Good afternoon, and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
for Wednesday, January 24th, 2024.
This is our work session, and with the quorum present, I will call us to order at 510 p.m.
Let the record show that Commissioners Cole and Thagard are absent at this time.
First item on our agenda is clarification for tonight's regular meeting.
First we have the minutes from January 10th, any questions, problems, okay.
That will take us to consent agenda, any questions, issues there, okay.
Items for individual consideration, we did have some emails come in, I don't know if
everyone saw that, so I'll go ahead and call up Mia, oh, Haley's going to be here for Mia,
number 4A, FP23-0036, hi Haley.
Good evening, yes, so this item, you did receive an extension request emailed this morning,
if granted that extension could be to February 14th, there are just a few remaining items
to be worked out on the plan, most of them are fairly simple in nature relating to just
labeling of things and depicting easements correctly, so we are hopeful that they could
get this to an approval state by the next meeting if the extension were granted, and
this would be a second extension, great, any questions, thanks Haley, you're going to stay
up here for 4B, absolutely, okay, FP23-0033, yes, and you also received an update on this
plat, this is the Hickory Grove project formerly known as Legends Ranch, if that rings any
bells for anyone, this has been changed to a recommendation of approval, as they were
able to work through the outstanding items since the packet posted last week, and that
final plat was submitted in email this afternoon, yes, okay, thank you Haley, last item for
items of individual consideration is 4C, FP24-0002, hi Erin, good evening, bless you, Erin Stanley
Assistant Planner, this is FP24-0002, this is a final plat for the Denton Shady Shores
Edition located east of South I-35E, yeah, a lot of directions there, they have a few
items to work through, it's mostly checklist items as well, and adding some easements that
are required, they have requested an extension request which could be granted to a date certain
of February 14th, thank you, any questions for Erin, okay, thank you very much, we've
got one public hearing this evening, that's 5A HL23-0002, hi Cameron, good evening Commissioners,
Cameron Robertson, Historic Preservation Officer, this is for a historic landmark designation
of 314 Marietta Street, so I'm sure some of you all have seen some designations in the
past, but a lot of y'all are new to this process, so I'm going to take you through a little
bit of background of what a historic landmark is, and what are some of the benefits, and
then give you a quick summary.
So what is a historic landmark, it is a building, district, object or site or structure that
is officially recognized by the City of Denton, the state or the United States, and it's for
outstanding architectural, archaeological, cultural, social, economic, ethic or political
historical significance, currently the City of Denton does have 64 local historic landmark
designations, and it is a zoning action, so that is why it's in front of PNZ this evening,
it first goes to the Historic Landmark Commission who then recommends approval which comes to
the Planning and Zoning Commission and then on the City Council.
So what are the benefits of a historic landmark, obviously I think there's lots of benefits
of a historic landmark, but there are property owner benefits, it does, there are studies
showing that historically designated properties do appreciate a greater rate, properties are
eligible for local historic tax exemption, in this case for the City of Denton that is
a 50% assessed property value for up to 10 years and then they can reapply.
They also protect the investment of owners and residents from incompatible development,
you get the historic landmark plaque, so that is some visible recognition there, but also
some of the community benefits are it does protect from swift demolition, it would have
to go in front of the Historic Landmark Commission, it does help with neighborhood revitalization
and it does discourage sprawl among some other benefits.
So the summary is that it is a request for historic landmark designation at 314 Marietta,
it is zoned OR3, so and that's due to the fact that it's in the West Oak Area Historic
District, which is highlighted there by the yellow border, it is compliant with our goals
in our Denton 2040 Comprehensive Plan, so our Community Character Goal 2, as well as
our 2019 Historic Preservation Plan, our goal number 1, policy 1.3, so staff is recommending
approval as it complies with our criteria for historic landmark designation 2.9.4B in
the Denton Development Code, as well as those two plans.
Any questions?
Thank you.
Questions?
Commissioner Smith?
Oh I couldn't find the backup, Cameron, was how many other HLCs, or Historic Landmark
designation, sorry, are in that area right there, on the West Oak Historic District?
Oh in the West Oak?
So the, I believe it is around approximately 60 properties, I can look that up so I can
present that later during the public hearing session, but I think it is around 60 properties.
I can confirm that.
And you're going to go through in the full presentation the reasoning and the processing?
Correct.
Yes.
Cool.
That's all.
Thanks.
So the HLC is undergoing renovation, right, or is going to go under renovation?
So their building permit is presently on hold.
No building permits can be approved and given to the applicants at this time due to the
fact that they want to go through the designation process.
That COA, because it is in the West Oak Area Historic District, that certificate of appropriateness
was approved back in November by the Historic Landmark Commission due to the fact that they
felt that it met the West Oak Area design standards as well as the Secretary of Interior
standards for new additions.
Okay.
So then that's on hold until this process?
Until the designation process is complete.
So once it goes to City Council, whether it's approved or denied at that point, then they
can proceed with that building permit process.
So this is in addition to.
So it is already in the Historic District.
It is a contributing property to our local Historic District, but they're just looking
for individual landmark designation.
Got it.
Okay.
And I think.
Oh, go ahead.
Oh, yeah.
And I think is that what you were asking Commissioner Smith is how many were actually designated,
right?
Correct.
Yeah.
Okay.
How many have a designation in that?
Because they're all in the historical district.
Correct.
Yeah.
Oh, so locally we have 64.
How many?
In this area.
Yeah.
Oh, I'm so sorry.
Okay.
I think you meant how many.
Cool.
I mean, I don't know why we would not do this.
Okay.
Sorry.
I thought you meant how many properties are in this historic district specifically right
now.
But let me look at how many I think that's more closer to like one or two.
Yeah.
Hold the designation.
Yeah.
Understood.
Okay.
Yeah.
And then that was kind of the reason, the follow-up question.
Sorry.
The reason I had the follow-up question was going through the process was just if there
are, however, I was going to guess there was between 50 and 100 properties in that area,
I just know in the area, but how does this one compare to the one or two that we've already
approved, right?
Gotcha.
So that's it.
Okay.
But I was like, if there's already 60 there, I mean, yeah, sure.
I'm going to put one on the pile.
Tina, were you going to add something to that?
Yes.
Just, and Cameron, correct me if I'm wrong, but just kind of a follow-up to your question
as well.
So, you know, as Cameron pointed out, because they've chosen, the applicant has chosen to
go through this designation process, it does put those building permits on hold.
They could have gone completely through building permits, since they have their certificate
of appropriateness approved, they could have gone completely through the building permit
review, had done the building addition and finished that process, and then come back
after the fact and requested the designation.
Correct.
But in this case, the applicant has chosen to pause their construction or their permit
review and hold off until they get the designation first.
So just, I want you to understand that it was up to the applicant as to when they submitted
this designation request, because we had that conversation with them, but they were wanting
to go ahead and proceed with it at this time.
And I guess that was the reason for my question, because I've not seen it in this order before.
Right.
That, you know, that they would be in the middle of, or certainly wanting to, you know,
Designate in the middle of the term.
Yeah.
So it just is a little bit, it was a little bit confusing to me as to the order of things.
Was there any, like, why are they doing it that way?
Well, initially, just to give you some background on the certificate of appropriateness application
that we reviewed in November, they had come to me back in July wanting to demo the property.
They wanted to build a craftsman style residence, which we kind of went through the education
process of what a true craftsman style residence is.
And I explained to them why it is important to preserve our current fabric that we have
in that neighborhood, because it allows us to tell kind of that story of that development
north of University of North Texas.
So we were able to work on this design process, probably over four months, about four months,
and then they took it forward.
And then after that, they decided that they were really interested in actually designating
the process, because they really appreciated kind of the process that we went through in
terms of education.
Okay.
Thank you.
Yeah.
Any other questions?
Okay.
Look forward to the full presentation.
It was just one?
Okay.
Oh.
I was close.
I said one or two.
Not 60.
I misunderstood.
I wish it was 60.
That would be great.
Thank you, Cameron.
Look forward to seeing you later.
Okay.
That is the end of the agenda.
So that will take us to our work session report.
We've got one this evening.
It is 2A PZ 24-011.
Receive a report.
Hold a discussion regarding demographic and housing data, as well as City of Denton's
affordable housing needs assessment.
Hello.
Hi.
Good morning.
Cameron is taller than I am.
All right.
I said good morning, didn't I?
You did.
Has it been one of those days?
Yeah.
Thank you.
Well, good evening, commissioners.
Hi.
It's definitely morning somewhere.
My name is Leah Atkinson.
I serve as the housing program's coordinator on the community services team.
A while ago, there was a request for some demographic data and housing stock data from
the commission.
And around the same time, an affordable housing bond was passed by the Denton voters.
And so the planning team and community services team collaborated to create this two-part
work session, going over that demographic and housing stock data, as well as the affordable
housing needs assessment and strategic plan going hand-in-hand.
So today, we'll go over a brief history of affordable housing in Denton, followed by
that demographic information and housing stock data, which ties really nicely into our affordable
housing needs assessment.
Those go hand-in-hand.
And then next time we meet, February 14th, we'll go over the affordable housing strategic
toolkit and its strategies, many of which will be coming for your consideration pretty
soon here.
Getting straight into that timeline, in January of 2021, the affordable housing needs assessment
and market value analysis was initially completed.
In February of 2022, as a result of that, city council did adopt the affordable housing
strategic plan.
In that same year, in November, the first housing programs coordinator was hired.
And then in April of 2023, public facility corporation bylaws were presented to city
council.
You may remember those tied 3-3 at the time and did not pass, but they are coming back
around for city council consideration shortly.
And that same month, the first housing programs coordinator completed the first GIS map for
city Dentonites only of vacant or underutilized properties, assessed for their viability as
an affordable housing development, essentially so that we can assess those potential projects.
And then most recently, in November of 2023, last fall, voters approved a $15 million bond
for affordable housing.
Jumping into that demographic information, the city of Denton is a majority white city
at 60%.
This is higher than the state average.
Only 11% of Denton residents identify as black or African American, while smaller percentages,
approximately 5%, identify as Asian or indigenous of some kind.
And then a rough 20-ish percent identify as two or more of those races or some other race
not listed and identified by the census.
If you're interested in change over time, those two categories, some other race not
listed and two or more races, are where you've seen the most growth and change in the past
10 years or so.
Additionally, oh, yes.
Sorry, do we have a breakdown of what percentage of the white population is Latino?
That's the information I believe I could get from the census as well.
However, it does also say Hispanic, any race is about 25%, so a quarter of Denton residents.
Yeah, of any race, a quarter of residents are Hispanic or Latino.
Thanks.
Commissioner Villarreal, next time, raise your hand, please.
And then also, you'll need to turn your mic on when you want to talk to him.
So that's all right.
I'm just reminding you.
No, that's my fault.
I just...
That's my fault.
I just really love questions.
All right, thanks.
So where Denton does start to set itself apart is age.
You might have guessed that having some major universities in our city affects our age demographics
a little bit.
Namely, our population of 20-somethings, actually a quarter of our population, 25%, is between
the ages of 20 and 29 in comparison to 14% of Texas residents overall being between those
age ranges of 20 to 29.
On this chart up here, you can see that Denton being the bottom row broken down and Texas
overall being the top, 20 to 29-year-olds are in dark blue.
So you can see we are taking up a much larger portion of the population in Denton than Texas
overall.
Directly tied to this and pretty majorly affecting our housing stock are household type.
In Denton, 41% of households are what the census considers non-family households, which
means that they either is a single...
That's either a single adult living alone or living with roommates who are not related
by blood or marriage.
So that's 41% of Denton residents in comparison to 31% of Texas residents as a baseline.
Again, you can see that broken down, Denton being the bottom bar and Texas being the top
bar, and we're again looking at that dark blue.
So you see non-family households taking up a larger portion, which affects our housing
needs.
Do I have questions about this or the race demographics before?
Commissioner Pruitt.
Thank you, Chair.
What is other family?
I looked this up and now it's left my brain.
That would essentially be, if I'm not mistaken, that would be like a adult and a child in
the household who is related by blood or adoption, or two adults who are not related by marriage
but are co-parenting a child or things like that.
Also like two siblings or a parent and child living together, adult child.
So other situations like that.
Does that answer that appropriately?
Anybody else?
Good.
Okay.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you.
Okay.
So this can look a little bit confusing at first, so if you'll allow me to walk through
it.
56% of housing units in Denton are single-family homes.
So essentially if we rounded up 100 Denton residents and said, "Hey, how many units,
how many homes are in the building that you live in," 56 would say, "I live in a single-family
home."
It's only us.
Smaller percentages, about 10% of our units are in duplexes or triplexes or quadplexes.
Additionally, about 9% are in buildings with five or nine units.
Approximately 8% are in buildings with 10 or 19 units.
Approximately 7% are in buildings with 20 to 49 units.
And then only 6% are in buildings with 50 or more units.
4% of units are mobile homes in Denton.
You can see that in comparison, Denton is in the light green in comparison to the lighter
blue of Dallas and the darker blue of Texas.
So as you might expect, Texas has a much larger proportion of single-family homes, whereas
Dallas has a much smaller proportion of single-family homes than Denton.
If you look over here to 50 or more units, you'll see Denton and Texas overall actually
have about the same proportion of units, 50 or more.
I believe you pointed this out when we went over it, Tina, in comparison to Dallas, which
has a much larger proportion of buildings with 50 or more units in it.
Does this make sense to everybody?
Do I have questions?
Commission for it?
Thank you, Chair.
And so this is existing housing units within the city right now, right?
Correct.
Existing housing units.
And if I recall, I'm sorry if I'm asking someone who wasn't close to the data, but if I recall
from our mid-year update, it was something around a 50/50 split between single-family
homes constructed in the previous calendar year versus multifamily and I think all but
one of those projects with 50 plus units, something like that.
That's my recollection, anyway.
If somebody wants to correct me, that's fine.
But I'm just trying to get a concept of what we have historically versus what we're building.
Okay.
Yeah.
Unfortunately, I was not with the city at that time, but I would love to dig into that
data and get back to you with it.
Okay.
Cool.
Thanks.
Yeah.
A few other data points about our housing stock in Denton.
A very, very slight majority, about 51% of our units in Denton are renter occupied.
So the household living there is renting.
They do not own the place, but it's a pretty slim majority.
Additionally, in Denton, 3% of housing units are studios or efficiencies with no bedroom.
15% are one bedrooms, and the vast majority at 60% are two or three bedrooms.
That's the majority of our housing stock.
An additional 22% of our units have four or more bedrooms.
And then kind of lastly on this slide, just talking about the age, kind of to your point, of housing units in Denton.
A pretty slim 9% were built before 1960, 55% were built between the years of 1960 and 1999, so that's the bulk of our housing stock.
If you actually look a little bit closely, between the years of 2000 and 2019, 37% of our housing stock was built.
Which by itself is a pretty large chunk, but also, you might note,
is larger than any other 20 year period indicated on this chart.
Kind of just speaking to that exponential growth we've had in the 20 years prior to 2020.
Any questions here?
>> Commissioner Pruitt.
>> Thank you, Chair.
If you're going to get through this in a minute, then just say wait.
But the renter occupied versus owner occupied, that's occupation of the unit, not number of people, right?
>> Correct. >> Do we have data on number of residents?
>> Individuals broken down by renter.
I do not have that at this time.
My understanding is that that's not how the census asks that question.
In the American Community Survey, that's where the stat is being pulled from.
But I can certainly, again, go back and double check and look for that.
>> Okay, thanks.
>> So touching on transportation.
The average commute for a Denton resident who does not work from home is 26 minutes.
50%, so half of Denton residents do work in Denton, which I think is pretty cool.
13% of those are working from home.
And then if you'll allow me to touch on vehicles before I get into transportation costs,
4% of Denton households have no vehicle available to them.
35% of Denton households have one vehicle, 41% have two vehicles available to them.
Again, this is household, not individual.
And then lastly, 20% of households have three or more vehicles available to them.
But again, that can be one of those non-family households, three roommates,
possibly in college, living together each with their own vehicle.
Lastly here, the Center for Neighborhood Technology has what they call the Housing and Transportation Cost Index.
It's essentially their way of saying, if housing is supposed to take up no more than 30% of a household's budget,
then housing and transportation combined should take up no more than 45% of a household's expenses.
This is kind of their way of measuring the difference between urban household costs versus suburban or rural household costs.
In Denton, 42% of residents do spend more than 45% of their income on housing.
You can see that in comparison to Denton County overall and Dallas itself.
Do I have any questions about this?
Yeah, 45% of Denton residents, sorry.
I mixed my percentages up, 42% of Denton residents spend more than 45% of their income on housing.
I have to do a lot of math, and I'm so sorry.
>> It's housing and transportation, right?
>> Yes, on housing and transportation combined.
>> Thank you, and sorry, Chair, I did not.
>> You're good.
>> All right, and if you're interested in more information about that,
the Center for Neighborhood Technology has a really great data explorer on their website.
So rent, it's gone up a bit.
As you may be able to see here, between the years of 2015 to about 2020, rent was pretty steady.
It was increasing, but slightly and slowly.
And then something happened between the years of 2021 and 23, so January 21 to January of 23, rent rose about $300 on average.
You may see on here, it stayed off a little bit after that, which is the trend we're kind of expected to see moving forward.
And it's not necessarily continuing to increase at that steep incline, but also not returning to pre-pandemic levels.
>> These numbers are average, is that what you're taking some kind of median?
>> Yes, not broken down by size of unit, just average overall.
There's a similar story with home sales price.
This data does go back a bit further.
Between the years of 2000 to, you know, 2010, 2015, home sales prices were fairly average, were holding fairly steady.
And then they start to go up a little bit in 2015 to 2020, debt is growing.
And so home prices go up a little bit, and then something happened.
And between the years of January 2020, from January to 2023, home prices on average rose about $100,000.
You can see again, those kind of studying off towards the end there, not returning to pre-pandemic levels, but not continuing to increase at the same rate.
Do I have any questions on these last two slides?
Okay.
All right, so here's where it gets a little complicated.
So, Danny and I are asked pretty frequently, what is affordable housing?
What does that even mean?
And I will answer that question, I promise you.
That a architect who's working on affordable housing development in Denton right now recently rephrased that question as for
whom is housing affordable, which I think is a pretty good lens of looking at this.
Housing is considered affordable if a household is spending no more than 30% of their income on their housing.
So from a development perspective, if I want to build affordable housing, I'm building housing that is
affordable at that metric, 30% of your income or less, for a household that's living at 80% area median income or lower.
Area median income is how the US Department of Housing and Urban Development measures income and also qualifies for their housing programs.
Subsequently, that's also how the city of Denton measures income and qualifies for our federally funded housing programs.
So this is an important metric for us.
It is measured at the regional level, so Denton falls into the greater DFW region, which affects these numbers.
And that median is considered $105,600.
HUD sets that as for a family of four, and then breaks it down further by household size.
So a household at 100% of the area median income for
a family of four is $105,600 collectively each year.
Is everyone tracking so far?
Okay, so if I am a four person household and
we're living at the 80% area median income mark, we're making $82,500 together collectively each year and so on.
At that extremely low income, 30% of the median income mark, we're making $30,000 and $950 each year.
Now that extremely low income category is where we see the most vulnerability when we talk about housing.
At that level, it gets extremely difficult to afford housing.
For example, for that family of four, if we're making $30,950 each annually,
that comes down to about $2,600 each month.
So 30% of that means that we have $775 to spend on housing.
I don't know if any of us are renters in this room, but you would have an incredibly difficult time
finding a studio for that price, much less housing for a family of four.
In Denton, this breaks down a little bit differently.
48% of Denton residents actually do live below that 80% area median income mark.
So a different way to say that is about half of Denton residents could potentially qualify for affordable housing.
We estimate there's approximately 57,000, I shouldn't say we.
The census estimates, much more reputable source, estimates about 57,000 households in Denton.
So about 27,000 are living below that 80% area median income mark struggling with housing.
Of those, 18% are at the low income level, so they're between 50 and 80%, AMI.
Between those two, the mic doesn't follow me.
Between those two lines, and then 14% are very low income,
living between those two, the light blue and the green lines, in terms of their household income.
And then 16%, about 9,000 households are extremely low income and
living with incomes below this chart, lower than the chart.
Do I have any questions?
There's a lot here, it's so much.
>> Commissioner Perrett.
>> There's a lot, you've done an extremely good job laying this out.
I have a related question that will help me interpret all the data.
>> Yeah.
>> I've always been confused about how and
with what confidence the census and
ACS data incorporates all of this stuff from nine months student residents in the city of Denton.
>> How should I think of that?
>> Danny's coming up, because she's got more knowledge.
Danny Shaw, Director of Community Services.
So the census data on this calculation is actually two and a half years behind.
So it's actually not even current to what you're looking at, so
it does calculate older data to get to that average.
>> Sorry, maybe I asked it confusingly.
It's not so much how old is the data.
It's when they collect the data, do they intentionally try to capture
students who are here on April 1st of the census year, or ACS date?
>> Well, yeah, the ACS date, yes.
They'd be calculating that database on people who are responding in their surveys
based on whomever responds at the time at that date.
>> So under normal circumstances, we would expect the student population to be sampled for ACS reasons.
>> Yes. >> But at the 2020 census,
do you think we had a lower student population than normal?
>> We did have lower responses here, yes.
>> So we would assume at 2020 data to have a little dip just from sampling, perhaps.
>> I think you could make that statement, yeah.
>> All right, thank you.
>> Anybody else?
Okay, thank you all so much.
So to put a little bit more context to all that math, we gave you more math.
We actually, the community services team collaborated with the economic development
team to put this chart together.
This is showing some common occupations in Denton with 30% of their monthly income when set at the 25th percentile.
So for example, 30% of the typical child care
worker's income is going to be $568 and so forth.
In comparison, we have the median costs of a studio in the light green, one bedroom in the purple,
and a two bedroom in the teal in Denton for comparison.
So as you can see here, there's a lot of occupations that in general are really struggling to afford even a studio,
including our hairdressers, pharmacy technicians, restaurant cooks, and
child care workers who are non-profits are telling us are really essential and in deep need right now.
Furthermore, if you want to afford a one bedroom, there's a few more occupations that struggle to afford that,
such as librarians, electricians, and clergy, even though they studied for quite some time to do what they do.
And even our middle school teachers are struggling to be able to afford a two bedroom apartment.
Do I have any questions here?
Okay, thanks.
Breaking that math down a little bit further, just to go step by step.
If I want to rent a studio in Denton, the median cost for that is about $950.
So in order to afford that, on an annual basis, I have to make about $38,000.
Translated into wage, that is about $18 an hour.
So on average, you have to be making $18 an hour to afford a studio in Denton.
Here I've got that AMI chart from earlier broken down.
So you can see in the lighter colors are households that can afford that studio.
It's the majority, which is good.
But for those extremely low income households, and also some very low income households,
it can be difficult to afford even a studio.
Some occupations that are typically represented in that population are going to be our cashiers,
those child care workers, cleaners, substitute teachers, and school bus drivers.
Do I have any questions here?
Okay.
So for households that may need a two bedroom, possibly they have children in the household,
that situation increases a bit.
So the median cost for a two bedroom is going to be about $1,500.
On average, in order to afford that, a household would need to collectively make $61,000 annually.
As you can see, a lot more households really struggle with that.
So commonly represented in here are firefighters, electricians, plumbers, social workers,
vocational nurses, teachers, and welders are struggling to make rent for a two bedroom in Denton.
Do I have questions here?
Commissioner Pruitt.
>> Thank you, Chair.
Sorry, just another interpretation question.
It strikes me that I may have been misinterpreting all of these charts of household sizes and AMIs in the past,
not just this presentation, but years past.
>> That's okay.
>> Because I noticed that, for instance, the 60% AMI for four person families is higher than the five person families.
That makes me think that this is all sampled data, as opposed to the --
>> I had assumed before -- sorry for my rambling, that the scaling from single person to multi persons was a scaling of cost of living.
And this doesn't appear to be like that.
Can you explain why it's not like that?
>> I'm going to let Danny take that one.
>> Sorry, I just -- I want to learn.
>> No, no, no, the little dip bothers me as well.
>> It is based on a formula calculation that incorporates poverty factors.
So at the four person household, it does have a variation in the calculation that HUD does.
The actual formula calculation is available on the HUD side if you're interested in learning the background.
But I can't answer if it's a sampling or not.
So I'm curious about that as well.
So I appreciate that question.
But it does -- the formula does change at the different income levels because of those poverty calculations and how they're calculated in different programs.
>> I will go have some fun with math.
>> Yes.
>> You can check it.
Yes, please do.
Any further questions here?
Okay.
Commissioner Smith.
>> Thank you, Chair.
So let me just make sure I understand the data you've given me so far and not making a conjecture and more of just surmising.
What I've seen so far is that we have -- you said the number was -- we have the highest number of single adult, non-family, 41% are non-family, single adults are unrelated, something like that, right?
>> Correct, yes.
>> And that the further down the household size you go and the definition of affordability that we're using, the faster housing becomes unaffordable.
Is that correct?
>> Correct, yeah.
The -- you can -- the way to say it that I would say it is it's just increasingly difficult to afford housing alone is the best way I could fix it, yes.
>> And not all 41%, but from the measure we can have, there's 41% of population that is, if you want to say it correctly, at higher risk of being -- of being in that more susceptible population.
>> I would agree with that, yes.
>> Got it, understood.
>> Okay.
So what is the result of -- wait, was there an additional question?
>> Commissioner Haggard.
>> I apologize.
>> Thank you, Chair.
Take the opportunity also to apologize for my tardiness.
Quick question, you may have already reviewed this.
Again, I'm also trying to understand the math.
When you're looking at combined household income, I guess, what are the opportunities where you may have like four electricians living together or where you may have three teachers living together?
>> I'm trying to understand because if the numbers you suggest is that we have a lot of people that are walking around and they don't have anywhere to live when obviously --
>> Right.
And a little bit we will go over that together, but it is actually pretty related to what we were saying before and that, yes, people live together.
I have two roommates, all of whom are -- all of us are working.
And so that -- we're a household of three and we're represented on here, right?
So I hope that answers that.
>> Okay, perfect.
Any other questions?
Okay.
>> Thank you.
>> So the result of this is cost burden.
If we've been saying that 30% of a household's income is the budget for housing, when a household is spending more than 30% of their income on housing, they are considered cost burdened.
In Denton, of the 48% who are living below that 80% area median income mark, 69% are cost burdened in some fashion.
In fact, the largest portion are severely cost burdened at 38%, which means that they're spending more than half of their income towards housing.
Do you have any questions on this before I move forward?
>> Could I just have you clarify because you keep saying towards housing, also transportation?
>> This is just housing specifically.
>> This is just housing?
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah, just on the one transportation slide where we're discussing housing and transportation together.
>> Understood.
Okay, thank you.
>> No, no, thank you.
All right.
But, of course, that cost burden is not dispersed equally.
We talked about our more vulnerable households that are extremely low income.
Of those extremely low income households in Denton, which again that's 16% of households, about 9,000,
88% are severely cost burdened and every single month paying more than half of their income towards their housing.
When our nonprofits talk about Alice households and households living paycheck to paycheck, unable to save for retirement or medical bills, this is a huge, huge part of that story.
In conclusion, we learned that the majority of units in Denton are single family homes.
About half of units in Denton are rented, not owned.
Both rents and home prices rose significantly between the months of January 2020 and December 2022.
Most, many, it's not most, many common occupations can't afford to rent a studio in Denton on the whole.
Of about the half of Denton residents who are considered low income, 69% are cost burdened and paying more than 30% of their income towards housing.
And of that 16%, that 9,000 Denton households who are extremely low income, 88% are extremely cost burdened and spend more than half of their monthly income on housing.
It's a bit of a downer, but this is the findings that our affordable housing needs assessment presented to us in 2021.
And this is why city council chose to approve our affordable housing strategic toolkit in 2022, and ultimately I believe this is why Denton residents voted to approve the affordable housing bond last fall.
I'm really looking forward to seeing you all next time and talking about solutions and what will be coming your way for consideration in the upcoming few years.
Do I have any questions?
>> Questions as we finish out?
Commissioner Smith?
>> I know we're talking about solutions on the 14th, but just a question that came up in my mind earlier was when we talk about affordable housing initiatives coming from the bond package as approved, essentially that's bond money.
So it's going to be city initiated, city led.
Are some of those solutions including working with developers that we've already seen come into the city before with affordable housing?
Okay, I didn't know what percentage was going to be that, or it's going to be, I'm just thinking of solutions that are probably not as feasible as working with private sector.
>> I'm going to let Danny talk to you because she's excited.
>> Danny, I'm just looking at it as like, if the city could go build $15 million of housing and run a city owned housing project.
>> It wouldn't be a very big one.
>> No, it wouldn't be.
No, and it wouldn't be very effective.
>> No, I think that's what I'm most proud of in our toolkit and the strategies that were developed there because it really is looking at how we incentivize the private market to be the partner in this because we can't.
It's $15 million at $275,000 per unit is not going to build very many units, so it's absolutely important for us to be working through strategies.
So you'll be looking at incentive packages that are designed to incentivize that behavior from developers.
We can't mandate it, state law ties our hands there, but we can incentivize that.
So we say, we're going to offer you some incentives, if you all approve those, that will allow developers to get a little bit of bonuses in what they're doing in exchange for affordability.
And not just short term, but long term affordability over time.
And those funds will help us with those incentives drastically.
>> I'm going to put you on the spot here, Danny.
>> Yeah.
>> I know how it works on bond committees.
>> Yeah.
>> When you guys came in with this idea to the bond committee, was 15 your target?
>> No, we came in at 10 million.
>> Oh, wow, okay, cool.
>> The bond committee was nice enough to say.
>> I was, yeah.
>> Okay.
>> We'll give you a couple more dollars.
>> I didn't know if it was, you know, you guys came in with 30, and they said, look, all we can really do together is 15.
And that just kind of helps me with scope and understanding, but they did a 50% increase.
>> No, they felt like we maybe came in low and offered that we could have some additional money to put towards that effort.
>> We thought we could make an impact with 10, but now we're going to make even more of 15 is what we got.
>> Yeah, yeah.
We'll do what we can with it.
>> Cool.
Thanks, Danny.
>> Yeah, thank you.
>> Anybody else?
Commissioner Perot.
>> Thank you, Chair.
First of all, just thank you for this overview.
I would like to ask if we could have a copy of this.
I know it's just a snapshot in time, but sometimes we don't always get a copy of the work session presentations.
I think this would be a very helpful one to look back on.
And I guess just a couple of questions.
If there are more things that we'll cover in the part two, that's fine.
Commissioner Thaggart brought up the concept of co-housing and how people mitigate these challenges.
I imagine the data is incredibly hard to get, but I would appreciate if you could at least introduce the concepts of sort of the difference in the housing speak of
over-crowdedness versus density of families and how that works.
And then -- yeah, sorry, if you want to say something.
>> Just to answer that very quickly.
We can and we actually include that in our five-year consolidated plan, so that data is relatively available as well.
>> Okay.
That's great.
And then -- uh-oh.
This is dangerous.
I should have taken notes.
>> You should have taken notes.
I'm sorry.
You're all --
>> I got a question.
You can think about it.
>> Hang on.
Commissioner Pruitt has the floor.
Are you truly stuck at the moment?
>> I'll take a break, yes.
>> Okay.
Okay.
Anybody on this side?
Yes?
Okay.
Commissioner Smith.
>> Thanks.
>> Okay.
You're next.
>> It was slightly mentioned in the presentation, but there was nothing really explicitly in the data that was presented that was directly student-related in looking at -- I mean,
outside of the percentage of folks between 20 and 29, which we can correlate to student or most recently was student, right?
Was there any data that came from the census that we could extrapolate that could help our understanding a little bit more about housing and the impact of being a heavily student population housing area?
>> I'll answer that.
And if Dani has follow-up, yeah.
I would be surprised if we were able to confidently extrapolate that from the census.
However, we can look at internal data and see if there's anything there.
Do you have anything to add to that?
Yeah.
>> I only ask that we -- Leadership Denton, which was almost eight years ago that I was on Leadership Denton, affordable housing was our project.
And we wanted to address variables that hadn't been addressed by other organizations and entities in the city already.
And our focus was on the impact of student housing, or student housing, the impact that students and housing students -- I don't want to say student housing, but housing students makes on the city.
And so I didn't know, and as comprehensive as this is, if there was data that was related to that, to show that as an interesting and significant point.
>> No, but we can use the university data on enrollment in the housing in those areas.
We can also look at a couple of other parameters in that discussion to see.
Because we do know that Denton is unique also in that we don't have as much naturally occurring affordable housing because it is taken up by students.
And also the larger housing product is not available to families as frequently here because students are taking up larger housing because they're co-housing.
So we can try to pull some more definitive data.
Those are just anecdotal statements based on what we know from the numbers.
But we'll see if we can get it to be something that you can be more confident in.
>> Gotcha. Thanks, Danny.
>> Anything else?
>> Commissioner Thacker.
>> Thank you, Chair.
I had the privilege of seeing Danny's presentation on the bond where I served.
It was a beautiful presentation.
A couple of questions, and I believe, Danny, I may have asked you this one when I served on bond.
Do you guys have data on the folks that are in long-term versus short-term housing, sort of like maybe a breakdown of what those families look like?
And also the tenure that they are in both long-term and short-term.
>> Yeah, and I appreciate that question.
We have the tenure of the housing stock, but not of the people who are in it that we can pull.
But thank you for clarifying exactly what context you were looking for there because let us look at that to see if there's some way we can identify that.
Because I think it would be important in our rental conversations for assistance, too.
So thank you.
>> I believe, yeah.
Thank you.
>> Commissioner Perutt.
>> Thank you, Chair.
I have recollected my thoughts.
These may be just hopeful requests for part two.
I think one thing that we haven't really talked about is specifically with the LIHTC, sorry, Low Income Housing Tax Credit, WordSoup, the federal program that gives us -- gives private developers money when they offer affordable housing.
The projects -- I think there's something called the Qualified Census Districts that changes the rules of that program and to some degree influences where those location -- or where those projects get requested.
I think that would be helpful for us to see.
And then just some more information about, you know, we talk about transportation data, some kind of staff suggestion of how we should think about location in terms of land uses for these types of things.
I know that's a huge concept.
>> It's not.
It's something we already have completed, but I'm going to let Dani say it because it's her brainchild.
>> Yeah.
Well, and I just wanted to kind of qualify.
There's a couple of reasons why those census districts are important.
There was a Supreme Court ruling in Dallas around the scoring and how it concentrated, inadvertently concentrated folks in certain areas.
We're already experiencing that just by virtue of the way land costs are.
So it's a good question.
Let's let us, like, sit like that with the other things, too.
>> I was thinking through -- because the qualified census track does incentivize, right, because there are people who are low mod income.
Our goal is to diversify that, right?
And so we're not prioritizing that in ours, but the state prioritizes it in the qualified action plan, the QAP.
So that's how it actually happens through the state.
>> Would you also want to throw in there information about our GIS?
>> Yeah, I was going to say also additionally in that GIS map that was mentioned earlier, that is our internal assessment of vacant properties or underutilized properties.
We are really looking directly at how close is this to a bus stop?
Is this in walking distance of a school or a library or a potential workplace?
And that's one of our major factors.
So, yes.
>> So it's really good to know that all that analysis is getting done.
I understand why all that needs to keep -- stay in house.
If there were some way of including relative scoring of projects where we have land use decisions on to give us an idea of is this sort of above median or below compared to other hopes, that would really help me.
>> Yeah, that's definitely what we're trying to do.
And additionally, in the presentation as we have it scheduled for next time, we do go over the market value analysis and the kind of regions that they outlined, and that's all public data.
And so kind of just discussing what characterizes each district and what we're hoping for that area.
>> Yeah, I lay ahead and nail on the head just to go one step further, though.
Our goal is to make sure we are making those recommendations in the future as you look at projects.
Why is it being recommended on our side for these incentives?
Because it does score this way.
And so that's exactly where we're headed.
Yes.
>> Thank you.
>> Any additional questions?
Anybody else?
>> Okay.
Thank you very much.
Outstanding.
Look forward to the part two.
>> Just a shout out to Lea.
This is really -- she's only been with us a few months.
And so as you can see, she's amazing.
Great team.
And so she did a great job.
So this is our first presentation in front of the city group.
>> You did great.
Thank you very much.
Okay.
That concludes our work session.
So I'll go ahead and adjourn us at 6.01 p.m.
We will reconvene in council chambers at 6.30 for our regular meeting.
Good evening and welcome to the city of Denton's planning and zoning commission meeting for Wednesday, January 24th, 2024.
With a quorum present, I will call us to order at 6.30 p.m.
First item on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas flags.
>> 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.
>> Thank you.
First order of business is the consider approval of our minutes from our January 10th meeting.
Are we having technical difficulties?
Okay.
We are going to have to do hands then.
Commissioner Thaggard.
>> I make a motion to accept the minutes.
>> Okay.
Commissioner Villarreal.
>> Second.
>> Okay.
We've got a first and a second for approval.
We'll go ahead and vote via roll call.
Commissioner Cole.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Thaggard.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Villarreal.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Smith.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Perrett.
>> Aye.
>> Chair is also an aye.
That motion carries 6-0.
We'll move to our consent agenda for this evening.
Commissioner Perrett.
>> I'll move to adopt the consent agenda.
>> Commissioner Villarreal.
>> Second.
>> We've got a first and a second for approval of our consent agenda this evening.
Questions?
Okay.
Let's do roll call vote.
Commissioner Perrett.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Smith.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Villarreal.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Thaggard.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Thaggard.
>> Second.
>> Chair is also an aye.
That motion carries 6-0.
That will take us to our items for individual consideration.
Our first is 4A, FP230036.
Haley is here for presentation.
>> Good evening, Chair, members of the commission.
Haley Zagorski, Assistant Planning Director.
The plat before you this evening is the final plat for the Denton West Joint Ventures.
You may recall this property in the last year has gone through a zoning change for plan
development with a suburban corridor based zoning located at the corner of Teasley and
Ryan Road.
At this time, staff is recommending denial of the plat as there are still some outstanding
comments that need to be cleared.
However, we have no objection to the requested extension to February 14th, 2024.
I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> Thank you, Haley.
Any questions for Haley?
Okay.
Thanks, Haley.
Commissioner Smith.
>> I make a motion to approve the extension of date certain to February 14th, 2024.
>> Thank you.
Commissioner Thaggard.
>> I'll second.
>> We've got a first and a second to grant the extension request to a date certain of
February 14th, 2024.
Any questions?
Okay.
Commissioner Cole.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Thaggard.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Villarreal.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Smith.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Pruitt.
>> Aye.
>> Chair, is an aye.
That's 6-0.
>> In favor of that extension request, next item is 4B, FP230033.
Hello again, Haley.
>> Yes.
Good evening.
So this is a final plot for Phase 1B of the Hickory Grove addition.
This property is located in the city's ETJ on the just west of the city limits along
University Drive.
At this time, staff is recommending approval of this plot as they've managed to clear all
of their comments since the agenda was posted.
I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> Thanks, Haley.
Any questions for Haley?
>> No.
>> Okay.
Thank you very much.
Commissioner Smith.
>> Make a motion to approve.
>> Commissioner Pruitt.
>> Second.
>> And a first and a second for approval.
Any discussion?
Okay.
Let's vote via roll call.
Commissioner Pruitt.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Smith.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Villarreal.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Thaggard.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Cole.
>> Aye.
>> Chair, is an aye.
That motion carries 6-0.
The second is 4C, FP 240002.
Hi, Erin.
>> Hello.
Let's see.
Good evening, Chair and members of the commission, Erin Stanley, assistant planner.
This is FP 23000 -- oh, that one's not it.
This one, 240002.
This is a final plot for the Denton Shady Shores edition.
This is east of I-35E and north of Shady Shores Road Street, I'm not sure.
And at this time, staff is recommending denial of the final plot as it does not meet all
of our criteria for approval.
They have requested an extension which could be granted to the date of February 14th, 2024.
>> Thanks, Erin.
Any questions for Erin?
Okay.
Thank you.
Commissioner Smith.
>> Make a motion to approve the extension to date certain February 14th, 2024.
>> Commissioner Cole.
>> Second.
>> Okay.
We've got a first and a second for approval of the extension request to a date certain
of February 14th, 2024.
Any questions?
Okay.
Let's vote via roll call.
Commissioner Cole.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Thaggard.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Villarreal.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Smith.
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Pruitt.
>> Aye.
>> Is there a second?
I also an aye.
That motion carries 6-0.
That will take us to our public hearing portion for this evening.
We have one item there, it's 5A, HL230002.
Cameron is on her way up to make a presentation.
I'll open the public hearing.
>> Thank you, Chair and commission.
Okay.
As I said, this is Cameron Robertson, historic preservation officer.
This is HL23-002B and this is for historic landmark designation of 314 Marietta Street.
During the work session, I gave you all some background about what his historic landmark
designation was and what are some of the benefits, so I'm going to jump right into the background
information.
So this property is located on the east side of Marietta Street, just south of Houston
Place, so it's highlighted there in red.
The owners are Travis and Sarah Rigsby and the construction date is circa 1940.
Some of the building's history, it was originally constructed for Ms. Susie Shepard.
The architectural style is a minimal traditional style.
Since 1940, there have been 14 property owners and it has been used largely as a rental property
since the 1960s to present day.
So kind of referring back to that work session item, when we talked about that certificate
of appropriateness that was approved by the Historic Landmark Commission in November of
2023, the new addition that you can see highlighted in red, that was approved by the Historic
Landmark Commission due to the fact that it did meet the Secretary of Interior standards
as well as our West Oak Area Historic District design standards.
So the request is for that historic landmark designation.
You can see the property as it is today, and then that OR3 zoning.
This is the front west and that north facades along Marietta Street, and then the south
and rear east facades, and that rear facade shows the current sun porch, which is where
the new addition is being added.
This is a survey of the property there, and you see the original abstract.
But diving into staff analysis, I know there's a lot on this page right here, but we're focusing
on the areas highlighted in red.
So we're looking at A, J, K, and L, and this correlates to, when we're looking at the debt
and development code, that correlates to 1, 10, 11, and 12.
So I'm going to run through these.
So the first area of criteria that we're looking at in section 2.9.4B is that character, interest,
or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the city, state,
or the United States.
The next one we're going to be focusing on is the location as the site of a significant
historic event.
Then K, looking at identification with a person who has significantly contributed to the culture
and development of the city, state, or the United States, and then lastly, a building
or structure that, because of its location, has become a value to the neighborhood, community
area, or the city.
So looking at that approval criteria A/1, much of the neighborhood north of the University
of North Texas was plotted during the 1920s and the early 1930s, but most of those residents
weren't built until the 1930s and the early 1940s.
So kind of on Marietta Street and some of those higher streets along Houston Place,
we do see a lot of minimal traditional house styles.
In some examples, you can see above that 314 Marietta circa 1940s photo.
These types of houses were intentionally designed to be simple, economical, and be mass produced,
especially during the Great Depression and following World War II.
And then as we kind of move through the 1940s, obviously we have a lot of servicemen returning
from war and their families, and as stated on the screen, the Federal Housing Administration
ensured long-term, low-interest home loans for these types of houses.
And then as you kind of move through the 1940s to the 1950s, that's when you start to see
the ranch style house come.
So moving on to Approval Criteria J/10, this is a Dens Le Leche League International Means
were originally hosted at 314 Marietta Street starting in the late 1960s.
One of the renters, Ms. Leroy Ball, she was the original leader of the group and was a
renter of 1314 Marietta Street from 1968 to approximately 1977, and one of the fun facts
was one of our historic landmark commissioners actually knew Ms. Leroy Ball, and so she said
this was really exciting to see.
Just to give you a little bit of background about the La Leche League International, it
is a non-governmental, non-profit organization that organizes advocacy, education, and training
related to breastfeeding, and it still exists today.
Moving on to Approval Criteria K/L, we did have two very significant families that did
occupy the house and were those owners of 314 Marietta Street.
We had the Shepard family, and that was Susie Shepard, who was the original owner.
Her family contributed largely to the education system in the North Texas region, both her
sons and her husband, as well as they owned a lot of multiple properties along Marietta
Street, which was pretty fascinating, and it's all in their backup, so I'm not trying
to go into too much detail, but if you want to learn more, feel free to check that out.
Also, there's the Hall family.
They were the fifth owners of 314 Marietta.
They were heavily involved at UNT and in Denton.
They did own a printing press that ran until the 1940s, and they were heavily involved
with the yearbook at University of North Texas.
They also were owners of more than one property along Marietta Street.
And then Approval Criteria L/12, this is actually one of the criteria that the Historic Landmark
Commission asked to be added before it came to P&Z.
They felt that this was really significant and that they felt that this property specifically
helped tell the story of development in Denton in the first half of the 20th century, specifically
as I said, the area north of UNT, as well as its connection with the La Leche League
and persons of interest to the community.
And as you can see kind of from the photo, from the sandborn map from 1921 to 1942, you
do see that large development moving west, so it is part of that kind of story.
In addition to staff's analysis, it is consistent with our 2019 Historic Preservation Plan,
specifically looking at Goal 1, Policy 1.3, which states we should prioritize and designate
eligible buildings and areas for potential landmarks and historic districts.
In addition, it is also consistent with our Denton 2040 Comprehensive Plan, specifically
looking at Community Character Goal Number 2, which is preserve and maintain the unique
character of Denton for long-term sustainment of community character.
We did do public outreach.
We did post both the newspaper and websites in early January with a property sign posted
on January 11th.
We mailed notices to 19 within the 200 feet, 83 within the 500 feet, and then we did receive
one response in favor yesterday afternoon via email.
So staff is recommending approval of the request for the historic landmark designation at 314
Marietta Street, as it does meet our goals and objectives of the Denton 2040 Comprehensive
Plan and that 2019 Historic Preservation Plan, as well as meets that criteria for historic
landmark designation outlined in 2.9.4(b) of the DDC.
As I stated previously, Historic Landmark Commission did recommend approval with conditions
5-0, and that was with the addition of that criteria 12.
So next steps would be going to public area and city council meeting on February 6.
Any questions?
>> Thank you.
Any questions right now for Cameron?
Thank you very much.
I do have one card wishing to speak, and it is the property owner, Mr. Rigsby.
Good evening.
>> Good evening.
Thank you all for having me.
I don't exactly know all I should say, but it was great working with Cameron, and this
is David here.
He's the architect, and he's sitting in the back here.
And originally, my wife and I, we wanted to purchase the house and build on it because
we'd like to be closer to the campus.
I was a student at the University of North Texas.
I graduated in 2015 with an engineering degree, but during that time, I met a group of Christian
believers, and I wanted to be involved more with the Christian community in Denton, Texas.
And so buying this house and adding to it, I think, fulfills the Susie Shepard name to
shepherd some students in the community in Denton and give back in this way.
So I appreciate the time to be here, and thank you all for your consideration.
>> Thank you.
>> Do we have any questions for him?
>> Yeah.
Do you have any questions?
>> I do not see any.
Thank you very much.
>> Yes, ma'am.
>> Okay.
I don't have any other cards wishing to speak, but this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone else wishing to speak?
Okay.
I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and open the floor for discussion or a motion.
Commissioner Villarreal, the board is working again.
>> It's working.
>> I move approval of the -- sorry, I move approval of the recommendation.
>> Commissioner Cole?
>> Second.
>> Okay.
We've got a first and a second.
To be consistent, we're going to go ahead and vote via roll call.
Is there any discussion before we go ahead and vote?
Okay.
Commissioner Cole?
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Thaggard?
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Villarreal?
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Smith?
>> Aye.
>> Commissioner Pruitt?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor?