Nelson and that's something that we consider but as far as a specific work session on that I think the consensus is not at this time okay I'm not gonna say never I mean that's not what we're deciding here we're saying we're setting priorities so I think what I've heard then is the committee on disabilities there seems to be at least four of you who are interested in doing that maybe more the traffic calming options you have consensus that you want to hear that the economic development there's interest but perhaps a slightly different conversation at some point down the road that's what I've heard from these five is that correct the rest don't come forward at this time I think that's what I've heard and if somebody all right I know some disagree with that the selections but if the process has been flawed or if your direction is wrong then when you speak up here are the other requests that we've logged from the council on at different times in the dates that we're planning to get some informal staff reports to you again most of these will be done the next couple weeks that you'll have this information we can go through and talk about today if you want to eliminate any of these from the list if you have a strong feeling about one of these that you'd like to see come forward but otherwise we can bring these back at our next strategy session and you'll be able to see that information and have the same kind of conversation we had on the prior slide you could do that at another time so what you have the information so what I'm hearing you say is that nothing's been sent out to us on any of these topics that's correct these are the dates the plan date that will be the informal staff report yes sir and then at some point these topics will come back as the previous that we just looked at we've all received the information what are we wanting to to do right in that regard what do you want to bring forward what do you want to eliminate okay councilmember Duffin and council member Armitage well on the first one and this is just for an informal staff report and I just want to make sure we understand so okay this isn't about we have we have no business getting involved in this that's county's business that's not the city okay it shouldn't be on there okay all right councilmember Armitage I need a moment sorry okay anybody else I mean are you ready no no I was just gonna say I'm okay with these just coming to us for an informal staff report because I'm how am I going to make a decision on whether it's going to be a work session if I don't even know what's presented to council as far as what the issues are the discussion or the options so I'm okay with all these coming to us I mean I don't think these take up a whole lot of staff time individually and I understand councilmember Duff's comment but I also know that that may be one of the pieces of information is you know whose property and so forth and so on so I don't have any problem with them coming to us for as an ISR okay councilmember Armitage yeah so I was just gonna point out there already has been a staff report on the spin program a really extensive and really good one so that's I mean no need to have another staff report on that it was an awesome staff report I think it's it's time to discuss it and as far as the the municipal equality index that some of these items can be like the fair housing for instance could arguably go with our discussion of affordable housing incentives because it also has to do with with with housing and accessibility to housing making housing more accessible as opposed to just you know bracketing it as an LGBTQ issue seeing it as kind of a subset of housing access I'm just mentioning that as a possibility and the and I just wanted to ask the review and possible revisions to the council rules of procedure I'm not quite sure what that is if that's something that I suggested I would kind of need more reminding because of the way it's worded now. So two things on the spin program I'm gonna update the ISR on it city attorney Liao and I I was concerned with the information the spin program the ISR that we received due to some zoning issues and that in property rights issues so we did we had a follow-up phone call the other day with folks from Southlake and we 're going to update that ISR for you and recommend perhaps a different approach the so you haven 't seen that yet but you will be getting that shortly on the on the comprehensive review and revisions to the council rules of procedure this came out this was actually articulated as a recall by the mayor who was not aware and we've had a past practice of not having the mayor make motions or vote on issues this came up about a month or two ago it and I'm sorry yeah you're right seconding a motion and so he had asked for an update on that and what you know what the authority and in the protocol appropriate protocol for the mayor would be in terms of seconding the motion so that's what that has to do it can be worded a little bit better but I didn't know how much further if we wanted to tackle that issue or if we wanted to go through the council rules of procedures holistically that's really up to you thanks yes so yeah on the spin program that that's good that there's more information but on here it basically says that it's anything is hosted by the community engagement committee and so we have a citizen on engagement committee and so I was thinking that if we did want something and it could run through that committee first since that's the whole reason for that is community engagement I think I think well I'll make this real simple what they 're accomplishing if you change the council's expectations that mandatory meetings for zoning items certain zoning as rezoning PDs that sort of thing where if you change your policy you require that those are mandatory you've essentially implemented spin what I don't like about the program and I think Aaron's more articulate on the Texas law than I am but what I don't like about the program is it's not required but it really is required when you get into taking testimony and we heard stories about him sending things back so it's essentially functioning as a high level HOA and I think as a simple tweak saying you know for these types of zoning cases or zoning petitions whatever we're going to require a community meeting you've accomplished the same thing so it's a it's kind of a simple tweak there that we could bring to the council to say do you want to amend your rules of procedure or the you want to amend your direction to us that with these two or three different types of zoning petitions you require a mandatory meeting because I think that's the the just of it the heart of what we were trying to get to yeah so we can we can certainly have something to you for an action item pretty quickly on that. Councilmember did you have something else? Yeah and on the the work session for diversity I that was actually something I requested and I know we've had staff reports and we had a presentation I actually was not here the day that that presentation was given but the one thing that I remember requesting was more information on scholarships because I think that's actually going to get to the heart of ways we can look to the issue and I think it was mentioned before in either the staff report or I know that the the the older fire chief did mention that that would be something that we could look at and so that was left off here and that's really the just of the conversation that I wanted to have what can we do not what is the issue just kind of what can we we do to improve. So that's the topic that you're interested in bringing back for a work session? Yeah. Well I would say on that one we are working with the fire department because any of those changes have to be worked into our meet confer agreements so we could certainly update you I know chief edges is is working with them on some of those ideas as well as possibly I think the other issue that former chief Paul's group brought up was a possibility of some additional points if you were went through a program and you're a local student trying to encourage that as well so they're open to it right now but and we can certainly update you in some form or fashion but that's something that's going to have to be agreed to under 143 rules through the meet confer agreement we can we can certainly talk to you about ideas we've got so right and would you need direction or consensus from this council to even go into that discussion with those ideas I mean that's I actually feel like we got that from you the last time we discussed this you know there's a lot of openness to especially reaching out to our direct community our schools and trying to partner with them and that we saw that as a way of maybe helping increase diversity in the fire department just a tool and so we're having communications with the association okay I think I think where we started is where we where you started mayors where we could actually move this conversation along we again every comment that I've listened to is targeted around getting more information that would come in an informal staff report an informal staff report would reside provide the information you need to succinctly ask the question or ask for a work session on a particular topic or specificity so that that's my thought broadly and so I'll reserve I have thoughts on the conversation thus far but I'll reserve them or I'll get with with staff when that when that becomes closer but I do have some it's burning me up but I'm hanging on to yeah I'll just so I support the moving the the fire having that discussion fire department in the meet and confer discussions and I know that because I've met with a couple firefighters actually to talk about meet and confer and they brought up that issue on their own and you know firefighters are really into this this idea they love the idea and as you said they're already talking about it so I I think that those two things would work together really seamlessly I hope people agree to that if I could just make a comment mayor we know that we know this is a little clumsy and painful today but we've got you know I think the only we had discussed with Aaron Aaron has really been difficult with us and mean on this process so you know we had talked about actually having like force rankings doing you know just trying to figure out how we could use your time more efficiently and it continued to violate telemonipine so you know if there's other ideas on how to deal with this on a monthly or bi-monthly basis we're happy to talk through any other ideas that you have this is our first crack we're trying to get your input on how we can work through these things but it does leave staff in an awkward position we have workshops that are required or requested we put an ISR out there and then we still have the one one or two people that are interested in it you know we have to have some way of getting your feedback so if four or five of you are interested in doing something we move and we're definitely open to any of your ideas and opinions on that but there's just a ton of these things we want to use your your time wisely this isn't the only way we can work through it but if you have other ideas let us know I did just I think we've been you know it's hard but we've been way off posting I'm surprised you get stopped by the cops there and and the simple question of you know are we satisfied with ISRs on these to that I say yes. So I have a suggestion that involves giving us a little bit of homework but they would save a lot of time and and we had started talking about something like this of the retreat having us on a monthly basis I guess we would get a ranking sheet and there would be some system there are a number of different systems we could use you know we could get have a numerical coded numerical system and we each on our own as individual homework rank it in a way that it could be all put together you know somebody wouldn't go over it have to go over it by hand someone could really easily put a program together to just take that data on email and spreadsheets you know we could do it on an excel document and to compile it and that would determine both the priority and the order of things and it would just be a computer could do it in other words if we come up with a system that we like. It's tough to determine when do we quit giving staff direction a whole discussion provides staff direction regarding priorities for upcoming work session reports and going into actually deliberate thing deliberating on those specific so is there anybody opposed what I'm understanding is this is the ISR you're sending out I understand council member Duff that there was one that you didn't want to be on the list I didn't I haven't heard that there's three others that had that sentiment yeah so I'm gonna say from what I 've heard that's the direction send out ISRs then we'll figure out a way as we continue to hone this process due to scar tissue on how we want to go about and do it better then some of these will come back to us or they'll all come back to us to prioritize them. I will encourage everyone on the work session on diversity that work session is on the city website you know you can pull that up if you haven't seen it go watch it it's very informative it's very educational when the fire department came to talk about the hiring practices and so forth so yeah I know you're gonna send it out and maybe if you're sending that out you might also send a link to the to the actual video presentation. Excellent. Okay we're gonna wrap this up here real quick councilmember Husspeth and councilmember Duff. I would to that point succinctly there I would encourage again I talk about going to staff but in these instances we are free as a council members to do outside research. I've spoken to firefighters in Dallas. Dallas has the same problem much larger city but I they have a class they do all these things we're talking about and they still have the same struggles with and I just invite people to not get swept up in emotion and do some outside homework because it is absolutely beneficial and it absolutely helps you craft your your discussions and set goals realistic goals so that's that's the thing I think as much as the the video will be great but I think there's also some outside homework component that really would do good and some history so I just want to I asked staff to do this because I've had this conversation on my Wednesday council meetings and I think it's important to note that we had a diversity officer that was requested Quinton. So I just I don't want the presentation only I want a history of the position. Okay. Yep great councilmember Duff. Yeah if we're gonna prioritize and all that I think there should be a no in there too you know. Well yeah and I think I think you presented that in your first comment. Yeah yeah and as far as the diversity I've been talking to somebody's dad here since before I was elected. Okay all right real quick so because we've got a couple more slides or several more slides to go through that I thought we had another big list. This is it. Okay all right well that's good. I guess I'll take that. Yeah no you still got. Yeah. No more there's no more. I support individual feedback into the agenda committee on some kind of a rating. I think this is just painful and I'd rather save the pain for the deliberation. Right yep okay fantastic. Well I think you have some direction and again as city manager said this is a new process for us. We will move through it in a way that as we find out what works and doesn't and we'll all come up with some different ideas that will be very helpful so I appreciate your your patience and encouragement here. Appreciate staff's patience and in that regard and your willingness to really be flexible with the process and I appreciate my colleagues being willing to be flexible with the process as well. Well likewise thank you as well. I know this is a long discussion and we really appreciate your time devoted to it. Thank you. Okay that concludes our work session reports. We will where's my cheat sheet? I will call the closed meeting then we'll take a quick break. I will convene the closed session at 4.03. We will consider the following items consultation with attorneys under Texas government code section 551.071 deliberations regarding real property under Texas government code section 551.072. I've now called the closed session meeting and we will break for five or ten minutes and then come back and close the question. Oh yes and Councilmember Husspeth will be recusing I believe on agenda item A I believe. Is that correct? Agenda item A. Okay so you won't be coming back. Good evening everyone and welcome to this meeting of the Denton City Council on September 18, 2018. It is 6.32 and please stand if you're able to pledge allegiance to the Texas and I mean to the United States and Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Honor the Texas flag I pledge allegiance to thee Texas one state under God one and indivisible. Okay we're going to deviate from our normal agenda procedure just for a few items before we go into the proclamations and presentations by the public. We want to call the budget items for individual consideration which is agenda item two. Two A is considered option of an ordinance of the City of Denton Texas levying the ad valorem property tax of the City of Denton Texas for the year 2018 etc. Who's making okay. Can these all be treated as one item? They do require a separate vote for all of them. Mayor City Council Tony Point and Director Finance I don't have a presentation ready for you today but as we discussed over the last number of months the current proposed rate that's in front of you the 6204477 is lower than our current rate. It is a represents one cent above the city calculated effective rate. Again we've had this conversation with you a number of occasions we've had two public hearings on the tax rate public hearing on the budget. Be happy to answer any questions that you may have tonight. Any questions for staff? Seeing none I don't have any blue cards for this item for individual consideration. Mayor Pro Tem. I move approval of item 2A. Council Member Husbeth. Second. We have a motion and a second for agenda item 2A. Let's vote on the board please. Motion carries 7-0. Next agenda item is 2B. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Texas approving the 2018 tax rolls and providing an effective date. Mayor City Council again Tony Point and Director Finance. This item is to approve the tax rolls. Tax rolls were delivered to the city on July 25th. We've had a number of conversations with the council regarding the tax rolls. State law requires that the tax roll be formally adopted by the governing body. Be happy to answer any questions that you have on specific to the tax roll. Any questions? Okay. Council Member Husbeth. I move approval of item B. Council Member Meltzer. Second. We have a motion and a second for agenda item 2B. Let's vote on the board please. Motion carries 7-0. Agenda item 2C. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton adopting the fiscal year 2018-2019 annual program of services budget and the capital improvement program. So Mayor City Council again Tony Point and Director Finance . As I stated earlier, councils had a number of conversations since August 2nd in consideration of the proposed budget. There was a number of changes that the council had made to various funds within the city. The current proposal in front of you is for an overall budget of $1.2 billion. Certainly the largest of that being our capital improvement program. Again, you know there's a number of budgets within the city that are managed as segregated funds and so each one of those has been included as part of your backup for approval tonight. If you have any questions about any of those funds, I'd be happy to go through that with you tonight. Any questions? Council Member Armitage. Not so much a question but a statement. I just want to say to the public, that's a lot of money. We recognize that. That's a really big budget and this is not something that any of us does likely. I just wanted people to know that we're thinking about that . I know I am. Making sure you really put your tax dollars to work. A lot of this has to do with mitigating past damage, past things that happened in the past and new expenses that we had to make to salvage some programs to get new equipment for our 911 emergency responders. This is directly benefiting the people, public needs, not everything. On the budget, I personally am a huge fan but I feel pretty confident approving this budget but I realize it's high. I wish it wasn't so high. I just wanted to say that. I feel like it's worth just taking a moment to say that. Thank you. Any other comments, questions? Yes. Council Member Melzer. Director Ponte, is it not still the case, we've been through a lot of meetings, that this budget keeps the average taxpayer at about an $80 increase at a time when the average rate payer for utilities will experience $120 reduction so that the average taxpayer and rate payer ends up a little bit to the plus. I think that's great. I'm impressed that all the staff's work, they were able to do that while at the same time tackling the long-standing issue of Denton Roads not being in good repair. This will clear the backlog and get us to the state where most of the roads are in good condition most of the time and I think people will be very glad that we did that. With that, thank you for confirming that and I move approval. Mayor Pro Tem. I'll second. Let's vote on the board please. Motion carries, 7-0. Agenda item 2D, consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas ratifying the adoption of the fiscal year 2018-2019 budget. This is simply just saying we did what we said we, doing what we said we did. That's correct. It requires that we ratify the budget whenever there is an increase in revenue, not necessarily an increase in the tax rate. Again, as we've talked about, the tax rate is lower than the proposed tax rate for next year is lower than the current tax rate, but there is additional revenue that's being generated from property taxes and it's such a state law requires that you ratify the budget after you approved it. Any questions, comments? Mayor Pro Tem. I move approval of item 2D. Looking for a second. Council Member Elser. I'll second. We have a motion to second. Let's vote on the board please for agenda item 2D. Motion carries, 7-0. Now we move into our proclamation and presentations. The first one is Effie Ruth Webb McQueen Day. So anybody that come on down Ms. McQueen and anybody that wants to come stand with her as well come down. Then I'm going to have you all introduce yourselves and then tell us what we're celebrating here today. I'm Effie Ruth Webb McQueen and we are celebrating our 50th anniversary. My name is Sharon Lawson Brewer. Dolores Henderson. Betty Fox McKinney. This is a proclamation by the mayor for the city of Denton. This means whereas Effie Ruth Webb McQueen founded and organized the Denton Gospel Heirs and that is that how you pronounce it? Gospel Heirs in 1968 in 1968 in Denton County, Denton, Texas with eight members. And whereas for over 50 years the Denton Gospel Heirs have traveled throughout the state of Texas and many neighboring states. And whereas in their commitment and dedication to God, this group continues to minister in song and travel even when they did not have a musician. And whereas the Denton Gospel Heirs still have two of its original members actively involved in the persons of Sister Effie McQueen and Sister Mabel Devereaux as well as member emeritus Sister Pinky Johnson. And whereas the Denton Gospel Heirs were historically the first to organize a quartet in the city of Denton holding the continued honor of being the most ten ured gospel quartet in the city of Denton. Congratulations for that. And whereas after 50 years the Denton Gospel Heirs with new additions continue to minister and traveling praising God for blessing to have come this far by faith leaning on the Lord and that's in bold capitalized. Now therefore I Chris Watts mayor of the city of Denton, Texas do hereby declare and proclaim October the 12th 2018 as Effie Ruth McQueen Day in the city of Denton and urge all citizens to congratulate her on this special occasion. Thank you so much for your dedication, your vision, all of the vision and just the ministry that you've had for this city and those around here for over 50 years. Thank you so much. Do you have family here? Do you have family that you'd like to introduce? Yes, my daughter Jacqueline Welp. My granddaughter Aston Sears. My granddaughter, Stacey Lanay McQueen. Carrie Welp. Clayton Welp. Cherie Sears. And my grandson, Brennan Simmons. And my great grandson, Michael McQueen. Thank you all very much. Would you all like to say anything? You sure? You don't have to look so scared. It's okay if we do. Yeah. All right. Well, thank you all so much and thank you again for your service to God and to this community. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Sure. Everybody take a picture. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Oh, yeah. Oh, the council. Okay. Yes. Yes. All right. Yeah. We'll send out an invitation. Yes. Okay. The next proclamation is Barney Cosimo Day. So, Barney, if you'll come on down. Oh, you weren't expecting that, huh? Come on down. And we're going to get a chance for everybody to introduce themselves. And if someone wants to say a few words, they're certainly more than welcome to do that. So, if you'll go ahead and start with introducing yourself. But I think we can figure it out. Barney Cosimo. I guess I'm here because of my affiliation with Dental Affordable Housing. Mark Moffitt, board member. And I'm Barbara Rodman. I'm the president of the board. And I want to give Mark credit, though, for dreaming up this idea and encouraging us to do it. I'm Prudence Sanchez. I am a previous board member. And I am kind of a PRN employee of Dental Affordable Housing Corporation. And I've been really pleased and honored to know Barney for a few years. And I know this is the last thing he was expecting or even wanted. But he's a good sport. Thank you. And I'm Sharon Barnhill. And I'm the secretary of the board and a friend of Barney's for several decades, I guess. Hi, I'm Pat Thomas. And I'm a board member. Marcella Franco. I'm vice president, board member. I'm Jennifer Luffritz. And I'm the accounting coordinator for Dental Affordable Housing. And I want to say thank you to Barney Cosimo for all his outstanding efforts with Dental Affordable Housing. And Donna Jones, our rental coordinator, is also here. Okay. All right. I see. Okay. All right. So I'm going to read the proclamation. And then whoever wants to act as a spokesperson for this group, if they have any additional words, or if any of you have any additional words you'd like to say, because I really appreciate you honoring Barney, because I know what he's done over the last many, many years and over the last two or three years with the organization. Proclamation by the mayor of the city of Denton. Whereas Barney Cosimo, sorry about that in the beginning, has been a member of the Denton Affordable Housing Corporation's board since 2014 and has served as interim executive director of DAHC for more than two years, declining reimbursement for his efforts. In other words, he didn't want to get paid for it. Yeah, absolutely. And whereas Barney has cultivated relationships with the city of Denton, Giving Hope, Friends of the Family, MHMR, the Chamber of Commerce, as well as many other local agencies and nonprofit organizations. And whereas Barney has personally performed repairs and maintenance jobs, including the most menial tasks for the DAHC properties. And whereas Barney has always treated everyone with the same respectful courtesy and has consistently modeled integrity and compassion concern in his dealings with DAHC's tenants. And whereas Barney's dedication to community service and involvement has been an inspiration to all those who have worked or volunteered with him. And whereas Barney has championed the rights and respected the needs of all those needing housing in our community. And whereas Barney has made an impact on the city of Denton in a profound and exemplary way. Now, therefore, I, Chris Watts, Mayor of the City of Denton , Texas, do hereby declare and proclaim September the 18th today, 2018, as Barney Cosimo Day here in the city of Denton and encourage all citizens to join in with his family and friends and all those up here to continue the celebration of his dedication and the impact of his community involvement. Thank you so much. OK, now I want to know what did they tell you in order to get you here? So somebody please just enlighten us on this. He needed me to come and speak on behalf of housing. Wonderful. Wonderful. Would anybody like to say a few words ? Folks, I got to tell you, I've served on the board of directors with Barney for a couple of years now. I got on the board. I was passionate about affordable housing and making sure that we had that we were able to provide a solution to affordable housing in Denton. And along the way, we had a need for a new executive director. Barney offered to step up. He served. He put in untold number of hours. And I was on the board of directors. And so were many of these folks. And we kept waiting to see when he was going to ask to be paid to do this. And folks, this is hard work. This is hard work. And I got to tell you, this man is absolutely dedicated. He is absolutely passionate about this. And whenever we got through all of this and we got our new executive director, we kept looking to see whether or not we were going to reimburse Barney. And he never took anything. And I want to tell you, that is I've never seen a situation like that before in my lifetime . And I just the man deserves a lot of credit. And our organization would not be here today if it were not for him . And so we owe a debt of gratitude. This city owes a debt of gratitude to Barney. And we're forever grateful. Thank you. [Applause] Barney does have family members. Yes, if you could introduce your family. That is my son-in-law, Eric Bradfield, my daughter, Pilar Bradfield, and my wife, Deborah Cosimo. [Applause] I want to mention we have a member of city staff here that has been so supportive of us. Barbara Ross. And she has bent over backwards to make sure our mission is successful. I want to say one other thing. I was inspired to do this as a gift to the community because of the work that the city council and you and Keeley have put in. No pay virtually. So you have been an inspiration. Thank you so much for your service to this community. [Applause] So I only get the rest of the day. Is that it? Tomorrow is back to work. That's right. You don't have much time. A few hours. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you, brother. Thank you. [Pause] Okay. Our next item on the agenda is proclamations and -- oh, we just did that. Pardon me. Agenda item four. We'll go off and do this again. Groundhog Day. Presentation from members of the public. If we could review the procedures for addressing the city council, please. [Pause] Here is a brief review of the rules that apply to citizen reports. [Reading of the rules] [Reading of the rules] [Reading of the rules] [Reading of the rules] [Reading of the rules] [Reading of the rules] [Reading of the rules] [Reading of the rules] Okay. Our first scheduled speaker is Henry Jason regarding a committee for the handicapped. Mr. Jason, if you'll state your name and address, your time will begin at that time. My name is Henry Jason. I live at 2012 Hemingway Drive here in Denton, Texas. I'd like to thank you first and foremost for allowing me the time to speak to you today about an issue facing many of our community citizens. My experience, I think, is important so you know why I'm making this proposal to reaffirm the Mayor's Committee for the Handicapped. I was myself a political appointee that was charged by various government entities to enforce the laws of state and cities regarding anti-discrimination laws . As such, I served on various Mayor's Committees for the Handicapped and as I'm suggesting for the reaffirmation of your particular committee, I have some recommendations and I hope that you would listen to them. I will make myself available for you after if you have questions and I'll provide my email address to you. And I 've never known a New Yorker who can last four minutes, so I 'll try to expedite this. I use the term temporarily able-bodied. The statistics show nationally that 50% of people my age, and I don't want to tell you how old I am, have a disabling condition. The CDC identifies that 20% on average each year has a dis abling situation. It could happen to any of us, thereby the term temporarily disabled. The committees that I have worked with, formed alliances with, we provided education. We provided training to all segments of the community. We acknowledge and we receive various issues from components within city government, for example. We will look forward to working with them, serving as the pleasure of yourselves and those individual departments that want our assistance. We have the expertise. We know what a reasonable accommodation is. I read ANSI standards. I take no pleasure in reading government regulations, but you have to read them to know them and understand them. I find that the number of complaints filed by people who acknowledge that they possibly have been discriminated against historically drops when you put in the applicable training, not only for cities within planning structures, however yours is organized, for streets, for accessibility of buildings, for availability of parks. Those things come with the input of members of their community. Whatever you propose is the adequate number, the appropriate number of people, they should have the knowledge, skills and abilities to be able to provide to you those technical services, maybe even free of charge, to assist this community in becoming totally dedicated to the disabled or temporarily able-bodied community. That's all I have to say. Did I make it in three? You did, but we have a couple questions for you. Councilmember Briggs. Thank you for coming and speaking tonight. We actually had a very nice discussion today in work session about getting this item coming to a work session. I believe it's the 25th of September, if I'm not mistaken, and so that would be a good time for you to come and listen to that conversation. So I just wanted to let you know that this council is taking it a very serious consideration. Thank you. Might I ask you a question? Is that the work session for the evening council? It would be the work session. It's the day, the day, and then when that would come back for a vote, it would be in the evening time. Yeah. And you said that I could participate? You would be able to comment, yes, before the vote. Yes. Thank you. Councilmember Amater. So I too wanted to thank you for coming, and I had the pleasure of walking City Hall with you and Tim Swenson, who's here with Service Dog Kismet and Mario, who's up there, and a number of dedicated staff for whom this issue is really important. And I was wondering if you might want to share with us what was of everything that you saw in City Hall, just that this building, walking it in terms of and looking at handicap accessibility. You could name one thing that was surprising, interesting that you noticed, something that would be a quick fix, you know, that would make a big difference. There were small items that we identified for complete access to the building. This one in particular. And what I view as our responsibility to you is to provide to you the knowledge, skills, and abilities that we have to recommend to you cost savings, but at the same time, provide access. We talked in terms of how do you get into the building after five o'clock. Well, we thought in terms of the door that people have access to. We put an electronic. We put a button that would alert people within staff to go to the doors and open them up for people we identified handicapped spots were more likely than not painted appropriately some needed to be removed, which they were near an area that didn't have any access. We relocate them, but meet the appropriate standards for with that access. And one item in particular concern was don't provide a handicapped spot with no access to a sidewalk. Otherwise, the person has to go out into traffic to be able to get. So those are the minimum cost. Nothing that we identified was earth shattering in terms of finance. We talked to the facilities manager who acknowledged my interest in their planning efforts for access. And there are other people within the community that need to be identified who can work politically and socially with members of the community to accomplish the task. I talk like a bureaucrat. No, thank you so much. I really appreciate that. And thanks for sharing that with us and being here tonight. Thank you. Any other questions. The speaker. Thank you for having me. Thank you very much. We move on to our next agenda item and citizens report is additional citizen reports. It's agenda item one. See, of four. And we do have one card. Craig Clifton, if you'll come down , state your name and address and we'll begin. And as we just as a reminder to the council and to the speaker that since this is an additional citizen reports, we can hear your report, but we're unable to enter into a discussion with you because of the Texas Open Meetings Act. I understand. Hi, my name is Craig Clifton. I'm here to talk about a proposed human warehouse that was turned down in zoning last year when they said they were going to build this on normal and scripture, because it would destroy the neighborhood. Well, evidently they've gotten traction on this now and everyone listening and looking on television, the Internet needs to look this up. It's the city of Denton agendas in minutes for March 8th, 2017 planning and zoning item number Z is in zebra 16 dash oh oh two three A's and Apple. It was resoundly defeated because in no uncertain terms, it is a not kind building for that neighborhood. Unlike the other buildings that have been built there in the 21st century, not in days of yore. There are only two stories. They only have 50 people adding to the neighborhood. And because they fit into the neighborhood, they're not tearing up the infrastructure. What has not been looked into is all these are the oldest real properties here in Denton. They're more than 100 years when it was normal teachers college. That's why it's normal street. The city of Denton is supposed to protect us from businesses are going to be destroyed when they take two and a half to three years building this thing. And the health issues involved are going to be the reason nobody's going to be living on that street. Normal Street, which I've lived on any time anything's done to that street. It's over a century old. Huge clouds of dust come up from where things have been festering under there for 100 years. Come up, people all across the street have to move. They've been people going to the hospital. I know one of my renters did. She was an older woman. They're going to tear up these streets for their own profit. Ruin all the businesses up and down the streets because it 's going to take now three years with the underground garage . They're going to do. Nobody is going to rent there. And after their leases are over for one year, all our businesses are going to be vacant. And I'd like to know how the city is going to compensate us since they're supposed to protect us from these people. The health risks are going to be immense. They're going to go in there and they're going to take out all the sewer line. That means mixed in these giant clouds, there's going to be fecal bacteria. The city knowingly is going to take this unnecessary health risk for these people that haven't lived and didn't one day . Anybody that comes down with anything that proves very, you know, makes them really, really sick, they can sue the city over that. I don't see how they couldn't. And all of us, it is within your purview to protect us against these things. Indigenous businesses cannot be put out of business by another business of the same kind that is so different that it will destroy that area. I understand this has gotten traction because these people from New York City have said, hey, you know, we'll do a lawsuit if you don't let us do this. Well, you know, here in Texas, we don't care much for lawyers, but are we going to lie down? Everybody lose their businesses just because they're threatening a lawsuit. I would think that their one lawsuit when push comes to shove, which hopefully will never come to that, will be nothing compared to how many businesses are on the street they're going to sue for their survival. They were turned down in zoning five to two last time by the city council in zoning because they chose to protect us . If you don't protect us now, then what good is government for? These people, they are just down here building this because they found a loophole in the zoning. This will be a domino effect. Once these businesses are taken out and the residences, 480 people they're putting in there overnight, that is going to have parking problems all well into the residential areas. This is something to think about because it is for the people that you serve. Thank you. Thank you. All right. With counsel's indulgence and if there's any objection to this, I'd like to move the public hearing agenda item 7A forward so that all council members can be here and present to hear that agenda item. Is there any objection to that? Do you want to do that before the consent agenda? Yeah, because we've got several items that were pulled on the consent agenda. So I'd like to take those all at once. Yeah. I mean, that's a council decision. That's not my decision. Is that okay to move that forward? It's to accommodate one of the council members here. Okay. All right. Then we will now call then and then we will after this agenda item move back to the regular agenda with consent agenda and so forth. So I will call within the public hearings portion of the agenda agenda item 7A hold a public hearing and reconsider the August 21st 2018 adoption of an ordinance approving a detailed plan for plan development district depicting an auto laundry facility on approximately 2.13 acres. We have a staff presentation, but I will go ahead and open the public hearing so I don't forget to do that. So the public hearing is now open. All right. And my thought was since we've all seen this and heard it before, I would give kind of an abbreviated presentation. But if you all wish, I'm certainly glad to go back through everything that we discussed at the original public hearing in August. So just a quick recap. The request before you is to hold this public hearing and reconsider the adoption of ordinance PDA 18004A, which was regarding a detailed plan for a property which is outlined in yellow here that's located within plan development number 176 also in Wheeler Ridge. The property is just over two acres in size. As you can see , it's located along the new FM 2499. So as I mentioned, this ordinance was originally approved on August 21st. However, on the 28th, a vote was made to reconsider the case. Just a little bit of recap on this. Wheeler Ridge was originally created as a PD in 1999. You can see here, kind of the green area on the map being that PD. PDs do require a two-step process. The first step being adoption of a concept plan that determines what should go where within the boundaries of the PD. That was approved in 1999 as well. And that is featured here on the map. You can see within that concept plan, this large central portion was all designated for residential development. However, two tracks outlined in red were called out for commercial development. They totaled about 16 acres. The second step in this process is for a detail plan. And that's what's before you tonight is a detail plan for the property you see outlined here in black. That detail plan is to dictate the site layout and the building locations. Just to kind of go back through, this detail plan was approved with five conditions at that last meeting. So these are enumerated here. The first being that no exterior lighting on the building should face a single-family residential use, or if it does, it should be screened from the view of that adjoining residential property. Additionally, a photometric plan should be provided with their building permit to show that they meet the current D DC site lighting requirements. The second condition was that due to the proximity of this site to single-family residential, and the majority of this PD being residential, as well as the lack of sign regulations contained within the PD, that the project should comply with the current code of ordinance as sign regulations for non-residential districts, as well as allowing that no illuminated wall signs should face an adjo ining single-family use. The third condition, which was one originally added by the Planning and Zoning Commission, was that the height of the proposed masonry screening wall, which is required in the PD at at least six feet high, be increased to eight feet. These final two conditions, if you remember back to August 21st, were recommended by staff based on discussions at that Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. So the fourth condition was that hours of operations be limited to between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. daily. And the fifth be that the centralized vacuum motor should be internal to the structure and soundproof to limit noise to its surrounding properties. And I'm happy to walk through more of the details, go back through the detail plan, whatever would be useful for you all. But with respect to your time, I didn't know if you wanted to go through the entire presentation again. I do have a question. I wasn't here for this presentation. Do you have the site plan? I do. That you could pull up? Yes. So the key features of the site plan, one driveway off of 2499 that would eventually be shared with the property to the north that is still vacant. You can see the building outlined in yellow, vacuum stalls are in blue, and then the parking spaces are there in red. So my question, just so that I can then address my next comment to ensure that I've got it accurate. So there's a driveway when you come in off of 2499. It looks like there's a circular kind of mobility through that to that site. Is that correct? Correct. So the site plan that I looked at, it may be up there. The dumpster revetments. Where are those? Right here. Okay. And so that's so that the truck comes in, comes around the corner. I guess the front loaders opens it up, dumps it. So my thought is, I think you could move those to the other side of the property because you still have the opportunity to come in the other direction. And so it moves them away from the residential, I mean, the property line for the residential that budded because I know there's a concern about vacuum cleaners. But when you get a dump truck, when you get a city dumpster at six o'clock in the morning or 530 dumping a who knows how many thousand pound dumpster. So my request would be as part of this is that that dump ster be moved to the other side to at least provide some buffer from from the sound by moving it away from from those. So that was really the only comment, at least at this point that I had. All right. And so whoever if the applicants here and then the people that are speaking, at least we'll understand that that's one of the things that I would like to see occur. Okay. Any questions for staff? I assume the staff probably wouldn't. I mean, that because it's just symmetrical on the other side. It doesn't look like that would present any problems. Correct. I believe as long as they have 50 feet of clearance for backup and maneuverability, that would be possible. Okay. Okay. Any other comments for staff? Seeing none. All right. Thank you. We have some blue cards and then of course this is a public hearing. So after we take the blue card comment, we will open it up to the public for their comments as well. The first person to speak will be Kimberly Hurst. Kimberly, if you'll come down and state your name and address and your time will begin. Good evening. My name is Kimberly Hurst and I'm at 3301 High Point Drive. I'm actually at the corner where the dumpsters will be. The criteria for approval in the list that we were sent, item B says that regarding the buildings and land uses that would not adversely affect the adjoining neighborhoods and properties outside, what is being proposed is directly going to be adverse to our property. We are going to have property values that drop. The noise that comes off of this, which we've already had to experience from the wall for $24.99, has actually created an echo chamber. Adding another wall there due to the 30-foot tower and the vacuums, which if you notice, all the vacuums are closest to the property, the actual residents versus being on the other side fur thest away from us, is just going to increase the noise that we have. On top of that, we have to worry about neighborhood safety. Anytime somebody goes into a location like this because you 're there for quite a bit of time, people are going to roam. We have two major residential areas. It's not like we have stores and things for them to roam to. They're going to be roaming through our neighborhoods where we have all of our children playing out on the weekends, which is the busiest time for this type of business. They're going to be littering in our neighborhood, which puts it on the HOA and all of our dues to clean up the mess from this, on top of already having to deal with the noise, the property values dropping. Then the biggest thing, which we're already having to deal with because of 2499 opening, there's two entrances into our HOA from the 2499 side. We have two stop signs in our whole housing division of over 800 homes. We've already proposed to try and get stop signs in our neighborhood and have been turned down every single time. This is going to increase the traffic in our neighborhoods where we have our children playing, and there's nothing to stop the traffic to slow them down around our three parks, our green belt. I just don't see how this benefits our neighborhood. I'm not saying that this gentleman should not have a business. I'm going to say having a 30-foot tower sitting outside my backyard is not something that aesthetically goes with the neighborhood, as well as the dangers that are going to come in due to the fact that we're going to have the increased traffic, we're going to have the increased trash, we're going to have increased crime. We already have issues where we're having to chase people out of there at our cost. We don't want to add more just to put some money in somebody else's pocket. We've got 800 homes to think about over one business. Any questions? Thank you. Appreciate it. The next speaker is David Furr. That's correct. Come down and state your name and address. Your time will begin. Okay, my name is David Furr. I live at 6500 Longleaf Lane, about where the southeast corner of this building is. I'm right across the street from that. Those people that are on lot number 12, it looks like, they're across the street from me. So right out of my front window, I'm going to be seeing this 30-foot tower every day. I spoke at the last meeting and I completely missed something on the presentation that was given. I went back and watched the councils again. I watched the video again and I caught it. One of the things was that this development was supposed to be in line with what is typically found along the arterial roads and highways in the area. The closest commercial section is where the Kroger is on Te asley, approximately a quarter of a mile away. The next closest would be the 711, also on Teasley, which is a mile away. Now this is driving. This isn't as the crow flies. This is a normal human route. The next closest thing to that is the CVS down at Swisher and 2499. The next closest thing to the north is the Sonic and the Ford dealerships at State School and, well, I guess it's Old State School and 35 right there. In between that, it's all residents. This is a residential area. This does not match the arterial roads and highways around that area. They are shoehorning a business, well, two businesses because there's two plots there, into that one little section to where you have residences to the north, south, east, and west of it. And there's nothing else. There's not a strip center there. There's not a store there, storefront there, nothing. This is just a two-acre plot plugged into the middle of a residence. On top of that, one of the things that was mentioned was that no white would be facing a single family resident. How was that possible? That is not possible because you have single family residents around the entire structure. This, it doesn't make any sense as far as putting this building there. Another thing that was brought up was the arrangement of the buildings and lands would not adversely affect adjo ining neighborhoods or properties. Well, as was mentioned in Kim's speech before mine, our property values are going to hurt. They're going to hurt our property values and it's adjoined to our properties. And on top of that, it's not going to adversely affect the adjoining neighborhoods. There have been people that have been here to speak out against this since planning and zoning. This is adversely affecting our neighborhood, not the neighborhood where the houses are. The neighborhood is a group of people. It's the neighborhood. You're adversely affecting it because you have so many people coming to speak out against this business. And that 's all I have. Any questions? Speaker. Thank you. Appreciate it. Next speaker is Tom Brandt. State your name and address and your time will begin. Hi, my name is Tom Brandt. I live at 6600 Halingway, which is on the southeast corner of Pine Hills in 2499. This will be my neighborhood looking out at this unnecessary building at this location. But the main point is we've been beating this dead horse for the last two or three meetings now. Good luck to you all. It sounds like it's going to happen because legally it's got to happen because he has his rights. Property owners that are being affected by this do not have zoning rights, apparently, that protect them because of the right of way zoning. That's what I'm hearing from everybody. A lot of apathy, but no, sorry to hear it, but we can't do anything legally to stop this. What I'd like to propose and before all that, thank you for listening to us and doing a reconsideration of this of the four of the seven of you that helped out. I appreciate it that we're getting another opportunity. The other three are hard sell because apparently it's not their neighborhood. It's not going to matter to them. That's what we're facing. It's not anybody's problem, but our neighborhood. So that's how we're approaching this. The only thing I would really like to recommend is something that would help everybody is even proposing because of the chemicals involved and solvents and deterg ents that this business is using and the environment it's going to be in. I understand they're required to keep the tree line that is on the south section of this. I like to propose, among other things with the neighborhood. So within the nearest proximities that they have to conduct a hazmat study or environmental study of long term effects as might have on the trees there, the wildlife of the trees and the immediate neighborhoods of this of this building. Just from potential leakage of the chemicals and and solv ents that they use to do their everyday business on top of the patrons that come there that are going to be using their cleaning products and who knows how they're disposing of them. So I just like that to be considered. The only other thing indirectly involved with this is 2499 this section. I don't know if I can move this around right here. This is Pine Hills I believe I'm at this intersection right here. The elevation of this road is six feet above my fence line. The elevation of this building is 12 feet above my fence line and above all surrounding neighborhoods of this area. This building will overlook within a quarter mile proximity , everybody's property. The neighbors will have no effect. They have little or none right now. Now when he adds his additional induction of noise. That's another proposal of the environmental study, the noise and pollution effects possibly. That's all we're trying to get out of this, we're trying to preserve what we 've got. I guess we have to accept what we can't change. We just want it to be tolerable, or at least intolerable. The only thing that's going to be in here is nothing but an engineering flaw, and either Texas and or the city of Dent on should be responsible to have this fixed prior to any construction of any other new buildings here. Hickory Creek is a blind spot turn. This is the street that pine hills, because it's elevated and the streets coming from this direction 2499 from the, I guess that would be the south and from the north, you have limited vision. This was an this was discussed four years ago when they were building a road doesn't take an engineer to stand out there and see you have hidden areas of cars approaching that you cannot see when you're sitting at the stop signs. This will just be enhanced by more business on this street, not directly because of this business, because traffic is going to increase. So, I think any of that should be the liability of the city and or the state before any future construction starts. But I appreciate your time and hope it helps. Thank you, sir. I'm just trying to pull the site plan up on my screen so I can. Okay, the next speaker blue cards and then anybody else wishing to speak will have an opportunity. Once the next speakers completed Joshua. Boshi, if you'll come down and state your name and address your time will begin. I didn't write it on the card this name. This time I'm Joshua Bosh a I am the business owner, the property owner and the developer here. So you the applicant. I'm the applicant. Maybe that's the term I should use. Thank you. I'll make it short and sweet and I guess maybe get to questioning or if you want to open it up to more. You know going into this you know several months ago. You know we worked with Haley and a lot of the city staff members and we really came up with a plan that you know is within zoning regulations, all city guidelines. We didn't ask for any exceptions on the property whatsoever . And we do have full staff approval to read their for approval statements. They do say that the use and development outlined in the proposed detail plan conforms to the PD development standards. The property is consistent to the development patterns along highways such as 2499. It does have safe and adequate circulation and has not just compliance with city regulations. They added the term substantial compliance with city regulations. So on that front we did really work hard. We did work with city staff to work on a lot of alternative solutions on coming up with the plan that you see in front of you today. It was approved with five conditions from my vantage point. It's hard to see you know and the time I've had to research it on the backside. Precedents in the same PD precedents in the same area of town and precedents with other businesses in town. Why my business of good standing is now subject to additional conditions without justification. I'm going to state my disagreement with all of the conditions. However, also know that I am 100 percent willing to work with those conditions that I'm given. At this point there is precedents in all five conditions. The other direction. However, I want to make it. I know I'm making a dual statement here. Right. We have this for this forum to voice comments on both sides of the aisle. I'm going to voice my opposition. However, I'm more than willing to work with any of the conditions on approval tonight. I can address at your discretion some of the residents concerns, some of your concerns. I do have some slides, some pictures of the property, some things that would detail some of the concerns of the residents, some of the solutions we have provided and maybe some of the questions you may have. So how would you like me to proceed at this point? We'll just open it up for questions right now. And then if some of the slides that you have any other material you have that might address some of those questions, that would be great. Councilmember Meltzer. Sure. General, I want all small businesses to succeed. I really do. You may recall. I did not vote for reconsideration. I don't know whether it's compatible. I don't know if it's compatible. I understand that it's not essential to the business concept. I heard you. Sorry for those who didn't hear all that interesting stuff I just said. I'm going to go to the end. I find the 30 foot tower, starting at a 12 foot hill to be incompatible. And to the extent that you want to take it as a question I believe it's not essential to the business concept, even though it's, you know, not a small change. So, you know, I guess I'll register that and I'm happy to hear whatever you'd like to say back. Councilmember has a question as well. I want to ask, I guess staff, because I won't put that on applicant. Because that I have a concern when people just start grabbing numbers without. I'm not aware of what that exact elevation is. I'm not going to try to pull up the map and get an estimate for us on the city's online map, but that's it would be an estimate based on the contour layers that we have on our GIS maps. Okay, yes, if you find it that's great but I just want to stipulate that we don't know that to be a fact and I don't want to run off with fake numbers. I want them to be solid correct. I'll see if I can find that out. I have a couple questions. I have a comment about the dumpster. If we could pull this site plan, if we could have the site plan, I'm not sure. Okay, there we go. So, I guess my question is, of course I had a question with the dumpster. Yes. I guess in general when I look at the bank of, first let me understand, on these vacuum stalls, I mean some of the car washes I go to, the vacuum compressor is right there with the hoses hooked to it. You pull your car up, you vacuum it out. It's all self-cont ained right there. You know, you've got your motor running right there. But this is different. This has a room or an enclosure. Where is that? This is correct. And if you follow my mouse here. In between, I have two sections of ten vacuum stalls. And in between them, I do have a separate room attached to my building in which the vacuums will be housed inside of an insulated room. So, the actual, you know, you would call it producer, right ? That's the motor that makes the vacuum will be inside and will be virtually soundless. But what sound you will have from the vacuums will be just as with every vacuum, every time you pick it up and put it down, it makes a quick, you know, just a suction noise as with use. I have some notes here. At my current wash, the design is very similar. In the same PD on the other corner of Teasley and Robinson. You cannot hear the vacuum producers outside of the building. You cannot hear the vacuum nozzles vacuuming the carpet more than 10 feet from the car that's parked there. Okay. That's personal observation this week. So the what I'm hearing you say is the the building that the room that you're referring to that houses the what do you call them? The motors, the whatever you call it producer. Sure. They 're within this yellow hatched area. Yes, that is correct. So I guess my question is, and not knowing much about this site plan as far as just what I'm seeing right now, is it designed in such a way that if you wanted to flip just invert to where the dumpster is on the other side, the vacuum stations are on the other side, because you're not really I mean, so I don't know about the ingress egress and all that or the mobility through the site. But if it just was inverted, not addressing the tower just yet, but just inverted. Is that is that something that whether you can agree to it just conceptually? Is that something that's even possible given the site layout, the actual configuration? I mean, if it's possible, but whether it's possible, and you agree to it are two different two different questions. So absolutely. So I and I'll probably just give you a few off the cuff points on flipping it. My idea upfront would be to flip the circular fire lane versus the vacuums, the building the driveway, that kind of stuff. My only concern with flipping it is that it turns the quote unquote drive through backwards. So if you've been to McDonald's, if you've been to Starbucks, you turn left. Every time you go through every drive through in your entire life. That's the way they're designed. It's the way they work. So you don't hit the side of the building, it works. You can talk out your window. You can pay when you flip it. All of a sudden it turns this into a right turn and it's a lot more right turn from where from basically entering the car wash is what I'm. So you come in through your entrance and you're saying come through the entrance right now I have three lanes to three payment stations where you get into one lane to go through the car wash. So you're just saying if you flipped it, they're just going to come around that corner and enter in through the neighborhood side, you enter through the neighborhood side through a right turn. If you flip the entire site plan. Just to be transparent. Yes. I understand that. But I think given the problems at least if we can't meet what we're being asked is to disapprove your development, this particular project for this site. Okay. And there's several different reasons why. Most of them are, you know, trash sound. I'm trying to find a way that I can help mitigate those to the maximum and also provide an opportunity for you to have this development, and if there's a way to take away some of those concerns or at least lessen them through the noise. And by flipping it, I'm going to be hard pressed for a right turn instead of a left turn to be a factor that might tip the scales and not flipping it if that if that makes sense because at this stage of the game. It's really it's easier to do than any other time I mean this is a site plan and it costs a little money to to red raw it. But I think that would go a long way to helping alleviate some of the concerns with the noise and the things such as that that have been have been presented, especially with the operating hours that you know we're sort of decided but now it seems everything else is on the table again. Absolutely. So I have a lot of facts to share and show on that. And if you have a specific question, I know and that's fine . Yeah, that that one sure will address later but just to share with you. Because I don't hear you say there's a constraint with the site itself that the constraint more is a self imposed constraint of, well, it would be more beneficial for people to come in. And I'm not even sure I'm trying to orient myself and I'm thinking, I don't know if I would even agree that I'm used to going this way through a drive through, or another way through a drive through because I think I probably go through different different ways but I could be wrong. It might be just so subconscious that they know we humans adhere to those kind of patterns. So that that's a real concern of mine when I thought about the dumpster I thought okay move that over, but then as I was looking at it with the vacuum stalls there. And with the flipping then this room with this motor with these motors, even though they're going to be a soundproof as possible. It's even more distance more mitigation of those potential noise. Absolutely. So it speaks specifically on flipping the site plan. The other aspect is it flips the building and it flips the building closer to the residents. So, so, if we talk about the washing tunnel itself again, not significantly noisy but there is noise associated with brushes hitting water being sprayed out of jets things like that, that will move the entire the building is off center to the north up, however you want to refers to it, it is on the north side of center line. So what it would do is flip it to the south side of center line. Not significantly I'm just saying it would be closer, but on the other side of the building you also see I have two more rectangular adjoining rooms. What I did do is move the building as far north as I could still get the driveway and still get the fire lane in the way away from the residents that's working with staff that's working with my engineers working with professional car wash developers to think about all these items you guys are bringing up so we pushed it as far north as we could. So, which is the longer room at the top of the building that equipment room houses my hydraulic pumps my water pumps my soaps my chemicals all of that stuff. There is noise associated with that, not significant, but when we're flipping that closer to the south side to me it's a, I'm trying to think of the right terminology to use but it's a, it's an equal flip that the noise we're saving by putting this equipment on this side is the same as the noise we're moving from the other side to this side. So, that didn't make any sense to me either. However, so let me let me and I hate to take so much detail because I watched the meeting. Sure. So I'm familiar with some of the other issues but I'm trying to understand if I conceptually flip this right now the cars if I'm correct, the yellow building is where the cars go through is that correct that is correct. All right. So if this flips. Then, yes, it may move, it's going to put that building those those that room housing your hydraulics your pumps and so forth. It's going to put it a little closer to it looks like a lot 12. I mean it's going to obviously correct, but the drive through of the vehicles is going to be on the. I don't know what direction is that south or was it yeah this year you could go north southeast west just like a straight up and down compass right here. Yes. Okay, but if you flip then, then the vacuum stalls, the drive through lane of the actual washing Bay. If you flip it. That's going to be further away from these houses that I'm seeing as lot 12 must be an 11 somewhere maybe not 10 98765 yes, and for the most part it moves. Most of that sound, albeit, whatever the decibel is correct away from that long stretch of residences. So, I don't, because if it's insulated the same as the vacuum motor housing, then what I'm hearing you say is, it's going to be virtually quiet anyway. Absolutely. Okay. Just to give you a little bit of trying to get my words are escaping me to give you a little bit of perception here. We want to talk how far away is this, this happens to be a large lot. Those parking spots are already 100 feet away from those adjacent rent, those adjacent residents. So we have 100 feet barrier there as is without flipping it . What we have. What parking spots you talking about all of the vacuum spots. The property line we've got approximately 100 feet away from the property line. This is taken smack dab in the middle of where the building will be on this property. So basically I did a panoramic forward to 2499 right here, and then this is a panoramic to the west. Facing the residents, the adjacent lot 12 we're talking about is behind this tree. This tree line is the line to the south. So, you know, that's another point there. But either way, we're building on a lot that averages 500 foot in depth. I'm building 120 foot building. So I don't even do some quick math there. 500 subtract 100, 400, 200 feet on each end. I've got 200 feet on each wind to my property lines front and rear. All right. Our lots 250 feet wide. We've got a 30 foot wide building. So we're building the building in the middle of this property on purpose, right. To mitigate as much of these concerns as we can. One of the other terms that we've continually talked about is the term tower. Right. And of course I put my fingers up there, but I think the term tower has been used, maybe incorrectly. Yes, it is the tallest portion of our building. But I know when I think about a tower, I think about skyscrapers downtown. Right. That's a tower to me. I have a 30 foot elevation to my building. One may call it a tower, but a 30 foot elevation is lower than any standard two story house. When I drive these neighborhoods, I counted, I kept hashtags. I've got the sticky notes in my truck. Over 60 percent of the houses in these neighborhoods are two story homes. All right. I measured my personal home. I live in suburbia. If I can find it, I measured my personal home. It's 31 foot , four inches. That's how high my house is. All right. We have 24 foot streets. So 24 foot away from every one of these homes is a home over 30 foot high. My 30 foot tower is shorter than the trees in the previous picture that I sent you. All right. It is not inconsistent with the neighborhood. It matches the neighborhood. My home, I think maybe Council Member Ryan brought it up. He brought about his two story home, I think, in the last meeting. But my home sits on a six foot retaining wall. My back door neighbor has a 38 foot view of my house. All right. Our neighborhoods ebb and flow. I have a few more pictures here that I'd share with you to get some of the perspective on the property. I do have just a question. Sure. So help me understand on my comment about the dumpster, and I would consider the dumpster part of the inverting of the site plan. Sure. I couldn't I didn't really get a clear indication of whether you would be willing to do that or not. And that's where I am opposed, but absolutely willing. Okay . Is that clear enough? And I can clarify that. I don't want to, but I absolutely will. Sure. So on the on the highest point of the elevation on your building, I did not see that necessarily in the presentation. Is that a 30 foot elevation that a 20 foot span across? Is it a the pitch of a roof? Is it just the point of a roof or what? Okay. Which is from Haley's presentation is the elevations I provided. It is. This doesn't have it on there. Yeah, I'm gonna have to work off of memory here. It is 30 foot from the foundation to the top of the tower to the top of the very roof Eve. It is 30 feet. Which which one is that in this picture where it says modern wash? Is that the one in the background? This one. Yes. This will be towards the front of the building that I'm pointing to right now will face 24.99. That's the front? Yes. And so this is the back. And that elevation is what at the top looks like about 25 or something? Approximately. Sure. Okay. All right. So then my question again, sorry, council members. I appreciate your indulgence. I'm just trying to get some some data. So when I look at this from a construction perspective, I see that there's a let me pull it up on the screen so I can see if I can see it. I see the the black sort of horizontal line that let's go to the top of the 30 foot structure. I see it says fiber cement panel. Yes. And then it says wave panel and it points to the black thing going across. The black thing. They're actually gray in the other picture. But those are just decorative panels. Okay. But I'm but is how much of that is the functionality as far as space storage space that you're using? In other words, is that little not is that white sort of rectangular part of that? I'm looking at the schematic. I'm not looking at the picture anymore. Go up. Go up some right there. That little area there. Is that just a cosmetic or or is that square footage space that is usable square footage space in that from the top of that little black and gray vertical or horizontal? What's hidden there is the pitched roof. So it's for water runoff. So I use approximately 25 feet. There is a two story mezzanine inside of there. So I do have all my pumping and water and chemicals in the first story. But on the second story, I use I house my water tanks, my air compressors, things like that. First story, I need approximately 10 feet of height so that when I run my pipes and my waters out to the car wash, I can come in over the top of the cars. Right. So I need 10 feet there. You've got about a foot of floor joist 13 14 inches with underlayment and flooring. Well, I'm just really talking about the parts that's in question. Inside that tower, I have 11 foot tall water tanks. So I'm using that whole tower. So it is functional. So I would have to reuse it. My water tanks probably do go to the bottom of the area you're talking about. Okay, but starting on the front of the building, my roof actually comes down to the to the 30 foot mark, it tapers down to the back. And you can actually see the slot in the back of this tower where the water runs out. So then the square around it is more cosmetic to hide to give it more of a architecturally architectural presentation. Sure. Instead of just having the one way slanted roof. Instead of a one way slanted roof, that would still be 30 feet in the front. Yes. Correct. Okay. Thank you council members for your patience. I know that council member Br iggs, I believe, has been patiently waiting for her comment or question. So just a quick comment. The car wash on university. Actually, you turn in and you go right. So I have the car washes I've used have been oriented differently than what you're speaking of. Correct. So just no point there. So I would like to as we're talking about the tower, give you an opportunity to say what you were going to say the last time you were here when you were sitting in the audience and you and you yelled out something that you know that. And so I would like to hear from you on on that now if possible. The answer is a lot of duplicity a lot like I gave the mayor, but it's, it's a matter of what I like to stay with this site plan would I would like to stay with the shape of the building. Absolutely. Will I also work with you 100% Absolutely. From a functional standpoint, I use a minimum of 25 feet. So where I was going with that point was, you know, could we work with city staff and the engineering to figure out, can I lowered a couple feet I think the previous conversation I had with Mr. Melter on, you know, in that meeting was that, you know, do we redesign, or do we leave as is, and I guess I felt like at the end when I made that statement was , I didn't feel like I made the statement that I'm still willing to work with to minimize what we can. And, and, and that's where I'm saying now with my 10 feet to get to the cars my floor my 11 foot tanks and my pitched roof so water doesn't leak in. You know, it really comes back to my original comment with the council member that you know we have a couple feet to work with. Yeah, that's that's where we're at. Okay, and the last time you hear I asked you about the neon lighting. That's in your, your current location. Yes, and I don't recall or you didn't mention it I just want to clarify that is not going to be used inside this that is correct. Okay, that is really bright. Okay, so I appreciate that. Thank you. Absolutely. Any other questions and there may be some that crop up. After we continue the public hearing which, you know, counsel's consensus we may ask you back to answer questions . Any. How much, because I know the applicant gets more time outside of the question and answer so does he seven minutes to address, whatever you'd like to or use your time as you see fit. I'm going to buzz through a few items I did bring a few more pictures here, you know, Google Maps is a wonderful thing. I've got seven examples right around here of additional car washes that back up to subdivisions right homes close and you look at all seven pictures they are closer to these homes than my 500 foot property. So, I truly believe if we all get along if we all talk if we all, we can coexist, and it's proven again and again I 've got quick car wash in Lantana, and I've got blue wave right right on University 380 they're not too far out of Denton actually. I've got a couple more here star car washes in Carrollton. I mean it's it's got adjacent residents on two sides, and then actually the wash factory at the crossroads has clearly a new homes being built right behind it as well, closer than any of the homes around this proposed proposal. This is I shine in the colony. Same exact thing we've got a rose of homes. I've got a car wash. Texas Star Express is on Western Center Boulevard in Fort Worth, and then even the express car wash up on old skate school road here is literally 20 feet from those residents as well. This is one of the photos I was going to share, just because getting information helps us make the decision that there are multiple facts of both sides. This is looking across 2499 based on some of these are two story houses but as you know a lot of our houses are only back there are two stories in the front, as you can see that there is an and maybe you can't see it there is only one home across the street that can actually see this property, and a little bit further in the presentation I actually have a picture. Quiet please. So last meeting I of course drove by the property I'm like why didn't I think about this. This is. This has five high tension power line crossings on this property and we have two communication towers that are over 200 feet tall. I would have liked to been in the meeting when you guys propose these 200 foot tall and approve 200 foot tall communication towers, I bet you, we had some lively conversation there right, you can actually see this is my public notice sign on my property this is the same tree row I showed you earlier directly across the street. The same photo I just showed you there is a 213 foot communication tower right there not to mention additional towers. So, they have to look past this to see my tower that is lower than their homes and lower than the trees on the subject property. This is the back of the property. As you can see there are additional. So not only will they will my tower not cover up these 200 foot towers they are still also going to see the towers on this property. So, I'm going to be moving down 2499 from my property. Speaking of that. Another thing that was brought up today was this is residential. It is 20 years ago it was planned commercial between 2181 and 2499 in Corinth and Robinson Road in Denton. There's over 100 acres of commercial property available up and down 2499. This is from Pine Hills Boulevard this road right here where I'm standing to Robinson which is four tenths of a mile in Denton. There are over 15 acres of commercial property for sale. This is a business district. It was deemed a business district, a long time ago. I'm just bringing up a lot of additional facts here. I walked one block away from my existing property. I found five dumpsters right against residential. Not to mention the top left one here is in this PD. To add facts to the dumpster I called the solid waste department. That's where my head is at. I'm looking at alternative solutions. I just don't want to argue against every idea because every idea is justified with a concern. Solid waste starts at 7 a.m. as an FYI. It starts at 7 a.m. That's when the trucks leave the depot wherever they house the trucks. I don't know what we call that. Whether it's residential or commercial they leave at 7 a.m. They're not going to get to their first pickup at 7 a.m. Residents get a big truck in front of their truck once a week. I would get a truck once a week. I have one dumpster, one truck, one dump once a week. Residents have up to seven trucks in front of their house depending on standard waste, recycling, yard trimmings, oversized items. They can have seven trucks every week in front of their house right now. I will have one. I really asked my alternative solution is what about timing ? They said absolutely. You can request afternoon pickup. You can put in a specific day of the week. We can match the residents. We can do what we need as an alternative solution to moving the dumpster on the other side of the property. Council Member Arbiter. So, several questions. Sure. Could you remind us, is there a shortage of car washes in the area or are there my sense is that there are other car washes. Absolutely there is a, you know, the car wash industry, you know, two miles apart is the standard. I'm the only car wash on Teasley for a five mile radius. It's actually five miles up here to the loop and it's actually about six and a half miles down to Swisher in Hickory Creek where the other car wash is. So, from a car wash shortage, absolutely there are more residents, more cars than any car washes in this area can handle. Yeah, I mean, my sense just kind of anecdotally from driving through that area a lot is that it certainly feels closer together. I haven't measured it, but really so that's the standard like five miles. So, people need a car wash every five miles. Is that good? No, it's more like two. Two. What I'm saying is there are no other car washes in five miles right now. The industry standard is two. Is two. Wow. So, car wash every two miles. Yes, absolutely. And even compared to the existing car wash , as the crow flies, it is about a mile, but it is over two miles the way you have to go down to Hickory Creek Boulevard or back up to Robinson Road. They are a significant distance and I'm sure as you went through Teasley and 2499 approvals, there are different people that drive on different roads. So, one car wash serves the Teasley traffic. This car wash would serve the 2499 traffic. And can you go back to those pictures because you showed some other neighborhoods that live much closer to car washes and are backed up. And did you want to see anyone in specific? No, just that's fine. Those are the ones I had in mind actually. I just point out, just making a couple observations, see how you respond to it. My impression looking at these two neighborhoods is this is a very different kind of area, very different kind of residential development. But that said, I'm wondering if, do you hear from the residents who live here that they appreciate living so close to this kind of development? Do they consider their neighborhood a residential area or do they consider it a commercial area? My sense is that where there are residents, people living in houses, they consider it a residential area no matter what it's zoned for. And so clearly, I mean, this is everything's all about the houses neat in a row and then all the commercial in a neat row behind it. I was just wondering your thoughts on, or if you wanted to share anything about the relationship between the residents and your business and the differences between these kinds of neighborhoods and the one that we're talking about today. There's a lot of thoughts on that, right? And without directly talking to those residents, which I have not, we don't have that exact answer. However, when you look at most of these properties, what you see here, with the quick car wash on the left, you've got a strip mall, you've got some dry cleaners, you've got a car wash, you've got oil change place, you've got a Sonic, that's exactly what's going to be developed up and down 2499 in addition to my car wash. I'm the first one in because the road is new. So this is, I guess, and I don't know what that means, but once this area of 29 is fully developed 20 years from now, it's going to look identical to this picture on the left. I'm only using two of the 15 acres for sale, right? There's hundreds of acres for their self. Yeah. Yeah. And so I think, and I totally understand that perspective. I mean, me, I mean, as you know, I had voted against this before, no disrespect to your business and I like the green friendliness of the business, but when I hear the residents say that they don't want their neighborhood to look like this, then for as long as I'm up here on council, I will vote to prevent their neighborhood from becoming like that instead of just taking it for granted. So I'm mentioning that just so you understand, I know that change happens, growth happens, right? Absolutely. And I don't know, including myself, whether it 's a car wash or not, I don't think I'd want any business on my back fence. Right? So that is, unfortunately, that is, like you said, when development happens, we have to work together and coexist. Yeah. And so I'm just thinking representing the residents. That's my perspective. Absolutely. So I'm listening carefully to them. And that's where we are. I mean, you look at these and they 're 50 feet from these residents. We're 200 feet from these residents. So we're quadrupling the distance here at our property, which to some point should help alleviate those concerns. To what level? Everyone's a little bit different, right? Now, for me, I look to the residents to see, I mean, I don 't think they feel that alleviates their concerns. But I do, I listen to them and they tell me . One more, if I may. In the first planning meeting, you had said that the property was on the highest point of the land, talking about the elevation. Okay. And I may have, I'm just going to look for a picture. Yeah, it was. And I can add some specifics to some of the conversation earlier too of what I know. Okay, thanks. So as I understand it from just kind of talking to people in the community, that there was a sense that you had said that it was elevated by 12 feet and then had said you were willing to make changes then. And then I'm hearing that came back the next meeting and then we're not willing to do that. So what would be your argument as to why the residents should, and council, we council, should be reass ured that you will stick to whatever agreements are made now. Absolutely. And I'm reading it, so sorry, I know I'm reading a concern from a resident. It's my job to represent the residents. I think he can handle that kind of question. So thanks. I have two photos here that help. What I do know in general , right? I mean, neighborhoods, ebb and flow streets, dirt goes up and down. We can level it all, right? So we're all in the same playing field or we work with the natural beauty of the land, which has been typical. Just like I said with my personal home, there's a six foot retaining wall behind my backyard, but my neighbor has to look up because elev ations change. What I do know from a factual height measurement is in general, this land that we're looking at that I'm proposing my business on is six feet above the surface of 2499. I believe the resident referenced 12 feet from their home and I can't tell you whether their home is lower than 2499. I know the dirt on my property is six feet higher than 2499. I also know in my civil, my grading plans because the dirt is tipped, when we grade it, when we level it out so we can pour a foundation, we will be lowering it three feet. So our building surface will be three foot above 2499, which is also three feet below its current condition. And here gives you a little bit of different view of you can see how it eb bs and flows a little bit of me standing on this property. Council Member Hussbuth, I know that you have a request to speak and certainly want to acknowledge that, but we've been going for about an hour and a half. So let's take about a five minute break just so that ... Is that okay? Yeah. And then we'll come back and the applicant will finish up with questions and you'll be the first one after we come back from the break. Yeah. So let's take a five minute break then we'll come back and ... All right. Welcome everybody back to this meeting of the Dent City Council on September the 18th, 2018. We are taking up public hearing agenda item 7A out of order. So once we get through with this agenda item, we'll go back to our regularly scheduled process through our agenda. Council Member Hussb uth, I think you were on deck and so, yes. Yeah. Just a launching point for others that would come before us. Staff crunched rough numbers based on a typography and the distance is six to eight feet based on the figures they found versus 12 and then whatever grading is going to happen. And for visual as we're looking at different pictures, it would equate to be even with the brick fence coming out of that residential district. So if you're looking eye level, that becomes the six foot fence, lower elevation, perceptually that would kind of be the ground and so that's the variable. Just for as the applicant wraps up his comments, I just wanted to stipulate that's what was communicated to me. Okay. Council Member Meltzer, question for comment for the applicant? Okay. First a comment, you can check me on this. A constituent during the break said actually on the elevation it says tower. We're calling it a tower. I think a tower exaggerates how tall it is. Absolutely. That aside, I may be the only one who's focused on this issue but if it comes up and if I have an opportunity to ask for an amendment because I think there's going to be a motion that won't be mine first, hearing the things you think you might be able to do but clearly don't want to do. Right. I hear that. I hear all of that. I want to open my business. If I were to offer an amendment at 25 feet as the height, is that a makeable number that you would not want to do but could plausibly do? For me 25 is pushing the limit. I'd have to go back to engineering drawings to commit to 25 . I understand. I could get close. If it comes up, if I feel the support, I'll see if there's a way to put wiggle room around it. Yeah. I appreciate your help. Thank you. Okay. No further questions at this moment. We might have some additional questions for you as we move along but I wanted to give the rest of the public an opportunity to speak because I think probably the time is how much? One minute? 22 seconds. One minute and 22 seconds. You got one minute and 22 seconds. For me to speak? Yes. All right. To wrap it up. Yes, sir. I just want to give you quickly as much perspective as I can. I think there might be a dual dichot omy here. One of the things I really see is visibility of this business from the road or from the residence and from the road because it's on the outside of a curve. You can see it coming both directions. Because it is six foot higher than the current road height, you can see it significantly well. If you look here , this is the wall I believe Gerard was talking about here and I believe Text-dot makes these eight foot tall. Don't quote me on that again. That's eight foot tall wall. You can see the homes are lower than that wall. They're looking up at an eight foot wall. They'd be looking up over that wall to this property if they were to see said tower. To give you a couple other pieces of perspective there, this is the adjacent property. This is the adjacent property. Again, probably an eight foot wall, but you can see their roof lines. That's a two story roof line right there. This one story roof line is virtually non-existent. What Text-dot did do for these adjacent people, they built them a brand new beautiful wood six foot tall fence. They have a six foot tall fence on top of a five to six foot retaining wall as my adjacent property. On that front, they're looking up across that fence to the trees, which are 50 foot oak and elm trees. We 're proposing our screening fence on the other side of the trees. Just to give you perspective. That was your time. I appreciate it. Fair enough. Thank you very much. Appreciate that. Okay. Those were all the blue cards we had for, that had signed up to speak. So, this is a public hearing. Anybody wishing to speak, please come down and state your name and address and your time will begin. Good evening, gentlemen and ladies. My name is Michael Otis . I live at 6700 Hailing Way in Denton in the Oakmont West edition. My street is one of the ones that is being shown. It's right there behind 2499. It runs parallel to 2499 and runs into Pine Hills. It's not necessary. Okay. I just was trying to get a visual aspect. Are you across the street on 2499? I am across the street. Yes, sir. Okay. Yes. In the Oakmont West edition. I don't have a lot that I can add to what the people who've spoken before me have with their concerns. I would just like to echo, I have those same concerns. But my biggest concern and my wife's biggest concern is safety and traffic because traffic and safety is a big issue on 2499, especially where it intersects with Pine Hills. If you're coming off Pine Hills and turning either left or right, you have a very, it's not a totally blind turn, but it is a very difficult visual turn, especially early in the morning, late in the evening. People that are driving faster than they should be, people that maybe early in the morning, late in the evening especially don't use their headlights. Visually, it's hard to see to turn either left or right. On Robinson, where you can make a turn onto, let's say you 're coming from the west on Robinson toward Pine Hill, toward, I'm sorry, 2499 and you're making a right turn onto 2499. There's a vision problem there as well, almost to the point where I think at some point there's going to be a no right on red restriction put there at some point, but that's for another day and time. My point being is that even with conditions the way they are right now, that's a dangerous traffic situation. Then add to that down the road to the south where you turn to go to, on Hickory Creek to go to Kroger and all that. One lane has had to be blocked off because people turning from Hickory Creek, either right or left, onto 2499 have a vision problem because it is, because the way the wall is, the shape of the street. There's some very dangerous turns. Traffic at certain times gets very high and then people get impatient. It's a very dangerous situation. Now with the proposal of this car wash coming in, my big issues are not necessarily the height of the tower or the whatever you want to call it. I don't care if it's a tower. You can call it Bobby. I don't really care. That's not the issue for me. I understand why it is an issue for people, but my issue is the safety. Now we're going to add, by necessity, add another turn in what's already a high traffic area where there's not even that much development other than residential. That's my biggest concern. Along with the security issues and the other safety issues that have been brought up and which I'm sure people that are going to come after me that are much better informed and have done much more research, I'm just going on the eye test right now and what I see. We're here to talk about 500 feet and 300 feet and 50 feet and 30 feet. I'll tell you what 500 feet is. It sounds like a lot. That's a par three. For those of you that play golf, you'll understand what I'm talking about. I can reach that with a five iron and I'm 65. That's not that much. The noise from that is still going to be heard. We hear it now. Thank you for your time and I'll let someone else come right up after me. >> Any questions for the speaker? Seeing none, thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak, please come down, state your name and address and your time will begin. Anybody else wishing to speak on this item during this public hearing? One more call. We'll now close the public hearing. Council member Briggs. >> I have a couple of questions for staff. >> Can you put it back to the image where there's the homes and you can see the commercial lot, the first image where it's highlighted. >> From the applicant's presentation or from this one? >> We've heard this is going to be a commercial zone, a commercial area. The intention is that for commercial to be all up and down this road. When I look at the image, I see homes really right there. I see a ton of residential and only a little space for commercial. Can you give me a better idea what it's like further down just a little bit to the left and to the right? Is there just a lot of acres of open space for commercial near here? >> Certainly. Just in this immediate area, what we can see on this image, of course the northern portion of this property is also designated commercial. There is a triangular parcel across the street that was rezoned, I want to say last year, to neighborhood residential mixed use and then restricted down, I believe, for offices and lower intensity commercial uses. Let me see. I guess this takes us just a little bit further out. You can see further south there is a large vacant track that's NRMU 12 which would permit commercial uses. This is Hickory Creek in 2499. I don't have a zoning map that extends that much further at hand, but there is a handful of commercial vacant properties in this area. >> This gives me a pretty much idea of how many homes are in the area. You said that the recent zoning was zoned down and protected for office use? >> Yes. It's NRMU with an overlay. I remember offices being permitted. I can't recall what else was strictly cut out of that, but there is an overlay on that property. >> Thank you. That's all I had. >> Any more questions or comments? >> I have a few more comments, but I didn't know if anyone else, if this is time to open up for discussion or if we're moving on. >> I'm going to recognize the movement and then we can obviously have more discussion as we move forward. Council Member Armitage. >> I move to approve the motion. I move to reconsider. I move to support. How would I put it? >> If you're wanting to make a motion to approve it would be simply a move to approve. If that's the motion that you're making. >> We've gone through the motion for reconsideration. This is as if this item is happening all over again. You can move to deny, you can move to postpone, you can move to approve. The motion to reconsider has already been decided. >> The motion to approve would be to approve the development. >> Right. I wanted to make sure. You want to withdraw? Okay . Got you. Thank you. >> All right. Council Member Husband, did you hit your request to speak? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. It did show up. I just wanted to make sure. Go ahead. >> Real quick. I want to thank the applicant for his presentation. I want to thank the citizens for their presentation. As I said before, sensitive to those concerns. I want to try to address those as best I can briefly. On my own research, I don't know how many people noticed or took note of the news. I use Frisco, Texas as a landmark just because it was noted one of the top cities in the state, number one , by Money Magazine today. At 3184 Hampshire Court, Frisco, Texas, 75034 stands a half a million dollar home in a gated community. Across the street from that half a million dollar home in that gated community is a legacy car wash. I struggle to support that argument that it's going to lower property values here in Denton. In the most high demand city in the state right now, it does not do the same. Then I absolutely quote my peers when they say, we should stand by what we say. To that, I apologize to the applicant that you're back here after we approved your project. I think that sends the wrong message for this council. I think we absolutely should stand by what we say. If we're not sure, we should say we 're not sure. But with no significant factors changing, we're back here. With that, I'm going to ... I'm trying to see if there's any other notes. I think the presentation was spot on. I think there's instances of what's happened. I think in the previous meeting, it's pointed out that we have a fire station that backs up to a neighborhood. We have a library that backs up to a neighborhood. We do this as a city all the time. Then the tower's coming to play and there's a gas well not too far from there. With that, I'm going to make my motion to approve this project with the four following requirements. I'm going to carve out one . I'm going to modify one. I'm going to carve out another one. Here we go. My recommendation is approval with the stipulation that there'll be no exterior lighting towards the neighborhood. I think that's how it's worded. That the sign requirements be met. I'm going to modify it to say that the retention wall be six feet. I'm going to say that the centralized vacuums and motor shall be a component of design. I'll stand at the ready for a friendly amendment to get me to four. If that on its face works, then that would be my ask because we've delayed this project for three weeks with no substantive differences or reason to do so. If we would have said no three weeks ago, then we said no. We said yes and then called it back with no substantial difference in the conversation. All conversations were the same between now and then, but here we are two hours later delaying the entire meeting to do this all over again. That's where I stand. Thank you. >> Councilmember Riggs, let me just clarify his motion so I can have an understanding of it. If you could, I think you said you had four conditions, is that right? What I have is one condition is no exterior lighting pursuant to the original recommended conditions. The second one is sign requirement pursuant to the original recommended conditions. The original recommended condition was eight foot buffer fence and you're saying your motion is six foot. And then the fourth one was the central component of the vac system to be in a room and sound insulated and those kind of things. Are those the four? >> That is correct, sir. >> Okay. All right. Let me go ahead and recognize the second and then I'll recognize. Councilmember Duff? >> I second. >> Okay. Councilmember Briggs? >> So the hours of operation were left off of the motion just for clarification there. So it has been addressed and mentioned that this is a waste of time, but for me, asking for this reconsideration and I'm thankful that council went ahead and approved that. During that meeting, there were a lot of unshores, there were a lot of people saying you have to do this, this is a legal requirement, it's already been approved and, you know, the use has but there were a lot of things that council can do and could have done, but it wasn't explained to us as well that night as it should have been. And going back and looking at the actual code of the PD prior to 2002, it gives council several options and the reason the PD was created was to encourage flexible and creative planning to ensure the compatibility of land uses. And so I can just go through and I have this whole code highlighted which goes over and over again the compatible arrangement of buildings and land uses, sufficient to demonstrate the relationship and compatibility of the district to the surrounding properties and uses and facilities. So after going through all of this , I realized that we didn't have all the information, the original code when this PD was in place and so I don't think that the way that it is is compatible with the area and so that's where I am right now. And I think it's within all realm and allowed as a city council to make that distinction given our authority. It also says in section 35, 155, conditions imposed, city council may impose conditions concerning the location, use, arrangement, construction or development of the district in order to ensure the appropriate use of the district and to protect the surrounding properties. It is within our right as a council to do this and for us to be told that we are doing something illegal and we cannot do that as in the first meeting was a concern and so that's just where I am in this process. All right, a couple of comments I have unless anybody else has a request to speak. Councilmember Ryan. Thank you Mayor. Would the motioner accept a friendly amendment to work with staff on relocating the dumpsters to the other side of the property? Yes. That's it. Anybody else wishing to speak? Councilmember Meltzer. We'll see how this fares. I offer an amendment, I don't assume it to be accepted on a friendly basis, but an amendment to restrict the height of the tallest elevation to 25 feet with some discretion for technical do-ability under oversight from staff. That was a request for a friendly amendment? Well, I didn't assume it would be friendly but it's an amendment. I offer the amendment so it needs to be seconded if it's going to go forward and to be voted on. So we have an amendment because it is not a friendly amendment then it has to have a second and then the amendment is voted on separately and then the motion general motion is carried. Is that correct? That is correct. Councilmember Briggs. Can he repeat that please? I'm not sure if I can. I'll do my best. The amendment is that the maximum height would be at 25 feet with some flexibility for just sheer technical do-ability to be overseen by staff. In other words, if it turns out it needs to be 25 feet and six inches, I don't think it should need to come back to council for that because the applicant stated 25 feet is kind of at the edge and wasn't able to respond with perfect certainty that it was doable so I'm trying to allow for a little wiggle room. Councilmember Briggs, was that the extent of your comment or question? Yes, I just wanted to clarify what he was asking. So it would be with the other conditions that were imposed with the first amendment or just that one only? No, no, no. I'm adding. I didn't take anything away. I added an amendment. I didn't take anything away from what's already been accepted. I'm sorry. I thought it was a brand new motion. We have a motion, a main motion on the table with the four conditions stated now with a friendly amendment. What was your amendment again, Council member Ryan? The dumpsters. The friendly amendment, does that have to be seconded? It does not because it's friendly and it's already the motioner has accepted the movement and it's been seconded by the seconder. So that's an amendment to the main motion. We have a next amendment is an unfriendly amendment which is only the 25 foot building height restriction with the associated language of some variance to accommodate some small construction technical situation. But as a point of order to clarify, it doesn't take anything else away that's already in the amendment. In other words, the friendly amendment already accepted, you know, what I said doesn't affect any of the other items nor does it prevent anyone else from offering other amendments. No, no. It stands only on its own. It's amendment all by itself. So let's say it passes, then it gets added to the motion. If it fails, then it fails. Yeah. So Councilmember Armitter. So I just want to say kind of why I don't want to support that amendment, but I appreciate the spirit and also and I appreciate the spirit of the suggestions about moving the dumpster and other changes. As I said before, I'm listening to what the residents are saying and if it had come from residents, if residents had said, you know, if they only move the dumpster here, then it would suddenly be compatible with our neighborhood. If this, you know, wall or tower was, you know, two inches lower, you know, then it would be suddenly be compatible. I'm not hearing that and that's why I'm that's why for me I 'm not going to support that motion because I don't hear it coming from the people. But again, that said, I appreciate these efforts to try to make it better. But. Okay. Councilmember Briggs. So by by leaving the hours of operation off any of the conditions from seven to nine, does that mean that it would go back to the twenty four hour operation? Okay. Right now. And that's a good question. But let's toll that question. Right now we have a we have a motion on the floor that is only considering the height amendment as proposed by Councilmember Meltzer. So he's made a motion. I have not heard a second. So unless I hear a second, that motion will die for a lack of second. I just want to I want to keep everything in an orderly process. So calling one more time for a second. Oh, Councilmember D uff, are you going to second that? Okay. Well, I'm going to call it. You're listed under here is the second. So. Okay. All right. So last call for a second to the motion of amendment for the height restriction that's currently on the table. Okay. Seeing none, that motion dies for lack of a second. Okay. Councilmember Briggs, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Right. Well, any any other thoughts that I had or seconds to motions is definitely dependent upon the hours of operation which were put in there. And so my question was that since the seven to nine condition was not on there, does that mean it automatically goes back to the 24 hours time use, which means that it would be constantly used all through the night? That's that's my question. If that's not on there as a condition. So let me ask legal that question. I mean, the motion did not include that time restriction of operation of hours. So that's the motion that's on the table. And if that motion gets approved as it stands right now, that means there would be no restriction of hours of operation. Is that correct? It wouldn't be included in the motion that passes. Assuming it passes, I would have to defer to the planners to see if that is is there any other DDC regulation that would limit the hours of operation beyond what was proposed as one of the things you're saying is something according to our regulatory code that might restrict those hours of operation without that. Okay. Fair enough. There's nothing in the code that I'm aware of that would restrict the hours of operation. Just to clarify the seven to nine is what the applicant indicated at PNZ were his anticipated hours of operation. You could certainly clarify with him, but it was my understanding that he didn't necessarily intend this to be a 24 hour facility like his other car wash. I don't certainly encourage him to to clarify that if that's not the case. Does that answer your question? Councilmember Bruce. Okay. Everybody spoken except me. Yes, Councilmember Melton. I'm going to illustrate the parliamentary point that you can amend, you can offer an amendment and it doesn't bind you one way or the other on the vote on the final motion. So, but it may have an effect on the outcome. So I move that we restore the hours of operation condition to the seven a.m. to nine p.m. Okay. We have a motion, an amendment. Well, first let me ask, is that would that amendment be acceptable to either the movement or the seconder? No. And I said, and I want to be very clear when when we had the work session to you can go back and watch it. When I said we were going to have to come back for no new information, I made it very clear that that is punitive. I amended the time on purpose because that was asked of me at our original meeting. That was then recalled. We had a meeting on that recall and I said I offered that in goodwill. You recall that and I'm stripping it out this time because last time it didn't work. And so that's why that's not in there. It's on purpose. I said it two weeks ago. It's not new. And so you can go back and look at the meeting where this was unfortunately recalled and you can see me say the same thing. I said I was going to bring the fence down to six because I think the 50-foot tree suffice and I was going to remove the time because the owner has said he's not going to have a 24-hour shop. That's not an option. That's never been on the table. So no. Okay. So we have a motion. It's been rejected as a friendly amendment. So we have a motion to amend the operating hours to restore them back to the original position of 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. We have a motion. Do I hear a second? I have a question. Yes. So if a council member makes a second, do we vote on the -- I mean, do we vote on it all as one with that amendment included? No. At this point, since the mover would not accept it as a friendly amendment, if there is a motion and if it's seconded, then you're voting just to determine whether or not the hours of operation restriction should be added as an additional condition to the main motion, which is still pending. Okay. And then the main motion would be voted on. Okay. So I -- With all the amendments attached to it and everything. Exactly. So I didn't understand that previously as well with the amendment of the height. So I will second that. Okay. All right. We have a motion and a second to restore the hours to 9 to 7. So I think it's time for me to speak because I don't want to get into a procedural quagmire here. I'm going to either at this time or whether it's denied -- I guess I can't make a motion for an amendment, but I'll say what I want and if somebody wants to put that forward, then they can do that. So this is what I'd like to see on this project. I would like to see the hours extended -- I mean the hours restored back from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. because I understand this is going to be a staffed car wash. In other words, it's not going to be unmanned or unstaffed as the other one is. It's going to be manned, which I think will provide some additional safeguards to litter and strange folks roaming around. So I think that would be helpful. So that. I would like to see the site plan inverted because I think that would -- although I mean we can look at these propositions as either all or nothing, and we have done that from time to time. I don't think this is one that really for me lends itself to an all or nothing situation. I think there's some things we can do to help the circumstances, even though it won't be the perfect set of circumstances for the residents. But I would like to see that the site plan is inverted to where the vacuum and the dumpsters are on the other side, and understanding that it puts one of the mechanical rooms closer, but it's a very small linear footage of -- I say it puts it closer, it puts it about the same level as the others. But it doesn't extend the whole length of the property or along that boundary with the residents as the vacuum pumps do. So I think that can be done. It is a little bit more hassle, maybe a little bit more time. Because of flipping that for me, I'm okay with the six foot fence because that's one of the issues with the fence is the sound. And so by inverting it, I think it takes the sound, a lot of that sound away, even that much further away from those residences. I'm okay with the condition of no exterior lighting, directly lighting the residents. And I'm going to have to rely upon our code to -- because it says it has to conform to the -- some illuminary plan. So if that's a special condition that our code's okay with lighting facing residential, then that will be modified according to the illuminary plan. Sign requirement, which was a recommendation from the Planning, Zoning Commission prior, I think is still in the original amendment -- or original motion, excuse me. And the moving and the sounding of the vacuum pumps to continue to be insulated, that's obviously going to be continued. But if you invert it, then it's on the other side as well. So those are my conditions. I don't care what amendments are attached to the motion. That's what it's going to take for me to support this. So I put that out there. I can vote for the seven to nine now. But if the other ones are not extended on there, then I'm not going to be able to support this motion. Because I think those are things that are reasonable in light of the cost to the applicant, but the benefit to the residents over the long term. Because we're still just in the site plan phase of this. So that's where we are. Council Member Meltzer. Point of information. Can I accept an amendment to my motion to amend in order to give -- in order to provide an opportunity for a vote on what the mayor has proposed? Can I make a recommendation? Vote on this? No, no. If you're in agreement with my conditions. Now, I know that you -- one of those conditions is not the tower. That's a final vote. If you're in agreement with those, you could either add those to your current motion on the table for the operating hours or withdraw it and make a new motion containing the provisions that I enumerated that are not currently in the main motion . Is that procedure? It can be done that way. I see a withdraw motion button here. So allow me to withdraw that and then move an amendment to restore the hours and, you know, I'm going to need a little help on the items that, you know, you want -- Sure. -- would like to hear considered. So to include inverting the plan. And some of the items you mentioned -- We're already in the main -- -- are actionable, right? The six votes there. Those are really the only two that I would add to the current main motion that's on the table. It's the inversion and the -- And the -- oh, yes, and the -- And the hours. And the hours. Because I agree with the six foot. I agree with the no exterior lighting. I agree with the sign requirements. And the vacuum motors being in a separate room with insulation, that's still part of the main motion and it's going to be on the other side of the property. So the actual part is the hours and the inversion of the plan. And I so move that amendment. Okay. Do we have a second for that particular motion? Council Member Briggs? I'll second that particular motion and we'll vote on that motion first to be added to the original motion. Yes. Correct? Okay. Got it. You can vote on this motion to approve it. And you can either vote to approve or deny the main motion with this amendment attached to it. Is that correct? This is a first for us. Yeah. Okay. All right. So before we take the vote, we've got a couple of people wishing to speak. So I guess I should say first, would that motion be acceptable as a friendly amendment to the main movement and to the second? Yes, if you'll let me grouse whenever that happens, wherever that fits. Well I guess so I'm going to check with the seconder. Is that amendment acceptable to the seconder? I want to grouse also. Okay. Do you want to grouse before you say it's acceptable as a friendly amendment or afterwards? Because if you're going to say before, I'm going to let you discuss it and then we still have another motion on the table and then you're going to have to state whether you will accept it as a -- because this is part of the discussion of the current motion on the table. So I'm going to go with Council Member Hutz, but I'm only using your terminology. Grouse away. Well thank you. And I'll be succinct. To those sitting here that we've kept for three hours, I apologize. This was done three weeks ago. To the applicant, I absolutely apologize. All you did was follow the rules and receive approval to go forward with your project, only to be called back, only to be delayed three weeks. So I happen to believe that business owners are humans and live in Denton and so they're not this -- it's not the building. There's humans behind those names. And so all I can do is apologize. Understanding the -- it's -- you left with a project as is. You got called back and now you leave with an inversion and more work to do. And I just wish that was not the case, but I'm limited here. So that's -- yeah. I just want -- I want you to know where I fall. It has nothing to do with the neighborhood. I absolutely agree. I get it. It's just I believe if we leave -- if we -- when you leave here and we say go start your project, absent some extenuating circumstances beyond the control of that night, then you should be free to conduct that project as given permission to. And the state sees it that way as well. That's why we have to re-notice. That 's why we have to do all this over again. And so the state gets it. I get it. But here we sit. So three hours later, we're at the same place and costing you more money and I apologize. >> Councilmember Duff. >> I tell you, I -- you know, I've listened to this and I looked at it flipping it and I think that is -- that's not necessary. There's so much distance between the homes and whichever way you flip it, I just don't think that's necessary. You're putting -- you're putting something back on the applicant that I don't think that he needs to have. Okay? Because I totally disagree with flipping it. If that's what it takes to pass it, okay. But I think -- I think it's wrong. >> All right. So now we'll pose the question to the movement of the original motion, Councilmember Husbeth. Would you like for this to be accepted as a friendly amendment or you could, you know, nod and it would just be attached and then we vote on that as it is? >> No. >> As I said, if the seconder follows, then sure, we can all reward bad behavior. >> Okay. All right. Okay. So seconder? >> I don't like it, but okay. >> So now I get to comment. I appreciate the spirit of the debate. I will disagree with my colleague, esteemed colleague, Councilmember Husbeth, that I don't feel that an apology is needed because this is the process. I mean, we have a process of a motion to reconsider. And that was duly noted. In fact, I think -- if I don't -- I can't recall exactly, but I think either the motion or the seconder or either both, I can't remember, might have even approved that motion to reconsider. So I find that interesting. But this is the process. And so we talk about predictability and that's what brings predictability to the process is to have the rules and to follow the rules and that provides an opportunity for further discussion. And that is something that everybody knows. That has been in our code for -- I can't even remember how long. We probably used it more in the last year than we've used it in the last ten years that I've been on Council. That's okay. That's the process. And if anybody knows me on this day, knows me well out in the public, that is my mantra. I trust the process. As painful, as agonizing, as disagreeable as it can be, I trust the process. I was not involved in this discussion during the first meeting. And so if this motion for reconsideration had failed, then it stands the way it is. So I get it. I get that there's some disagre ements. I don't think that they're bad feelings. They're just disagreements. And that's what I like about this body is that we can disagree. And we are not going to walk out here and hate each other because we've got to come back next week and make decisions all over again. So -- and I also understand that it's not a black and white thing. Yes, the residents asked for what they wanted. And I don't blame them. I would do the same thing. And anybody knows that in a discussion, in a negotiation, which, let's face it, folks , most of that's what these things are. You try to figure out where are the end points, where are the aspiration points, and where do you find common ground. And sometimes you can 't find common ground. And we have to make that decision. And so my philosophy is how can I find common ground and mitigate the harms at the least cost to the applicant. So the flipping issue, albeit that Councilmember Duff and Hutspeth may disagree with its approach, to me at this stage as someone who's in construction, yes, plans have been drawn, money has been spent. But I will tell you, the money spent to change that, to try to gain some goodwill, it may not create goodwill in the neighborhood, but to put forth that additional effort, that's a small price to pay for cooperation and to send a message of collaboration. Doesn't mean everybody's going to agree with it. Some of you could be sitting out there and having the same sentiment. And the great thing is I respect that. And I appreciate that. Fortunately or unfortunately, we're here to make these decisions and we listen and we do the best we can to try to find the best possible way to meet the interests of all parties, albeit very often they're competing interests. So that's my explanation, not that anybody wanted it or needed it, but I thought it was important to share that. Councilmember Armitage, and then we will, well, let me summarize it. So Councilmember Armitage, and then we'll move forward on the parliamentary vote. Thank you. I just make a final statement and kind of a please since, you know, you mentioned your philosophy on this and I understand that and respect. I agree with a lot of what was just said. But for me, my philosophy guiding these decisions is based on representative democracy. And I was just reading a bunch of definitions. A number of them are very good. Here's one. And it's fairly short, but I'd like for people to listen. Representative democracy is a form of democracy founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people. Here people allow representatives who form an independent ruling body to represent them in the various forms of democratic process and are not directly involved in any of the processes of legislation or lawmaking. To a very large extent, the whole concept of representation depends upon the ability of the people to make their wishes known to their representatives. Oh, okay. Any other comments? Councilmember Armitage? Councilmember Armitage, was that it? Yeah, I'm sorry. Okay. Okay. So I'm sorry, Council member Hussbam, you're going to have to refresh my memory, Councilmember Duff. So y'all have accepted this as a friendly amendment, is that correct? Okay. So that has been accepted as a friendly amendment, so no vote on that is required. So what will we be? Is that correct? That's correct. So the you have a main motion with three friendly amendments, actually two friendly amendments that impose three additional conditions , the hours of operation, the inversion of the site plan, and the dumpster being moved from the southwest and northwest side of the property. Which I think with the inversion of the site plan , that will take care of that automatically because that's yes. So I think what we've got from the motion was that friendly amendment was this is what I recall that is part of the main motion now. The main motion, the original conditions were no exterior lighting to be facing the residential properties. The signed requirements pursuant to the recommendations made by PNZ. Six foot fence. Part of the main motion was the vacuum compartment being in a separate room being insulated. That's going to happen, but that's also part of that inversion. So that condition stays, but it's just part of that inversion. And then the friendly amendment is the hours of operations moving to 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. and that the site plan will be inverted. What is meant by that is it will be flipped to where the vacuums and dumpsters and those kind of things are on the opposite adjacent property line. And staff understands the spirit of that. I mean, I don't think we have to necessarily define it. That's what I understand the main motion now. So Councilmember Meltzer, I see that you have asked to speak. Let me just first ask, is there any have I missed something on that? I'm asked to speak just to add clarification. Another way to say the same thing because people have been looking at this list on the video screen. So you're basically just taking out item three and inserting there, if you like, the flipping of the plan. Everything else stands. Yes, that's correct. Yep. Do you concur with that, Mr. City Manager? City Attorney, I'm sorry. More time? Yeah, do you concur with that? Yes, I do. All right. Okay, so we have a motion on the board, as stated. And if there's any confusion later on, we can go back and watch the video to get the specific clarity. We have a motion on the board and a second for agenda item 7A. So let's vote on the board, please. The motion carries four to three. All right. Well, now we 'll go back to our regular agenda process and schedule. We will cross 7A off the list. So I believe the next agenda item is the consent agenda. And we -- well, I'll let the motioner pull the items that were discussed to be pulled. So consent agenda. Chair would entertain comment or action on the consent agenda. Mayor Pro Tem Ryan. I move approval of the consent agenda pulling items C, Y, BB, and CC. All right. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda except for items C, Y, BB, and CC. Is that correct? Okay. All right. Do I have a second on that motion? Councilmember Briggs. I'll second. All right. So we have a motion for the consent agenda. Save those pulled items. Let's vote on the board. Agenda carries 6-0, I think is what it was. All right. So consent agenda carries agenda item 5. So we'll now go to the pulled agenda items, which are now items for individual consideration. Agenda item 5C, which is consider approval of a resolution approving the City of Denton Greensense incentive program manual and distributed general manual for FY 2018 and 19. Good evening, George Mor rill, general manager of DME. As I mentioned this afternoon, I'd be back tonight with an updated ordinance or updated resolution for the Greensense incentive program that clarifies for one of the points that was mentioned to us by a citizen to ensure that the program was applicable to multifamily and it was and that developers could take part in the reb ate program for solar and they can. So we've made some enhancements to that. You have at the dais an updated resolution and I'm asking for your approval of our 2019 program. Councilmember Briggs. I appreciate that. Adding in the clarification language just so if someone is looking at it, they realize that they can apply for that. And with those changes, I recommend or I make a motion to approve. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem Ryan. Second. We have a motion to second for agenda item 5C. Let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries 6-0. Ag enda item 5Y, which is that you're right, Y. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton establishing the rate for water and water service, providing for repeal or et cetera. I believe in work session, Councilmember Briggs, you pulled this, but you didn't necessarily require a presentation. You just wanted to be able to have a separate vote. Is that correct? Right, correct. All right. So we do have an agenda item 5Y that's up. Mayor Pro Tem Ryan. Move approval of item 5Y. All right. Do we have a second on agenda item 5Y? Which are the water rates? Councilmember Armitage. Councilmember Armitage, you. Yes, I second. Okay. All right. Let's vote on the board, please, for agenda item 5Y. Motion carries 5-1. Agenda item 5BB. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas, providing for the schedule of miscellaneous fees, deposit billings, and procedures for administrative services to city utility customers. I believe no request for presentation was made. This is just a separate agenda item. So chair would entertain a motion for agenda item 5BB. Mayor Pro Tem Ryan. Move approval of item 5BB. All right. Do we have a second for agenda item 5BB? It's simply the adoption of the ordinance of fees for the utility company. Councilmember D uff. I second. All right. We have a motion and a second. Please vote on the board for agenda item 5BB. Motion carries 4-2. The last item pulled from the consent agenda is agenda item 5CC. Consider approval of a resolution confirming the appointment of Frank Dixon by the city manager as police chief for the city of Denton Police Department and declaring an effective date. Councilmember Briggs. I motion to approve and welcome him aboard. Councilmember Armitter. I second and I'm really excited about him coming here. Great. All right. Let's vote on the board for agenda item 5 CC. Motion carries 6-0. Moving on to agenda item 6, items for individual consideration. Agenda item 6A. Consider approval of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton approving a negotiated settlement between the Atmos City Steering Committee and Atmos Energy Corp. Good evening. Members of the council, Mayor Mario Canazares, assistant city manager. In the interest of time, I'll quickly go over the slide deck here. But before you, you have a topic to cover tonight. It is consider adoption of a resolution of the City of Denton approving a negotiated settlement for rate increase as requested by Atmos Energy Corporation. To give you a little bit of background, the City of Denton is a member of the Atmos City Steering Committee. It's a committee comprised of 172 cities from around the state of Texas and involves coverage just over a million Atmos gas meters across the state of Texas. And within the City of Denton, there's approximately 1,000 gas meters. Again, to go a little bit more in the background, back in early April, the Atmos Energy submitted a rate increase of $42 million. But through the process of the coalition that the cities are involved, that the City of Denton is involved with, that rate was reduced and then negotiated and ultimately was settled at $24.9 million. And based on the recommendation of the Steering Committee's executive committee, they recommend that the cities that are part of this consortium adopt a $24.9 million system-wide increase by the end of September because the rate's going to affect October 1st. To give you an idea of just some history, the past rate increases that Atmos has requested and ultimately settled by the cities, you can see on the screen, back in 2015, $28 million and settled at 21.8. And they're here all the way through the current time, which is up for your consideration tonight. It started at $42 million and was negotiated at just under $25 million. And again, that's system-wide over those million plus customers. To give you a perspective, the monthly average increases of the various categories that have gas meters within the city and across the state. For residents, it would increase their average bill by $1.06 on a monthly average. The commercial, $3.20 on a monthly average and the industrial transportation at $82.93. Just to note, the majority of the categories here in Denton are the residential, which would equate to approximately 18,754 meters and the commercial is just under 2,200 meters. And then the other two categories is 13. So it's a very small amount for those industrial and transportation components. For your consideration, while the screen shows there's two options, actually there's three. The first one is to approve the adoption of the resolution, including your packet, as recommended by the consortium. The second option is to deny the recommended resolution. And the third option, and again, it's not listed on the slide, is to take no action. So with that, staff recommends taking option one based on the direction of the consortium that the city is involved with. And cities across the state that are involved with this consortium are going to their councils during the month of September to get this resolution passed from their respective councils. Georgia Crump with the firm, Lloyd Gosling, is here to answer any technical questions that you may have about the negotiations and some of the other financial aspects of the request that HATMAS has submitted to the consortium. Questions for either the speaker or representative council, Deb Armitage. So I have actually not so much a question, just a statement to the public. I support, I'm going to vote to support option number one, and I'm really grateful for this consortium that is advocating for cities against a monopoly, and HATM AS is a monopoly. And it's a really terrible situation that these cities are in. And so I really admire this group of cities getting together and really fighting tooth and nail. And so I'm grateful to the law firm. I don't know how you do it, but fighting to get them to bring the price down. We recently had an incident not that long ago with Atmos Pipelines, where one of their, a contractor who they hired, mismarked by a great distance where a pipeline was. And we had some city workers who were just routinely doing their work, doing their job, avoiding the pipeline. And it turned out that Atmos had mismarked it. And it was a potentially just devastating situation. People responded quickly. It was near a church. So anyway, this is where really, I hear from residents all the time about how their Atmos bills are going up, and there's so little we can do. But there's not nothing we can do. We can do this. So I, you know, very mixed emotions in voting yes to this, but I'm at the same time really pleased that cities are getting together to try to do what we can. So I just wanted to say that for the public. Councilmember Braetz? I will be voting no, because I'm against another increase. If you look at the past year's history, even though we did switch to the larger city, we are still getting a very large increase that we're asking our ratepayers to pay, and I'm not in favor of that. Anybody else have a question? Comment? Councilmember Rauw anger? Sorry. I just want to add that I completely respect that Councilmember Braetz. So I really I respect that opinion. I do have a question for our legal counsel. And I don't think this is a, even if it is a legal question, I think it's one that I think the public needs to hear. So, you know, we have several options. We can approve one of these options, or we can deny this. And let's just say, not hypothetically, we could deny it. If we deny this settlement, what happens moving forward from there? Yes. Thank you, Mayor George Crump, for the record. If the city denies the resolution and denies the settlement, then APMAS will undoubtedly appeal that action to the Railroad Commission, which has appellate jurisdiction over cities' rate actions. Because the coalition itself has approved the settlement, it's very likely that the City of Denton would be at the Railroad Commission on its own defending its rate action, because the coalition has decided not to expend further efforts in that regard. So that would be the impact of it. The rates would go into effect, the filed rates that APMAS requested, because of the wording of the tariff, they would go into effect on October 1 while the appeal is pending. So it would be the higher rates that APMAS filed for and not the settlement rates. Okay. So if we deny it, let me make sure I understand what you just explained to us. If we denied this, then we as a city would be, APMAS could appeal it, and then it would go to the Railroad Commission. In the meantime, their higher rate that they filed for would go into effect. Then at the Railroad Commission appeal, the City of Denton would be wholly responsible for its attorney's fees and the representation of the appeal. If the appeal was granted to APMAS, in other words, they said, "We don't agree with the City of Denton's action." What are the consequences of that if the Railroad Commission accepts their appeal and rules in their favor? The effect of that would be that those higher rates would stay in effect until the next RRM filing, which would be in June. I'm sorry, I've said that wrong. The next RRM filing would be in April of next year. So the city would have another opportunity because the city adopted this rate review mechanism tariff as revised early this year, then APMAS is still required to come and make that filing with the city every year until if you don't like that RRM tariff, then certainly you can vote to terminate it. So those higher rates will be in effect at least through October of next year, which is when the next RRM filing will be reviewed and looked at by the city. So if the appeal is denied at the Railroad Commission, in other words, they deny APMAS' appeal. So up to that point, APMAS' requested rates are in place. The rates that are pursuant to the settlement agreement are not. It's APMAS' filed rates that are in place. So if the appeal is denied, what happens? Well, it would depend on what the Railroad Commission found to be the appropriate rate under the rate review mechanism tariff. So if the Commission found the rates should be lower than what APMAS had filed for, then there would be potentially a refund ordered by the Commission to the customers. I can't tell you really what I would expect the Commission to do other than the fact that in the past when one of these rate review mechanism rate actions was appealed, it did not appear that the Commission was inclined to take a very hard look at what APMAS had filed for. That case ended up being settled because we saw the writing on the wall there that the Commission was not going to act favorably towards the cities. So if any of the case, if APMAS wins their appeal, is the city responsible for any of their attorney's fees in preparation of that appeal or does it just each pays their own attorney's fees? That's a good question, Your Honor. I believe that . . . Thank you. You just elevated me to judge. I appreciate that . Under the RRM tariff, the city's costs in reviewing these filings every year are considered to be a reasonable necessary operating cost of APMAS. So they will recover that through their rates and essentially refund to the cities all of the costs that the cities have had. If that rate is denied, we haven't gotten to that point, but certainly the city would have an opportunity to request reimbursement of its expenses as a rate making activity which by statute the cities do get their rate case expenses reimbursed. So it's not clear to right now how much . . . Okay. . . . how you'd be successful in that. All right. I appreciate that. I just wanted so the public could understand that we do have options here and if we decide to approve it, then we know what the outcome of that is. If we decide to deny it, then we also have sort of a potential roadmap of the course of action following that. And one thing to consider also, if those were to be considered rate case expenses and reimbursable by APMAS, those would be directly charged back to the rate payers in Denton. Right now, all of the rate case expenses from the last RRM are being charged back to the million plus customers. So I think it amounts to I think a penny a month for a period of 12 months for each residential rate payer. So whatever costs are incurred both by APMAS and by the city of Denton in that type of appeal would be charged back to the city. Just the city of Denton residents? Yes, sir. Okay. Wouldn't be spread out over all the meters pursuant to that agreement. Right. Right. Right. Council Member Briggs. So last year we were the different group and we saw that this group had a better negotiating, I guess, at the table negotiation. Do we know what the other group is being asked to pay, what that increase is going to be? I'm sorry, I don't know that and I meant to find that out today and didn't have an opportunity. We have an APMAS representative here. He may know, but I'm sorry, I don't know that number. Okay. And last year Dallas challenged, they did not approve the rate increase that they had. They approved something that was smaller. Do you know what happened with that by chance? They have a separate tariff that they call theirs the DAR, the Dallas area rate review. I believe that that was appealed to the commission when Dallas denied that, but I believe that has either been settled or there's been a final commission order. But again, I'm sorry, I don't have that number for you. I apologize. I'd like more information on that from staff later. Yeah. Okay. We can certainly get that for you. I can, when I get back to my office, I can find out all that information for you. That would be very helpful. Yes. Appreciate that. Thank you so much. Thank you. Good question. All right. Any more questions? Sorry, I drugged that out, but I just wanted to make sure we had an understanding of all the different pathways. Mayor Pro Tem Ryan. Thank you, Mayor. I greatly appreciate the contortion, where it's not going to come out right at this time of night. The efforts of the group in negotiating and I regrettably move approval. I understand. Council Member Duff. Second. We have a motion and a second for agenda item. What is this ? 6A? Let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries 5-1. Agenda item B. 6B, consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing a memorandum of understanding between the City of Denton and the Denton Parks Foundation. Mayor City Council, Gary Paggin, Director of Parks and Rec reation. Here today to present to you a brief PowerPoint regarding a donation that we have been working with on the behalf of the City of Denton along with the Parks Foundation with a member of the Razor Elliott family for the IAAF cemetery. I would like to show you some images of some of the focus areas that we're working on. The donation is a total of $ 100,000. Those key areas would be fencing improvements, landscaping enhancements, some renovations to a historic structure on property and completing phase three of our emergency head stone repairs that we completed phase one and phase two over the course of the last two years. From a beautification standpoint, this year we completed a project of replacing decorative fencing along Carroll and the adjacent frontage road and we 'd like to do some additional enhancements along that thoroughfare. This is the location looking south and this is the location looking north, that northeast corner of the cemetery property. From a renovation standpoint, this is a historic structure. A few years ago we put a new roof on it. We would work through the historic preservation to make sure that was done in an appropriate manner. Staff does still use this for storage and maintenance equipment, so it still is a functional facility. As you can see, it needs quite a bit of TLC. From a fencing standpoint, approximately $25,000 of the $100,000 donation will be put towards fencing. That is not enough to do all the fencing that we need. The proposal is not to do the decorative fencing, if we can, to move towards more of a vinyl fencing, but this is in pretty bad shape. There's some additional ... I can see a tree growing through this fence and then just continuous areas of damaged fence where people have run into it over the course of the years. Then very lastly is completion of the headstones. This is one headstone that was completed over the past two years where we had headstones that were just concerning to a point where they could fall over if somebody was on property. That would be continuous phase three to wrap up that emergency repair. If council approves this, we put fiscal year 2019-20 as a completion, but I would assure you, you'd probably have that done much sooner than that. - Council Member Briggs. - This vote is to accept a donation to do the work. Can you go back to the first picture of the broken fence? Oh wait, that one. Are those really large potholes? - That's ... the road is near that road. - Yeah. Okay. Just take note. - I'm sorry, that's out of posting. I'm just kidding. - Thank you. - We've been working with Molly, and Molly's here this evening as well, to work on this donation. She's done a lot of work with us to make this happen. - Council Member Armitage. - I just want to say thank you to the Parks Foundation for helping out with this. I'm just wondering if we're going to think of things in terms of needs and wants, something like a cemetery, which many of us will go to live in at some point or another. It really should look a lot nicer than that. It's a historic cemetery , and there's just ... it's a special place, and it deserves to be kept up out of respect for Denton history and the people who are buried there and their families. I'm really glad we're repairing it. Grateful for the contribution from the foundation. It's just essential. I'm grateful to Park staff too, for all you all are doing. It's extremely important, and I'm glad this is happening. While this donation is specifically geared toward IAOF, because that's where the family members are buried, the donor, we did create in May a cemetery improvement plan to address both cemeteries. Over the next seven or eight years, systematically try to chip away at some of the needs of those facilities. That doesn't mean things can't be moved back and forth by year, as well as things added to it as we go. At least it sets a vision and gives an estimated price on what we can focus on. I'd like to get, Gary, if you could in the near future, because I know we spent, I think it's 300 and some odd thousand, 50,000 or so, to put the wr ought iron fences around both cemeteries, portions of both cemeteries. On IAOF in particular, along the Eagle Drive side and along the Carroll Boulevard side, which I will tell you, that is a huge, huge difference. That is a gateway to our city. I would like to see what the remaining costs would be on the cemeteries as far as to replace the rest of the fencing. Even though this isn't a well-traveled road, a cyclone fence isn't going to last very long. I think we did it the other way because that's all the funds we had. I want to see what it would take moving forward systematically to do both the monument repair and the fence repair in conjunction with this donation, anything that the city may be able to match and how far that would go. In the future maybe an informal staff report or something like that. I can do that. All right. Council Member Briggs. I move approval. I would like to thank the person that made the donation for the improvements made. Mayor Pro Tem Ryan. I second. I have a motion to second. Let's vote on the board please. I think it was approved. Okay, there it is. Six-zero. Moving on to agenda item. Now we're back to public hearings. We have completed public hearing agenda item 7A. We're moving to public hearing agenda item 7B. Hold a public hearing considered option of an ordinance for a specific use permit to allow for multifamily use. The 12.37-acre site is generally located on the east side of Brinker Road, approximately 900 feet south of Loop T8. Before staff presentation, I want to get some clarification from city attorney. This is an agenda item to consider an SEP. I know we've had discussions in the past what would constitute the reasons for denying or approving an SEP and then what could be considered outside the bounds. I just want to put everybody on notice as the discussion moves forward. I just want us to remain cognizant of that. And if we need to, I believe we have the opportunity to adjourn in the closed session for a specific item to get legal advice, if that should warrant, is that correct? That is correct. Because what I don't want to do is I think we need to be very careful in our discussion because the item before us is an SEP. If any member of the council feels that they need some guidance on the deliberation and what falls within the legal confines and what may, according to our city attorney, advice fall outside of those legal constraints, I certainly would encourage you to ask for that and I certainly am willing to do that myself if that should arise. Go ahead. All right. So the case before you, as you mentioned, is a specific use permit request for a project called the Enclave at Denton. So you can see the subject property outlined in yellow on the map. It is located along Brinker Road south of Loop 288. For reference, this is the Walmart at Brinker and 288. The site is just over 12 acres. So just a little bit of background on SUPs because I don't think we've had one of these for some of our newer council members. The specific use permit is an approval that's required for uses that may be considered compatible in a zoning district where the use is not necessarily permitted by right. There's language in the code that indicates that the use may be made compatible with conditions or restrictions imposed on the development to limit any nuisance potential or conflicts that could arise with surrounding development. The SUP does follow our zoning procedure and require two public hearings. Looking at this site, the zoning on the property is our regional center commercial downtown district. This district permits multifamily with a limitation. Limitation four indicates that multifamily is only permitted either with the approval of a specific use permit as part of a mixed use development. For it to be considered a mixed use development, it has to meet the definition of mixed use, which requires three or more uses integrated vertically or horizontally. It additionally imposes a restriction that within the RCCD district, multifamily as a single use can only make up 30% of the land area. There's also options within this limitation for multifamily to be approved if it was under a previous approval such as a master plan community or a small area plan. In this case, because none of these bottom criteria apply, we're here for this SUP request. There are multiple criteria for approval that I outlined in pretty significant detail in your staff analysis. To summarize all of the criteria for approval for an SUP center around a compatibility analysis to determine if the property and the requested use are compatible with everything around it in terms of land use. Some of those specifically include whether it would impede normal and orderly development of any surrounding properties, whether there would be nuisances generated through lighting or anything like that on the site, as well as parking, traffic and access to the site. It provides criteria relating to appropriate landscaping and screening, as well as architectural compatibility. Walking through what the applicant has proposed here, you can see two buildings on the site. The footprint of those is just over 95,500 square feet. In blue is the portion of that footprint that would be multifamily. Then in red, you can see there are some commercial spaces here, but those commercial spaces weren't enough to allow them to meet that 30 percent maximum land area for the multifamilies. The multifamily is the significantly larger portion of the site. These two buildings would contain 270 units that are a mixture of one, two and three bedrooms. Commercial square footage is about 5,100 square feet. They are providing adequate parking on the site. 471 spaces are provided. They have provided parking for the commercial uses, as well as multifamily. Another significant feature of the site is that two and a half acres of it are set aside for conservation because there is upland habitat ESA on the property. Looking at the landscaping on the site, you can see in yellow an area where they do allow space for the required parking lot screenings because they do have front parking along Brinker Road. They 've provided the required 15-foot area there. There is a buffer required between multifamily and commercial, so they've provided for the required type C buffer on both the north side here in light green, as well as on the south side with all the required plantings. You can see scattered throughout the site the required street trees for the internal street system, as well as trees needed to meet their overall requirements. They are within the maximum lot coverage, which is 90 percent. They're at just under 85 percent. Ten percent landscaping minimums required. They're at 15.8 percent. Then, as I mentioned, there is an ESA on the property, so pretty much all of the trees that you see outlined here in this large cluster are considered upland habitat. Code requires for residential uses, 50 percent of that be preserved. I believe for this site that equaled right at a little over two acres , so they've set aside two and a half acres that was specifically called out as a conservation area on their preliminary plot. By meeting the upland habitat preservation requirements, they're also meeting the tree code preservation requirements. This area that's being set aside does meet all of their required preservation for ESA and tree code. Is that the area in green? Yes, that's the dark green boundary. What you see here, I apologize for not explaining that a little bit more. This is their preliminary plot that was approved by P&Z, overlaid onto the site so that you can see this is actually designated as conservation area on the plot that would be mimicked on their final plot as well. Any other questions on the site plan? Councilmember Briggs, I'm sorry. I have a, if you go back with the outline, the conservation does look like a T-shaped, so is that other rectangle-y kind of thing underneath, is that parcel owned by someone else? Is that just the way that it's shaped? Yes , that was the ESA and tree preservation area for this assisted living facility. Comb ined, there is larger than two and a half acres of contiguous canopy that would be there between these two lawns. Okay, thank you. The other feature that's been provided with this SUP here, some conceptual building elevations. You can see here what the building front facing Brinker Road is proposed to look like. It is a four-story building, approximately 52 feet tall. Our CCD does allow up to 100 feet in building height. Then the materials that they proposed are a combination of brick and stone veneer as well as fiber cement siding and panels. Some of the analysis that staff did, we did consider the future land use designation for this area, which is regional mixed use. You're probably familiar with these are areas primarily intended for high density residential and commercial development that would attract a regional customer base. Some of the criteria for that include providing for higher density housing in these areas so that it wouldn't affect established single family neighborhoods. This does fit well within the requirements for that district. Looking at what's surrounding the property, as I mentioned, this is a heavily commercially developed area. We have Walmart, Target, and Home Depot across the street for some points of reference. This development would be consistent with that existing land use pattern, which is in this wider area, a mixture of commercial, institutional, and multifamily development. Staff did find that the use, since it fits so well and there are other uses similar to this in the area, is unlikely to generate any nuisances for those immediately surrounding properties. Haley, quick question. Yes, sir. I noticed that this project was slated for four stories, I believe. Is that right? Correct. Elevators are required after three, I believe. Is that right? I'm not sure that exact requirement in the building code, but I believe they do intend to have elevators. Okay. What other apartment buildings in the area are four stories? Do we know? Four stories, I'm not aware of. This debt here is multifamily development. Two stories. Yeah, those are two story, I believe. I don't know of any other four stories. The district permits up to 100 feet, though, so they're well within that parameter. As far as four story, because I know part of the SEP is compatibility. Yeah, they meet certain requirements, but if there were only two story apartment buildings all throughout here, you could ask for something that would say be more compatible. Possibly, yeah. Regarding the SEP. Okay. It wouldn't violate the SEP requirements. No, I don't believe so, if you were concerned with the height. Thank you. Yeah, I'm not specifically aware of any four story multif amily in this area. So notifications were sent about this case back in August before it went to P&Z. I've received no responses to those notices, and the applicant didn't hold a neighborhood meeting given the commercial character of the area. They didn't see that that was necessary, maybe. Staff is recommending approval of the request with one condition. That be that you consider the site plan, landscape plan, and elevations that you saw tonight as preliminary. They are generally consistent with the requirements of the Dent on Development Code in terms of site design, landscaping, and parking. But we would like to see a final site plan, landscape plan, and elevations be provided to work out any remaining details, specifically with the site engineering. And we would like that those plans be consistent with what you've seen here tonight. The Planning and Zoning Commission similarly recommended approval of this case seven to zero. And I'd be happy to stand for any other questions. Council Member Briggs. This may be a silly question, but can you remind me why we're doing it SEP and it's just not a regular zoning? Correct. So the zoning on the site is RCCD, which does permit multifamily with this limitation four, which requires that multifamily meet one of these criteria that either have an approved SUP, be part of a mixed use development that meets that definition referenced here, or that it was part of a previous approval. Okay. Any other questions for staff? Council Member Armitage. So is my understanding there's an affordable housing component to this development? Can you speak to that? I don't have any direct knowledge of that. Just from what I've seen in the newspaper, I believe that is the case, but that wasn't part of our analysis or part of what we considered in this. No information directly related to that was provided to us. Okay. Yeah. And that was not related to planning. So that'll be a question for the applicant. Thanks. Any other questions for staff before we open the public hearing? All right. We'll now open the public hearing. We have one card wishing to speak, but then this is a public hearing, so anybody else wishing to speak is welcome to come down and state your name and address. John Dickerson, come down and state your name and address and your time will begin. Oh, I'm sorry. You're right. You're right. I was wondering that. Seven. Oh, wait. That says seven. Okay. We're on B. We're on B, aren't we? Okay. So I have no cards for B. I've got C and D. I apologize for that. So we have a public hearing. There are no cards, but that doesn't preclude anybody from coming down and wishing to speak. Anybody wishing to speak, come on down and state your name and address and your time will begin. Mr. Memorometer? I have a question for the applicant. Okay. Is the applicant present? Yes. Yes. All right. Thank you. So same question. I need to state my name and address. Kenneth W. Fammer, the second, 317 Edinburgh Court, South Lake, Texas, 76092. Thanks. Sorry. I forgot about that part later. No problem. Yeah. So there's, as I understand, there's an affordable housing component. Can you speak to that or is that- Yes, but before I forget, can I speak to one question that was brought up during kind of the initial staff? So the property is- It's fine with me. Is that okay? Just so I don't forget. So the property is four story. Every building does have actually two elev ators in every building. So we have at least one elevator in every building. Okay. So four stories, two elevators in each building. At least one elevator in every building. Okay. So yes, so this development was comprised, it has a component of affordability with it. We are setting aside 49% of the development for market rate, 51% for incomes at 80% or below of their median income. Thanks. You're welcome. Any other- Council Member Briggs. Could you just, I didn't hear you very well. Can you say what you just said louder, please? The last part of it. So the development- Thank you. We are setting aside 49% of the development is set aside for market rate rents. 51% of the development will have rents at or below 80% of the area median income. 80%? Okay. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Any other questions? Council Member Armitage. Yeah. Is there a, can you say something about the bus route? If you looked into the DCTA and is there a bus stop nearby? Yes. Yeah, that's my understanding is yeah. Absolutely. And I know you guys have a fancy- Yeah, if you'll put it right there on the square. There you go. Can you pull it back, Billy? Yeah. There you go. I'll zoom in a little bit more. There you go. So this is Brinker Road. So you have a bus stop that is right here, I believe. If I have my bearings straight. So we like the walkability to the site. We like the walkability to the adjacent Home Depot, Target, Walmart. But having a bus, a site that's on a bus route obviously brings mass transit, which you don't see in everyday development. It's kind of hard to get to a multifamily development on where you're developing. So we truly view this as infill housing, which is supported by your consolidated plan, which is one of the reasons why we really love the site. Thank you. I agree. I like that was my understanding too. I didn't remember exactly where it was, but I really liked that about it. So I'll be pleased to support this, urging that anyway, I appreciate the trees that are being preserved anyway to preserve more trees. But I think this will be really good for the area. It's kind of almost the opposite of what we see in a lot of development cases where you've got kind of residential neighborhood and some commercial thing that nobody wants here. You've got this, no offense to, well, I don't mind offending Walmart. You've got great big Walmart. And then you've got some housing that I feel will make the Walmart look nicer. You've got the bus stop right there. I like taking this area that's not pedestrian friendly the way it is now and making it to where people can live there and walk around. So to me, it's compatible. And that's why I'm going to approve the SEP. Thank you. I do want to make a point, a note as well. Haley mentioned that one of the conditions is coming back and making sure we have plans and specs that conform with the site plan. We've been working tirelessly with staff, civil engineering , traffic to even come up with a design. We started with fire. We start with traffic just to get our initial site plan. We've worked with engineering on the, there's a retention pond that's adjacent that we'll be sharing with Walmart. So we have an agreement in place. We'll be improving that in order to make sure that the storage is there. But everything meets staff's requirement, the buffer zones, the screening along brinker. We even put a buffer around the two and a half acre tree conservation so that we stay out of the, we have a work zone in essence within that. So we're being conscious about the preservation. Kelsam and Ryan. Thank you, Mayor. According to the site plan, there's a small percentage at the front of the building that will be commercial. Yes, sir. Do you have any thoughts as to what is that going to be? General office? Is that going to be restaurants? What that would be? Some of it is general office. What we've initially, when we sat down with staff and actually tried to meet a previous interpretation of the 30%, a lot of that we were bringing internal. So some of it is actually fitness that will be, it's a fitness center that will be for our residents as well as for the general public. I actually have been in conversation with Council Member Hespeth on possibly opening some type of business incubator or something. We're still kind of going through that process, but we have some space set aside and we have the parking allocated for whatever we want to do there in terms of commercial adaptability. But some of it will be for our tenant use that's open to the public. We've done that on several developments in the past and it's worked real well. And some of it will be open to really flex space. Thank you. Council Member Briggs? So I have a legal question. I don't know if I should just ask it or do we need to go? Go ahead and ask it and then you can reserve the right to ask for a closed session on the legal question. Well, I'm just curious about if there's going to be commercial on a property that is off of the tax rolls, how that works and if that is okay. Generally, if you, I mean, I'm just curious because they're forming with another entity, right? And so this whole development will not be a taxable property and say a commercial entity would move into that, how does that work? I'm just, I'm curious about that. And that's a very good question. A lot of what we've discussed in last year and this year has been those that have applied for housing tax credit program and how that works. And then there's also the other part where if it is owned by DHA, a housing authority that's actually recognized or in this case, a private facility corporation, which I suspect is how you've organized. My understanding is the residential component is you're not taxed on your exempt from taxes. The commercial is obviously not that. We've never faced that issue, but I suspect that you probably will have to pay property taxes on the commercial space. Is that your understanding? It's my understanding that we can bifurcate out the building. We've done some developments where we can put a separate lease on the commercial space itself and that lease space will actually have tax implications on the lease space. It is something that we could also take an additional look at and do the research on that. But what I remember the whole program, it's only the residential portion that is tax exempt. Right. And another part of the majority or I forget what percentage you said is market rate, which would also, would that be carved out as well for that commercial? So the majority of it is actually an affordable component. So it's really how the program and the structure of the deal is that 51% will be at the affordable rate of 80% and below and the balance would be at market. So that fits within the bandwidth of having a property in conjunction with the housing authority. Okay. Couple of questions. Is it your understanding that if you decided to not make that a commercial space, that it was just space for the residents, whether it be a gym, coffee bar, whatever, that would still be taxable or non-taxable because it's a part of the multifamily project and it's not a commercial project that would allow the public to come in? That is correct. So you're saying that if it was not a commercial space available to the general public, that your understanding, your belief is that it would not be tax ed, that it would be tax exempt from the tax rolls? That is my understanding and I can probably get clarification, but that's my understanding. And so are you representing here today based upon the site plan and the condition to make the site plan basically conform with what we're seeing and it's being labeled as commercial that's open to the general public? Are you saying today that that's exactly what you're going to do, that it's going to be commercial space that is open to the general public? Yes. However we figure out, we still need to work through the configuration of what we're going to offer there, but it is our intent to have that commercial space open to the general public. And how much, how many square footages is that commercial space? Right there, that commercial space is right at 10,000 square feet roughly. Okay. So I do have a question. And that's though, that's inclusive of a clubhouse. So the net of that, so the clubhouse even by staff's definition of that is not considered in the commercial space itself. So you're saying the 10,000 is commercial, are you subtract ing that out? I'm subtracting out 5,783 square feet as it is. So you got 5,000 commercial? Correct, roughly. Okay. All right. Okay. So I just want to ask a couple of questions because this is under chapter 303, I believe of the local Texas local government code for public facility corporations. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay. So you've stated, yeah, okay. Yeah. So you stated on a couple of occasions, both here today and even in, you and I met, individually and privately. That I believe it was 51% will be reserved for 80% or below the median income. That's the representation here. So first of all, do you know how many units does that equ ate? 51%. 51% equates to, I wrote it down so I get my math right. That's 138 units are below 80% AMI and 132 units are market. Okay. Now, so that's different than what you said just here tonight. I believe you said that 51% would be reserved for 80% or below AMI. So is it 51% or below AMI or is it 51% below 80% AMI? Say that one more time. The 51%. You're reserving 51% for what? 51% of the units will be set aside for income restricted at 80% and below. Okay. All right. So this is my question. First of all, that 's 150, I forgot what you said, 138 units. So do you have any idea what the stratification will be for those units? In other words, are they all going to be at 80% or 10 of them going to be at 70%? Have you all made that determination? So there's a range on the determination right now. After our conversation, we've at least to, we went back and we at least agreed to have set aside at least 10% of that 138 at 60% AMI. But as we have it modeled right now, because of the rents that we have underwritten right now, we have over, and I'm looking at a rent analysis that I looked in prepared. Probably it stands, we have about 20% of the property that 's at 60% AMI rents. And what is that figure on the rents? So that range is an average of, well, it's set aside per bedroom. So it's a- Right. Just a one bedroom. One bedroom is roughly $900 up to a three bedroom at 1100. So what I hear you saying is that the $900 rental range would equate to the rental value that would be required to be charged for someone at 60% of AMI for this census tract. That is correct. Okay. All right. All right. So my question is this, because the standard, according to the chapter 303 of the Texas government code, for tax exemption for a corporation formed under this chapter is, where is it? Here it is, yeah. D, I don't know what the subsection is, but it says an exemption under this subsection for a multifamily residential development, which is owned by a public facility corporation, which I believe is what this is. It's a public facility corporation. I want to hear you out before. I don't want to piecemeal kind of- Oh, okay. Which- By housing authority under this chapter, and which has not had at least 20% of its units reserved for public housing units, which I don't think this meets the definition of public housing units. The housing authority, at least 50% of the units in the multifamily residential development are reserved for occupancy by individuals and families earning less than 80% of the area median family income. So what you stated is it's either equal to or less. Now you can smile, but if there was an audit done and 80 ... you would be in violation of this and you would lose the tax exempt status. So I know it seems like it's a quibble over words, but there's a difference between a standard of it's equal to 80% or less, but what the statute says, earning less than 80% of the area median family income. So are you saying that your standard is 80% or less of the area of family median income? Any documentation that we have executed on this development has the exact wording, so it is technically 79.99%. It is less than 80% of the ... I understand what you're saying. Well, and I appreciate that. When I'm speaking, the average person doesn't know the difference between what I'm talking in general between 79.95 or 99% and 80% of the area median income. We can easily go in and calculate the 80% area median income, but on developments that we've done in the past, we've always kept our rents below the 80% area median income so that we can qualify per the statute. Of course, of course. Well then, and I could be mistaken, but if I remember correctly the memorandum of understanding that was signed states 80% or less. So to me, now you can configure it in a way that it's less than 80%. I'm just pointing out that what you're saying is not the standard pursuant to the code. In actual ity, it may work out to be that because you don't want to lose the tax exempt status. I'm just trying to have an understanding between what I'm hearing and what I'm seeing in the code, but I think you just addressed it that said that we will make sure that we comply with the code in that respect. Do you know what the income is for 60% of AMI for this property? What the rent income is? What the income requirements would be? I believe I have that. Give me a moment. For a one person, because it's a one bedroom. I was going to say, so for one person, for an 80%, one person is 43, not to exceed 43,200. And so for 60% it's? Not to exceed 32,400. And then that's calculated, the rental calculation is based upon, is it 30% of that income? Yes. Keep in mind because there's an obligation of not to exceed the housing burden to be 30% of someone's income. Okay. So for example, then using the 32,000 for 60% AMI, you multiply that, that's a yearly figure, you multiply that times 30% and that's $9,600 a year. So when I divide that by 12, I get $800 a month. So what you're saying is, I don't want to get us bogged down in the math. But what I heard you say was that your development is willing to reserve 10% of the 138,000. At 60% AMI. At 60% of AMI and the corresponding rents that are calculated to be that. And they're published by HUD. So we take away all the guesswork. Of course. Of course. Whether it be a one bedroom, a two bedroom, are those 13% or 13, are those primarily one bedrooms, two bedrooms? I mean, we've only made that modification since you and I have talked, so we'll need to go back and make sure they're dispersed amongst units. Okay. So that leaves about 125, is that right? Yeah. 125 that could be all the way up to the 79.9% of 80%. Correct. Okay. And so those rents of 80%, which we're calling affordable, it's about $900 to $1,000 a month for a one bedroom. That's what the memorandum understanding said at least. The average rents were for certain floor plan, $900. For another floor plan, it's up to $1,000. But if they're market rate, it's anywhere from $1,100 to $1,200 for a one bedroom. Yeah. This development, I don't want to get bogged down into details of a rent by unit analysis. Every unit analysis is different. The square footage is different. We don't have one bedroom unit that is a crossly hold type. We've got three different floor plans. So I don't necessarily know if you can generally say that statement for all of our units. I was just going by the memory of the memorandum understanding. I don't have the memorandum. I don't have it in front of me. No, I understand. But that was the document that your organization signed with the sponsor, with the public facility corporation or with Denton Housing Authority to sort of create this public facility corporation was the memorandum of understanding. That's what people were based their decision on entering into this agreement with you based upon that document. At least that 's what sort of concur, that's what I mean, if you all entered into an agreement. There's a little bit more that went, this was a long laborious process. No, I understand. It was over an eight year. I mean, so to go to one document and say, hey, everything was hindered upon that document. There were multiple spreadshe ets even prior after that document that everyone agreed on rents, everyone. So I can't really say yes to your statement because it looks like. So there are other documents outside the memorandum of understanding that have their agreements between the different agencies. So no offense, Mayor. I know you're probably going somewhere. I feel like you're going somewhere and I don't know where you're going. So I'm going to respectfully just try to understand where you're going because I really want to know where you 're going. Take me there instead of take me to A, B and C and count out a process. Honestly, I'm not going in any particular direction. I'm just basing my comments upon your answers. So when you say to me that the memorandum of understanding. You said that. I didn't say that. No, no. I mean, you brought up the memorandum of understanding. Let me finish as you ask me to let you finish. You made the comment, you made the comment that the memor andum of understanding wasn't the only document signed or that has been agreed upon that there's been subsequent documents on rent agreements and things such as that so that the memorandum of understanding is not really the totality of all the agreements is what I thought I heard you say. Is that not correct? I'm going to pause right now and just go talk to my team and make everyone's hearing what I'm hearing. You know, when you get in a conversation, I don't want to get one sided with what I'm conversation. So. Okay. All right. Well, let's go ahead and take about a five minute break and then we'll come back in five minutes. Okay we're back in a reconvene this meeting the density council on September 18 2018. I can't see the clock. At 1020 at 1018 agenda item seven B. Okay. I think I've got my questions answered. The only question I have is it was stated that there was 13 units 10% of the 138 reserved for 60% of the area median income whatever that rent is calculated to be according to HUD regulation and guidelines. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay. And I'm John Shackelford council for the applicant. I'm just going to say some of the questions you 're getting into a little bit of a more legal nature a little bit beyond the scope of Mr. Fan bro and if I could be of assistance to you and the rest of the council members to assist you. I appreciate that. I don't have any further questions in that regard. Thank you. Council member Armater. Yeah. Thanks. So I just wanted to kind of just make a say something about the my sense of the what this vote is about. So it's my understanding that our job now is to make a decision about compatibility. You know, is this compatible with the site and staff has recommended seven to zero unanimously that it's that it 's compatible and should have the S.U.P. That doesn't mean we're obliged to you. But I kind of feel like if we can't think of any reason why it's not compatible I don't quite understand why we're asking these kind of legal legal questions. And I mean that just maybe I'm wrong. I'm new on council. So maybe there's something I'm missing. But I just thought we were supposed to decide you know is this is this compatible or not. You know there 's not a bunch of Wal-Mart hasn't come out here to say I don't want people living in my backyard. So I mean it looks compatible and I'm not trying to you know kind of diminish your concerns just to I'm confused about what this is all about. I have stopped my line of questioning so yeah I'm in a that so okay yeah. Council member Ryan. This question is probably more for staff. Was a TIA required for this property? Yes they've been working with us city engineering staff to determine the appropriate scope of that. It would primarily determine whether there would be a turn lane required on Brinker for this site and about the two points of access that they've proposed. They are needed for fire but they are a little bit close together so they've been working through some of those details with engineering but they are working on that TIA. Okay because I've got great concerns. I mean one is definitely going to be a write in write out if or just a write out only one of the two and the other one is directly across from a drive that already is difficult to make a turn out of and I know the increase in traffic on Brinker as we as the 35 project wraps up is going to increase as well so that's why I'm wondering how much of an overall impact that's going to have. Correct like I said so they're looking into you know turn lane requirements on Brinker Road currently. I believe the southern entry would be the primary entry point for your traffic incoming and leaving and then this would be a restricted exit. I think there's been talk of whether it should be emergency only but definitely write in write out on this north entry is my understanding at this point but the southern would be a little bit more flexible. And there's no connectivity whatsoever to any other adjacent properties? There's no connection to the Walmart property to the north because that's where that shared detention facility will be. This drive aisle is actually or entryway is already in place and would be shared with the site to the south of them. The assisted living facility that's directly south they would share this existing point of entry. It's hard to see but on the aerial you can kind of tell that driveways already in place so that would maintain as a shared driveway. Thank you. Councilmember Briggs. Go ahead. May I say one thing to address Councilmember Morian and I believe I mentioned this to you when we met even prior to the TIA we looked at the analysis the initial traffic analysis and we've already agreed to put in a right turn lane only a right turn lane desail lane coming into the property itself to address some of the concerns that we have. Well my concern is more about leaving the property for the residents that are there as opposed to so that's why we're entering the property. We're trying to work with traffic to have this as an exit only coming out of this on the right turn only right there. Okay. Any other questions? Did I have them? No I thought I was but I wasn't I was looking at the parking. It looks like a lot of parking spaces. Is that from are those required by the new ordinance the parking ordinance? Yes ma'am. Is that the one to one? Okay and is there is there parking also allowed for that commercial or is that parking included with the apartment parking it's just kind of all shared? No we've had to add additional parking in the front of the building where we have the commercial here so we have parking there. What you don't see on the site itself is we have tuck under garage parking at pretty much every building. We see an indention in the building so we have tuck under garages as well as the surface parking but we did add parking along the front to adhere to commercial. Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Seeing none thank you appreciate it. This is a public hearing anybody else wishing to speak please come down state your name and address and your time will begin. Anybody else wishing to speak? Okay we will now close the public hearing councilmember Armitage. Move to approve the SUP. Were there conditions were there conditions as per were there any conditions from either zoning or anybody? I guess there was one recommended condition regarding the site plan and landscape plan be preliminary. And that makes sense to me as recommended by staff. So question for legal. There was a representation made that 13 of the units or 10% of the reserved units would be held for 60% of median income 60% I'm sorry of median income. Is that prohibited from being in a motion on this particular item because it's an SUP and that doesn't seem to fit the criteria and if so that really doesn't create a legal obligation for that condition does it not? That is correct. It's outside the planning item that is before you. Okay. All right. Okay. Thank you. We have a motion for approval with the stated conditions by staff. I need a second. We've got a motion on the floor. Need a second. Okay. I'm going to make one more call if I don't get a second. Okay. All right. So we have a motion on the floor and a second so let's vote on the board for agenda item 7B. Oh wonderful. I think that was I think that showed a tie a 3-3 tie and according to our rules I believe it goes to the next council meeting when everybody is present is that correct? It automatically gets posted at each successive meeting until there's a full complement of council. Okay. All right. Councilmember Armatrout. Yeah I just want to say something just kind of on a personal note. So I'm so the reason why Councilmember Meltzer isn't here it's the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur it's a high holiday I it's actually it's era of Yom Kippur the evening before Yom Kippur I happen to be Jewish too and I think this is a new thing I think we're the first two Jewish people on council and and so I know this it's a new thing but normally I would be at Temple now but I chose to be here because I thought there were a number of you know important votes I wanted to vote on and and this was one of them so next time so you know one person and I have no idea how Councilmember Meltzer is on this on this particular item you know for or against. I think it's relevant just to say that that it that's how important this is to me and being here and it and we have a tie vote because because we're holding a meeting on a you know a day where it's a it's a holiday so anyway maybe in the future and maybe next year you know maybe not have a meeting on on you know on the important holidays for for Councilmembers I hadn't suggested at all to you know not not hold this meeting but it's occurring to me seeing the tie vote as a result of one person being absent so that's all. Okay thank you okay so that will be posted on the next available council meeting I believe which will be what date? What's the name? 25th. October 25th. September 25th is the next council meeting. So would it be September the 25th that's posted? Yes. Oh I thought you said October. No September the 25th. Okay all right so September 25th will be the next posting of this agenda item. All right we'll move on to agenda item 7C is hold a public hearing considered option in order to the City of Denton regarding assignment of initial zoning classification neighborhood residential 3 and use classification on approximately 47.466 acres of land generally located on south side of East Ryan Road. Good evening Mayor and Council the item in front of you tonight is a request to assign initial zoning of NR3 this is a property also known as Creekside I know we 've gone through a number of different reviews with respect to annexation it's generally located on the south side of Ryan east of sorry east of Andrew and just north of Creeksdale. Just a little bit of history on the property there was a pre-annexation development agreement that was approved by council in 2016 there was a preliminary plat that was approved by P&Z and site plan the very next day that was approved by staff that was essentially the same as the concept plan then there was a requirement prior to final plat that the gas well on the property be abandoned and plugged that was completed in February of this year P&Z approved the final plat in late March and then if you recall the annexation went through I think a series of four of the hearings and readings and finally approved on August 21st after the annexation one of the items that was spelled out in the PADA was that the city would initiate a rezoning to NR3 so this is somewhat unique in both in the structure of it but also that we are initiating the application. Just a little bit more detail on the final plat again this is typically we have the zoning before we have final plat 137 residential lots density at 2.9 units per acre there was a traffic impact fee that was imposed as part of that agreement it was actually substantially more than what the current impact fee is that amount was $589,100 and that was paid in a lump sum in July of this year. In addition their tree preservation plan talked about a 76% or 65% depending on the parcel I'll get into another slide but they were able to preserve substantially more than what would have been required under the DDC as you can see would have been only a 20% requirement. I know there's been a lot of discussion on Ryan Road so wanted to make sure that I believe this was brought up with annexation at the last meeting but just wanted to hit on some of the highlights of where we are and sort of where we're going. We're currently in the process or the city's in the process of conducting traffic counts shortly thereafter staff will be conducting a preliminary analysis and already moving with the TOPO survey speaking with CIP they expect it to go out for consultant selection in October and then at that point really look at studying the 2040 volumes in a much larger area because it all sort of contributes to this but really Ryan Road on the north Hickory Creek to the south, Country Club on the west and then Teasley on the east. Again they expect that to be done at the end of the year and then looking at design plans complete preliminary design plans April of 19. The second phase which would be the roadway improvements in construction. The first bullet point is really the most important is the funding of those improvements because without that the second two really don't fall into place. If everything goes as planned or as anticipated in talking with the city engineer earlier today they expect commencement to start late summer early fall of 2019. Again that's best case scenario but I'd rather give that than worst case scenario at this point but that's just a little background because I know this has been a point of contention on a number of venues. A little bit on the tree preservation there were a total of 720 trees just on the trees themselves they were able to preserve almost 82 percent of the trees. On DBH you can see the total number of inches or 10, 000 what they removed and they were able to preserve over 70 76 percent. There were some trees there was an issue that was brought up at P&Z particularly around this buffer where the road is being cut in where some trees had died. Haywood did go out and take a look part of it was had to do with drought. The other part was some of them just did not have the protection up so once those if those trees do not come back they will be required to replace those at the ratio. Again the request is going from RD5X to NR3 we looked at it in addition to the what was spelled out in the PADA but as well as the zoning criteria and it did meet it's consistent with the low density land use. We did have some folks in opposition I think a total of six which was the equivalent of three percent so this did not kick it into a super majority and planning and zoning commission recommended approval the request six zero and with that staff also recommended approval and happy to answer any any questions. So will the developers plan to have any community meetings? Not that I'm aware of I don't believe that they I know there were some when they my understanding is there were some that were done in 2016 when the PADA was being developed but I don't believe there's been any any plans and I think the developer is here. Because I know I know that there were some letters that were opposed and then we received emails that as well and so the concerns like you said were traffic and some were just concerned with the quality of the development and so I think some sort of community meeting would be very beneficial if if that's a possibility. Any other questions for staff? We open the public hearing. All right we will now open the public hearing. We do have a card now we've got a card. Mr. John Dickerson you'd like to come down state your name and address your time will begin. Mayor Watts members of the City Council and city staff my name is John Dickerson my address is 8333 Douglas Suite 1300 Dallas Texas. I'm the president of Dickerson Development and we are the owners and developers of the Creekside community. Maybe to add to the the presentation that you heard on I guess how we got here we went under contract for this property in January or February of 2017 prior to us and the developers who initiated the development agreement and and I don't know if they had any community meetings or not was the Shelton group. So so the Shelton group was the original developers and they did the contract or the that's not the right word they did the the negotiated planned annexation development agreement. So as Ben and I were driving looking for sites to develop which I've been doing since 1990 this struck me as one of the prettiest pieces of property that I've seen in a long time. A lot of properties have overhead wires they have water towers a lot of the stuff that's left in these areas have things that you can't have to turn your back to and this one was beautiful and it had a large number of trees I call it a tree reserve and so we contacted the owners found that it was the Shelton's and I think they had gotten to a point where they were ready to to maybe move on. So it was our fortune and we were very excited to have picked up the ball and carry it to this point. Maybe a little current update as to what we're doing with the property. We're on our 137 home sites we have two home builders their price points are going to be 350 to $1,000 homes. We have plans for our pool and cabana which includes restrooms and amenity center for the community. We have our tree sanctuary that you saw on the site plan in Platte which is on our western boundary. We have trails through that planned through that tree sanctuary and a lighted trail and the portion that cuts through the middle of the project. And then one note that was part of the PADA as you all may recall was a pedestrian bridge and so when we saw this pedestrian bridge and creek side and the natural lay of the property that bridge is off of Ryan Road. It comes in parallel to our vehicular entrance but it's a pedestrian entrance. We think it's an amenity and so it's designed to look like a smoky mountain or Appalachian type bridge so in keeping with our character of this property. So with that I'd be glad to entertain any questions that the council might have and look forward to your approval. Councilmember Briggs. So I'm reading a letter here by someone who mentions that the trees that were there and I think the staff spoke to earlier some had died but they are saying that a lot of the trees that they thought were going to be there for protection have died because of root damage because the workers that were out there with the dirt cut the roots and so that 's why the trees didn't make it. It's my understanding I guess from what I hear that whatever trees have been taken down or died will be replaced for that same protection. Is that what I'm hearing? So on the ground the trees I believe in question are on the western side in the tree preserve and there is a roadway that was cut or there's about a five or six foot cut along that side. The cut is along the tree canopy line however and I don't know if there's I know the arborist was out there there could be two three or four trees post oak or red oak trees that have gone into what I call shock and so with summertime in this part of the Texas and Oklahoma trees can change colors prematurely and sometimes they lose their leaves prematurely but we don't really know that they're dead until next spring if they don't bud back out. So yes I believe it's our understanding that that the trees it was agreed to that planting zoning that the trees that died along that tree canopy I'm sorry along that tree preserve would be replaced. Now we do exceed as you saw the percentages any any minimum percentage required by the city of Denton but if that was what was agreed to the PNZ then then that's what we'll stand by. Some clarification from staff on that. Right yeah and I just ask because you know some some of the residents that actually is a protected boundary that between the development in their homes and so they were counting on on that and so that's just why I wanted a clarification. Yeah so. All of that green. Yeah. It's a marvelous battery. All the green on the south are trees. In fact there's three dead trees on the south that have been dead long before we started the process. They're just dead and you may or may not know but the city of Denton did a pipe burst to connect a sewer line and the homeowner whose lot the city pipe burst through called Ben who works with me and said I've got a dead tree and a branch is falling in the backyard. Is there anything you can do about it. Well the city didn't cause that tree to die. That tree's been dead for years and I didn't cause that tree to die but we told the homeowner today that we'll remove that tree plus the two next to it at our expense. Now I'm not going to replant those trees. They're dead. They were dead before the PADA was done but as a good neighbor and because a branch had fallen across her fence we're just going to take care of it. To answer your question and my engineer was at the PNZ meeting so if staff has the notes or whatever we agreed to at PNZ we absolutely will stand by. Right. There were some trees that that where Heywood wasn't sure if they were dead or just in shock. He did go back I believe after we've had these rains the last couple the last two weeks. Some did show some some buds growing on them. There were some others that that didn't at least yet but those are kind of on what I guess I'll call the watch list. So prior to prior to finalization of any seal those those will be looked at as a condition. Thank you. No I I like that you preserved as many trees as I'm not arguing I think it's fantastic and wonderful. I 'm just trying to answer the questions in these letters that I'm opposed as I as I go along to get answers for myself. Certainly. Yeah. Council member Amater. Can you speak to the I was just looking it up trying to look on the map for myself. Can you speak to the proximity of this development to the body of water the lake forest lake whatever it's called right there in the good Samaritan community community. How close. Also off Brian Road. I'm looking at two two different maps here with two different map that I pulled up on Google search. If you're familiar maybe someone else on council could could speak to our staff. Yeah. To assist. When this when this part of that part of the PDA this entire track that you see even this area in the area over here was all part of that agreement. And so this within that agreement there were it established three parcels tracked one eight one B and one C. And so one a. This is essentially one a that's adjacent to Good Samaritan. Their future they'll essentially have to go through the same process of plotting annexation and then zoning. But it's but it was already sort of established as part of that PDA. I believe this goes to NRMU but there's a limitation that really all it can do is just be a continuation of Good Samaritan. The parcel here in the middle which is primarily ESA. I believe it goes to NR. There are two but it is restricted I believe to two just to two residential units two or maybe three of the max but it's very very limited in what can be done. So that's like a buffer. I mean not correct. So you have the you have the ESA which serves as a natural buffer and then all the area through here is already limited through that P DA of what what could be developed there in the future and then even further further east. And where is it. So I'm looking at this one map and trying to find I see that two bodies of water here. It says I'm saying bodies of water because I don't know what it officially is but at some point it was a man made thing but it's lovely. I guess it's a little I believe there's a lake right here because it's called Lake Forest. But yeah and you know yet. And then my understanding is they're also going to have a lake here as part of their drainage with a fountain that would be incorporated into their into their site. OK. Because it's just it's it is a beautiful area. It really is. And strangely I mean I 've lived in Denton since 2002 and I only just recently earlier this year went to that area. It was kind of off my my route and visited folks that they get some area and community and was just really impressed with the beauty of that area. So thank you for helping me just just trying trying to place those two areas in proximity to each other. Thank you . Council member Briggs. So I have a question for staff. There is a someone is requesting that River Pass Road. Can you show me do you know where that is that River Pass Road extended connect to Ryan. Is that is that in part of our traffic analysis. Yes. Yes. Traffic analyzers out there right now. OK. Thank you. And that's that little it's a little road down at the south part of that subdivision if you take that down that's River Pass right there. He's got the cursor. That's great. River Pass goes north south. Further south. That's it. OK. That's member. Thank you. Similar question. The obviously the I think it's on the plot is the road that's going to connect down towards River Pass. Is that correct. Is there another connection. The plat seems is that we get in our backup. It's kind of cut off on the bottom so we can't really see the connection into that neighborhood. There's just the two there. There's the entry off of off of Ryan and then the secondary to the south here . OK. And I think that's that's correct. Creekdale Creekdale. Yeah. I think at one point there was a it was contemplated. You can see I believe it was here but that never as the as the PDA was developed in that concept plan that that was never taken taken through. I think it was this this hill I think goes over there. It's kind of dead end and eventually Creek dale will connect back up to grind road as well. I think that's thank you. It's kind of coming from both ways. I think that's part of development. If you could maybe step behind the line. Yeah. So we're being told by so. So Creekdale running north does connect back up to Ryan Road through our main entrance but it meanders through our community so as to prohibit it from being a speedway through there which I think is very good for everybody involved. Council member. So yeah I'm just looking at that hundred and thirty seven lots and they're kind of all compacted there and then we're looking at the way to get in and out is a concern but that's what's being studied right now. I mean are there other options for is it just that one entrance and exit. That's correct. So so on our site plan the only way in and out is through the northern entrance and then through Creekdale to the south. Okay thank you. That's my right. Do you have any potential dates as to when you think you'll start putting houses on the ground and kind of when you think you might be finished up. Certainly. So at this point we've completed our dirt work out there and we're in the middle of doing utilities. If the weather holds we should be paving around Thanksgiving and we would anticipate our first delivery of lots in June of 2019. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant. Seeing none. All right. Thank you. Oh thank you. Are these questions for the applicant or these. Okay. Yes member. Yeah. So and where is the plug gas well. Well it's gone. Oh yeah. But I'm sorry. Where was it. Yeah. Where was it. It was with that white mark is worse. The cursor. Right there. So the gas well was the gas well pad was right here originally for years and then the access to it was up in this private road which is now in our trail system. So all that's gone. Yeah. Yeah. And plugged wells gone. Yeah. Disappeared. The gas company is probably the hardest people we've dealt with . I bet. Yeah. Used to getting things their way. Yeah. I bet. What can we say. Yeah. And they're gone. Yeah. And we're very happy about that. Well and I know that you know even after a well is plugged and they go away there's still I mean I'm sure you're you know concerned too about the you know what remains in the ground and kind of effects on the kind of local environment and residents and I'm just just just just kind of putting that out there and wondering if because I hadn't gotten any any letters for or against this particular development I don't know if anyone else on council heard any concerned from resident nearby about issues regarding the gas well or if I thank you for mentioning. Yes. If I may say to the gas well we do an environmental phase one and because there was a gas well we did an environmental phase two by Alpha engineering and the good news is there was no evidence of any contaminants whatsoever before we ever started or frankly closed on the property. I wouldn't I wouldn't have bought the property with my lender Frost Bank had there been any kind of contaminants or anything to deal with. Yeah. So we did all those reports and thank goodness very clean report. Yeah well thank you. Thanks. Yes. Thank you. I do just have one question about that. Is there an agreement about monitoring that plugged well because plug wells don't necessarily always stay plugged. So is there is there some agreement either with you and the old gas well operator or with you you know laterally that you would do it or whoever that monitors that because I know there's probably rules and regs pursuant to the Texas Railroad Commission unplug. So I'm just trying to understand. Yes. Plugged. But yes. If there's some problem in the future who's responsible for mitigating those concerns. So to that question if there's a problem in the future there is responsibility by the gas company by Endeavor the gas company. If there is something were to come up or the plug didn't hold. Now the actual plug the actual well if I can get the cursor is in our hike and bike trail. So it's important to us and designing these lots. Well this is the pad with the batteries if you will storage tanks and other equipment were the actual well is in the hike and bike trail. So it's not on anybody's lot. The borehole. I'm sorry. The borehole. Yes sir. OK. The borehole. Yes. Do you know if they removed the casing when they plugged it or did they plug it with the casing. How deep did they. So the first 20 feet down they removed the casing and then plugged it with concrete. OK. Any other questions for the applicant. Seeing none. Thank you. This is a public hearing anybody else wishing to speak please come down state your name and address your time again. No desire to speak. I'm just giving you our time. OK. That will now close the public hearing council member pro tem Ryan. Thank you mayor. I'm very glad to see this come forward as an N.R. 3. Very glad to see that the gas well has been been capped and taken care of that also helps the neighbor neighboring community next door. And with that I move approval. OK. We have a motion. Do we have a second. We've been slow with the seconds tonight. Anybody got a second. Council member Duff. So we have a motion and second let's vote on the board please. Motion carries six zero agenda item seven deep hold a public hearing considered option of an ordinance of initial zoning of neighborhood residential N.R. 1 on approximately one acre. The best best for last. This is a and the quickest for and the quickest for last. And our last two folks in the audience I believe this is a assignment of an initial zoning of N.R. 1 to a one acre site. This property was annexed in 2013 as part of the H. nine which included two hundred ninety eight acres and one hundred and twenty nine parcels. As you can see it's generally surrounded by by E.T.J. This is one that has that party five X. However it is a one acre so it doesn't meet that five acre minimum so they are unable to build a house on the site which is the purpose of the rezoning this evening or the assignment of the rezoning. There's two criteria does it conform to the land use plan and adequate provisions for public facilities. The answer to all of that is yes it is land use low residential which N.R. 1 is essentially our our lowest density residential zoning district. There is a lot of large lot residential surrounding it albeit R.D . five X. There's really no hurry to have those zone because by the owner because they already have their property there and the likelihood of redeveloping their single family home on those large lots are probably slim to none. There is this is accessed through a private road and this was taken in as part of that county when we annexed in from the county. The city does have a water line out there however they will will be required to have septic for for sore. We did send out a public notification. We received zero in opposition one in favor which I believe is the applicant P.N.C. recommended approval seven zero and with that staff also recommended approval. Be happy to answer any questions. Okay any questions for staff. If not I'll open the public hearing. We do have a card on the agenda item says I do not wish to speak but will be available with questions if needed from Alexis Kuhn and Jonathan Burling. All right. So they are here if there's any questions for them on this particular agenda item. Any questions for the applicant. Seeing none and seeing that there's no one else in this room that could come to speak for for public hearing I think I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing. Councilmember Briggs I move approval. Mayor Pro Tem Ryan second. We have a motion and a second. Let's vote on the board please. We have approval six zero leads us to our last item concluding items. Councilmember Husband just a few things. So I want to I want to thank Mr. City Manager staff didn't police department really busy weekend and for that to go off seamless then a little excitement on the square. They were able to manage that well. So I appreciate that help. I have a pro clamation request. I don't know what that process is. I always forget. But I'd like to ask that we consider or ask Professor Andrew Torgut from UNT who pending confirmation just set that world record for longest history lesson. I'd like to invite him and his family here because I think that story is pretty dynamic. We heard it at breakfast koanas and I think it's just really neat a really neat process and story to tell. I'd also ask us to reach out to and I know Caroline is getting ready to have a conversation with Ren Baker over at UNT and maybe that's the best point of access for that. But I think that's a UNT with that big win and just kind of the significance of that that team effort. I really would like to see if we can get I know it's mid season so I don't know what that looks like but a representative here for a proclamation I think that would be really neat. And then lastly I have a thought if Mr. City Manager if you could have the whoever hits the library's department. I talked to a lot of people that have a key cost concern at the colleges are books. And so I 'd like to see what we could do to build an inventory or get an in kind donation from the universities may be it like a English class it's an entry level class it's always going to kind of be there what that current book is and if the library could house that or if they could give us a copy. So a student up and running maybe doesn't have the money for that initial book that we could that there's a section at the library at least they could go read you know chapter three as needed that sort of thing. But any any collaboration though the universities UNT TWA and NCTC would give us and so I don't know how to start that conversation but that's the goal is to have it so we could advertise those major classes books that are available for kids that may not be able to take that plunge and then just try to build that inventory up and maybe once it's in place I can try to get donations or that sort of thing. Thank you. Councilmember Hussbill on the proclamations if you'll just have somebody contact Robin she'll send them the template and then they get to fill out the text. Yeah. Councilmember Amater. So I'd like to ask that our gas well inspector check out that plug gas well make sure everything's all right. Yeah yeah and that the NR 3 just go check on that for peace of mind. I know we've got a lot of those but just because that just came before us. Mayor Pro Tem Bryan. Thank you mayor. I just want to remind anybody who's still watching at home or for fellow council members up here that Thursday the 20th is North Texas Day of Giving which has matched funds that go with it so when you give to your charities and you can go online now up through Thursday to give to your favorite charities in the North Texas area that are listed on the site and they get additional funds from some I wouldn't necessarily call it grant but it's it's large sponsors that put funds into match certain dollar amounts. All right. There's no more conclud ing items. Okay all right. We will stand adjourned at 1104 p.m. on September the 12th September 18th 2018.