Good afternoon. Welcome to the Special Citizens Bond Advisory Committee meeting
on Thursday June 27th. It's 6 o' 2 p.m. First item on the agenda is consideration
of approval of the meeting minutes from June 13th.
Has anyone had a chance to look at those? Okay, thank you.
Do you get that Ms. Teresa? Okay, great. Any other comments? I'll entertain a
motion for approval as minutes as amended. I'll move to approve the minutes as amended.
Second. Thank you, Susie. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign. All right.
Motion carries. We'll move on to street lights. Mr. Estes. Good evening. Todd Estes,
City Engineer. We're continuing the conversation we had on the 13th where we
talked about roadways and Proposition 2 and now we're also talking about the
item that was left over which was sidewalks and then street lights as an
potential add-on to that Proposition 2 commitment. So sidewalks and street lights,
just to give you a brief overview where we're talking about in that priority
scale what we had looked at earlier summarizing the actual funds funding
amounts where staff is put together and prioritized. Sidewalks was right square
in the middle is about number four in line with the other items and then
street lighting down here. As with the other items we are always looking for
ways to take taxpayer dollars that would come into this program, both of these
programs, and try to stretch them through other grant funding sources or some
other resources that might be available to us through other entities and we'll
talk about that a little bit tonight as we get into those. So just to give you a
quick overview what you see in green this is a map of the city of Denton. The
green lines are where we have sidewalks today. Now this is not an evaluation of
their current status if they're in need of repair or if they need a leveling
this is just where we have sidewalks today. So one of the things that we had
left over from the 2012 and 2014 especially the 2014 bond was a segment
in that bond for sidewalks. That two million dollars has been pretty well
spent. We have two projects left over that have lumped several areas such as
what you see here where we took missing sidewalk segments then identified years
ago and part of the plan. We've designed those elements. We have a 2018 we call
it the 2018 sidewalk we designed the elements that needed to go into
construction. We have about what was it a half a million pre-tax that we could
put towards this construction effort but still needed a half man left for the 2018
sidewalk. You got to pay attention tonight.
So we have 300,000 that are in the construction on that 2018 sidewalk
segment but it's still about 700,000 on that that is left to be made up and then
another two million that's already been designed or nearing completion design
for 2019 sidewalks. We would have wanted to have gone construction this year and
that's still needing funding. So we've already exhausted the two million
dollars in funding plus some grant funds that were already put into the program
as well and now we're looking to go further. So what we are proposing with
the 2019 bond program is about 12 million dollars in sidewalk funding. Now
we anticipate being able to stretch that to 18 or 19 million on the safe side
through safe routes to school funding, through grant funding and alternative
was not alternative I would say that's wrong active transportation funds and
those are several grant funding sources that the state provides on an annual
basis. Now the trouble with those funding sources is that we are in the mix with a
variety of other cities. Every other city in the state of Texas can also apply and
there is a limited amount of funding every year. Now we do submit projects into
that on an annual basis to try to stretch those dollars as far as we can. So
one of the avenues that we're focused on are those safe routes to school programs.
That's a set of funding that we can also go after. You can see we've
broken the city into several areas and it's kind of a heat map that you look at
here. The black being the actual grounds of a school mostly you see these
centered around the elementary schools and the middle schools. We don't have
them around the high schools primarily because they're very hard to get safe
routes to school funding for the high schools as they tend to have a lot more
students that already drive to the school. But one of the other reasons that
we also look at this from a heat map scenario where we're looking more
radius and you'll see over on the side where we're talking about the radius
within a quarter mile of a school, half mile of school. One of the reasons we look at
it this way is as we work with the school district the school district also
defines a route to school and their transportation program by a two mile
radius. So if you live within a two mile radius you're not eligible to be bused
to school. Outside that two mile radius you can take a bus they do have those
routes set aside for you. So as we start looking at our sidewalk
infrastructure and what potential funding sources are out there beyond what
the city would put into a bond program or an annual program we would be looking
to stretch these dollars into those programs sponsored by the state. They
fund a safe routes to school funding source where we would identify those
school pro those schools within an area that have missing components. So our
first target would be that quarter mile area and the reason we look at the
quarter mile area first so it's a radius around the school it really doesn't tie
into the cost because there's an actual distance of sidewalk within each of
those areas that has to be filled and some of those areas have more sidewalks
need to be filled than others but within that quarter mile of each school we're
looking at how do you really bring that the kids that are closest to the schools
themselves are the ones who are most likely to walk the further you get
they're less likely the further you get away from even that they're less likely
they're most likely being dropped off by parents in a car or they're some other
mode of transportation may be bringing them their carpooling maybe another way
they're getting there so that quarter mile becomes our first target it's also
a way that we start looking at how do we break this into more or less bite-size
chunks instead of you see down at the bottom if we were to go to the one mile
radius right from the get-go which is this very light yellow around the
outside of these rings we went to the one one mile radius we'd be looking at
almost 280 million dollars in funds to fill in those gaps so that's larger than
the bond we're actually asking for at this moment to give you an idea of where
the state tends to go on the Safe Routes to School program I think this year they
had eight million set aside for Safe Routes to School I think that's right so
they had about eight million dollars available across the state to go into
Safe Routes to School program some years it's higher some years it's lower it
depends on where their revenues land on an annual basis so when you start
competing against other cities for the same funding source it's a limit to
what you're actually going to get what you could get you know these all will go
down the pathway of the city or whatever entity actually gets these grants that
you put in 20% of the funding amount and they matched up to 80% beyond that so
it's a one to four trade-off on the cost that there's just not that much funding
to go around so what helps us get there is to have a plan not just a plan for
how we're gonna get all of our missing components in but a physical designed
plan to show that group of the folks that actually evaluate who gets the Safe
Routes to School funding that we actually are ready to go tomorrow we're
shovel ready we're ready to go and part of our program that we're proposing for
this 2019 bond would be two million dollars roughly annually a component of
that would go into design each year for the following year's construction that
way we're always ahead of the game we're ready for construction in the following
year and it allows us to get into that mixture on the Safe Routes to School
funding during the application time period they can see we're ready to go it
truly is shovel ready it also gets us in line with those active transportation
funds and some other routes that we could potentially go down such as CDBG
funding if we can partner and show we have that plan put together ahead of
time they're a lot more willing to say yes that seems like a good option let's
put that money there so where we're recommending right now is that we would
push for the quarter mile radius with this bond program and in get all those
infill missing sidewalks complete within that quarter mile so just to give you an
idea of what that might look like we've zoomed in just a little bit around
Evers Park Elementary and Strickland these are the areas where we have
missing sidewalk segments that would really get us to that Safe Routes to
School program that would fill in those gaps how do you get those kids to the
school so these red lines would be an example of where those missing gaps need
to be filled when it comes to just this area you see a little bit of Jennings as
well over on the on the east side of that drawing that's about three miles of
sidewalk that gets added into the program and generally runs about two
million dollars for that particular piece of construction including the
design of it all the other factors that might go into what you need for that
sidewalk I know there have been some questions about variability and pricing
why does this seem to not be as equitable as say streets you know per
lane mile well one of the reasons that you're going to see a high variety of
pricing on sidewalks is some sidewalks are not as clean cut to put in the
ground as others so if you look at a segment this is just an example where we
have put in this missing piece of sidewalk here recently it's a long loop
288 you've got the a train and the pedestrian crossing over loop 288 if
you're McAllister's fan you'll recognize McAllister's hanging out over here on
the corner this had no real problems for us from a construction standpoint we
didn't have to relocate utilities we didn't have to acquire right away there
was really no constriction there we just had to go put form boards down put
concrete in the ground quite literally and then we're done so very easy to do
from a standpoint of all the upfront work before you ever get to construction
and kept the cost down about 400 linear foot of sidewalk like it was five foot
sidewalk $28,000 to complete that stretch now in comparison here's where
this gets a little hairy on the pricing when we're talking about sidewalks so
the concrete elementary school you see it down here circled in yellow some of
the missing segments that absolutely are part of that safe for us to school
program is Swisher Road getting these homes and the kids that lived out in
these neighborhoods down to pecan Creek Elementary School there is a significant
challenge when we're doing this project this is a zoomed-up area of this area in
red see the homes are very close to the road you there's a fence right along
this roadway segment here there are no curb and gutter there are utilities in
the area and we'll flip a view and you'll see a street view here in just a
second but we still have to fit a five foot sidewalk in here at a minimum at
least on one side so the challenge is that presents to us is this is the
street view of that same segment of road a virtual wall of trees and overgrowth
the fence is immediately behind this along with power lines that would have
to be either moved or you potentially come over to the other side of Swisher
Road but now I've got to figure out how do I not let the kids cross through a
drainage way especially when it's wet and muddy during adverse climate times
of the year or do I move the whole road anyway you look at I'm probably getting
right away for sure getting into some easements I'm having to relocate some
heavy utilities maybe creating new utilities in the form of stormwater
infrastructure that's going to elevate the crop the cost greatly so just this
piece right here without doing any of the road could potentially for the same
400 feet run us almost four times as much so it's at least three times as
much if it becomes evident that we really just need to shift the whole road
over it gets infinitely larger and the cost so that's where the variability
comes in when we're talking about pricing of these sidewalk elements not
everything's as easy as just putting a sidewalk now so one of the ways that we
are really putting into our plan going forward of making sure that we get this
done is would in a timely manner is is spent on the 12 million dollars over six
years we would target those segments of sidewalk first that really don't have any
challenges there's not a right away issue there's not a lot of relocation so
that gets out of the box first and then in the meantime as we hit successive
years we're absolutely going to be working through those more challenging
segments of town to get that safe routes of school program the active
transportation elements in the different funding sources that we are looking to
bring online to stretch those dollars even further you know we're asking for
12 million but that quarter mile segment really is 18.7 by our budget
estimation at this point how do we get there well we're absolutely planning on
going after that active transportation money the safe routes of school money to
get us there now I'd love to be able to get even further like we can with the
roadways but again we're competing against so many other cities to get that
same dollar amount now active transportation it has an advantage that
safe routes of school does not safe routes of school is purely to get people
to the schools they do prioritize the elementary schools first yes ma'am yes
and then the active transportation grants that's where we could actually
get some of that money that would tie in the parks or trails networks because
that is a little bit more broad in what we can apply it towards and then your
CDBG grants can be used in more than neighborhood settings for other
issuances of that that sidewalk component so any questions so far on
sidewalks yes as we get closer to destinations like schools the closer we
get we would do a pedestrian survey to make sure we understand how many folks
are actually coming to the destination we would go to an eight foot or a ten
foot potentially even a 12 foot if we ascertain that there's also bicycling
traffic along with that pedestrian traffic so the destinations really
become the way we figure out how wide a sidewalk do you really need and we gauge
that by doing a survey count of how many people are coming and going yes yes ma'am
there's sidewalks with alternatives permeable sidewalks I know you're annoyed
all I ever do is talk about permeable lots of several of the cities have to
cost-wise it's it's more efficacious do we have any permeable sidewalks here I
know we do parking lots but have we tried that at all not currently but it's
an it absolutely is something that we look at it's it's definitely a little
it's a little bit more challenging to try to maintain over the long term is to
make it effective you have to make sure somebody does come and power wash it
periodically long stretches just mean we have more time and money annually that
goes into that it's something that we do look at when we start working into these
these types of projects that we're talking about right now where we're in
filling sidewalks where they don't exist a lot of them are not in existence
because they were probably very large trees or some other types of impediments
that in the way that if I had an impervious or I had a pervious type of
pavement there might be beneficial to what was a concern at the time when I
might have had to have cut through some roots to go around it or take a tree
down that absolutely becomes something that is a viable option and we're not
opposed to doing that we just want to make sure we do it in the right way at
the right time and we would absolutely consider where's the best place to put
those we're not averse to that yes ma'am I noticed you were have sidewalks on
Lester Davis school is that not a high school it's yep right there it's a high
school
and I think at some point someone had even brought up that Denton High School
will be changed at the current Denton High School will be changing facilities
we're working with the school district on those things we meet with them monthly
to understand what their growth plans are what's going to happen and right now
what we don't know is what they plan to do with the old Calhoun and the old
Newton razor when they finally start making adjustments and even those are
two to five years out so this really is the best alternative as we go forward
but it's going to change as the school district continues to evolve as well
isn't the new codes or this current city codes that sidewalks be built when a
property is developed so there should be no future situation I mean as this
eventually so it's taking care of over 20 30 50 years they'll be sidewalks being
put in by developers we have both I mean sidewalks are definitely being put in by
developers now there are instances where you have a whole stretch of roadway that
has no sidewalk maybe on the perimeter of a development so we typically take
an escrow account we get the money from them up front so that when we get ready
to go build the sidewalk we can do it all together at one time or other times
we go ahead and put the dollars into it to do that connection now especially if
it's a small segment the challenge we get into is we absolutely don't want to
leave someone with a visual disability or physical disability stranded so they
get off expecting I got somewhere to go and then they get stranded somewhere so
you've got that piece of sidewalk that's hanging out there and they got nowhere
to go so that it's a constant battle on both sides of just how do we actually do
this the most effective way just to make sure I understood maybe I misheard the
numbers you said the state currently only allocates eight million dollars per
year for safe depends on the year that's what they had been using this I think it
was this last year it was eight million and so so we're hoping to get a total of
about six million between that funding and the city over the life of the
program okay yes okay not in one year yeah yeah but over over the life of the
program yes okay and that value changes I mean I've seen it as high as 25 30
million dollars and it can come down lower than eight it just really depends
on what the state's available funding is okay
all right for again street lighting any other sidewalk questions okay yes sir
McKinney's a major East West thoroughfare that a lot of people yes sir
where where do we stand on addressing that is that outside of this scope or is
that being addressed by existing projects there it's being addressed in a
multiple fronts it's outside of what we're proposing here but what we are
doing is we are designing up to 30% where all those improvements along
McKinney from Luke 288 all the way to Carol would be you've seen some of that
get infilled as we have some annual dollars available through CEOs or other
amounts supplemental amounts in the budget process but as we go forward
where we're looking to go is to leverage North Central Texas Council of
Government dollars some of the various funding sources they have to get all of
McKinney done at one time so part of the issue that the Council of Governments has
is if you don't come to them with some kind of plan and and for them a plan is
no longer hey we'd really like to go do this this makes sense it really is I
got to have some drawings I got to have some information that says you've
thought through this you know what the right-of-way takes gonna be if there is
one you know how much material it's gonna be what is the real cost here then
yes they're absolutely willing to sit down and talk to us about how do we
partner to make that happen and that that is something we're actively engaged
in right now what's the rule regarding easements for sidewalks and what
percentage are we talking about that would require right-of-way acquisition
versus the easements I don't have a number for you on that one we can look
into that one it's not that difficult to do with our current GIS database but a
lot of times it just depends on how willing and how much area we really need
how willing a property owner is to go down the easement versus right-of-way
pathway or if I just need a couple of feet I might not be worth it going and
getting right-of-way it might be better to just grab the easement until we
actually know what kind of right-of-way we might need in the future for
transportation purposes all around if we need another 10 or 15 feet that might
be a time we want to get right-of-way because it's typically right up on the
back of the curve or the roadway in that case but it's going to be highly variable
depending on where we are and how much right-of-way we currently have
you're gonna get my favorite engineering answer it depends so there are a lot of
things we're trying to weigh the balance of for instance here was it late last
year early this year we did is it Miller and oak so at Miller and oak there is a
corner where the city has an obligation to maintain a handicap spot for a
property owner there's an actual ordinance for that yeah so when we went
back to reconstruct oak we didn't address that particular scenario so we
came back in last year and addressed a proper handicap spot with all movements
allowable for the person who has a disability but the thing that became
apparent was as soon as we started putting in handicap ramps and making it
fully accessible as we didn't have a sidewalk that could go anywhere so you
have a public accessible spot that couldn't go anywhere but to one house so
we then added the sidewalks along that length to tie them back in somewhere so
that's our prime focus is going to be can I get a person safely to where they
need to go especially a person with disabilities or some kind of physical
challenge it then the second is going to be is doesn't make sense at this point
to go through that pathway especially when you get in the areas of oak and
hickory some of the older parts of the downtown area the right away is very odd
because some places they've given up enough right away for us to put
sidewalks in immediately some places they haven't so the timing may be an
issue is it can take anywhere from six months to a year to acquire right away
depending on where we're going with the actual roadway and other needs and
impacts there's just a lot of elements that go into figuring that part out
it's absolutely it's even part of what you're looking at here so as we start
looking at some of the schools in the area we're already gonna start to bridge
that gap yes any other questions on sidewalks all right street lighting so
as we talk about street lights one of the things that I want to make sure you
all are aware of is that when we're building major roadways right now
whether it's in the 2019 bond or if it's a bonnie bray or a mayhill we're already
building street lights with those roads so that is a internal policy that when
we build these new roads we're putting in the street lights to go with the
infrastructure now that leaves us with a lot of roads that really fall into two
categories older roads that potentially we're not going to be touching for quite
a while or roads that have recently been reconstructed but didn't have
didn't have streetlights in them like University Drive or 2499 those roads
somebody's not going to touch for the next 30 to 50 years we hope hopefully
nobody's getting into those again so those are absolutely prime corridor
areas where you get near TWU or over closer to where North Texas comes up
along Bonnie Bray people are gonna cross you see students cross or even staff
members at times or just me if I don't want to wait to get over to the corner
cross mid-block in between a corner so they cross wherever it's convenient and
there are advantages to that when you're a pedestrian you got long stretches or
roadway between the intersections and there's a median in front of you it's
infinitely easier to just look at one line of cars this way get to the median
wait and look for the other line that's absolutely one of the things that runs
through their mind the other thing that makes that much more attractive is when
you get to an intersection is why does any of the intersections on University
Drive it's a very long stretch that's virtually unprotected at a signal so
you're hoping that the guy turning right or left at the time doesn't just miss
you in either a sea of cars or a sea of poles I mean there's a variety of things
out there so the mid-block crossing is absolutely where you see a lot of
pedestrians say I would rather go over there and cross where I know I've got
some safety and protections and I can see a lot further so that presents a
challenge at night especially when you drive a corridor like University Drive
a little bit higher speeds the roadway was definitely designed to travel for
more cars to travel from here to there quickly but you have pedestrians and
cyclists who also traverse that area as well so one of the things that's a
challenge for us is how do you get that that street lighting infrastructure into
a place that's not going to be touched again for a very long term that's what
we're asking for in this bond package is we go address those corridors those
prime corridors where we know we're gonna have similar scenarios and nothing
realistically is gonna happen on those roadways that will allow us to go back
in and put in streetlights you've got roadways where you know where we know
we're going to be going back and reconstructing them in the next 10 to
15 years they'll have streetlights flip them on those projects as they get
proposed you'll have other programs that we're currently developing internally
working either through grant fund sources or with DME to provide some sort of
annual budget for streetlights where we can infill on those collector roadways
or neighborhood streets where there is a safety concern and that becomes a
smaller budget item that we can handle one off each year these are clearly
defined projects that have constraints that we just need to go knock out at one
time so that's where we're looking at the University Drive project FM 24 99 FM
21 81 and us 377 those projects would be our prime candidates any or all of them
to try to get those streetlights in immediately and make sure we provide the
safest corridor possible just to give you a brief idea this was the one I was
supposed to talk about about DME another funding sorry I got out of sequence so
this is just an example area of some of those roadways that we would be looking
for alternative funding sources beyond the bond to actually fund streetlights
in those areas just an example not meant to be all-inclusive of any kind so one
of the things that we're targeting for these streetlights programs is these are
not Denton streets but they are very resemblance of some of Denton streets so
this roadway over here just to give you an idea of the difference between what's
currently happening today so we have a lot of sodium halide lamps we have a lot
of our metal halide our sodium high pressure sodium lamps that are hung up
on the sides of utility poles or variety of other places there that amber color
and part of what happens in that amber color this is a well-lit corridor under
that old fixture style it's very hard to see striping colors it's hard to see
signs you get a lot more cast-off shadows so it's just hard to see other
obstacles in your way whereas where this street was redone with LED lights a much
more white or blue light I can now see actual yellow I can see white I can see
signs a lot of the shadows have disappeared yes absolutely this is
similar to what University Drive looks like today if you're driving down the
stretches or don't have businesses right up next to it it's very dark it's hard
if you can tell there's actually a sign right there and if you'll notice there's
a bike lane here you would not be able to see a cyclist or pedestrian trying to
come across at any time in that corridor whereas what we're proposing would look
much more like this where we would put in all those missing street lights and
then convert it over to LED so you would be able to see I mean you could clearly
see a cyclist running along this this path over this way you could also see a
pedestrian that might be crossing at the mid-block so just an example of where
we're trying to go with this program before we get there yes yes ma'am
run that by me one more time I make sure I understand the biggest challenge with
solar right now is just one with street lights is what kind of street light are
we putting up because if it's a pedestrian level lighting and you have a
significant amount of trees within the area they're going to be a challenge for
collecting that energy plus it can be troublesome on the maintenance side it's
not as just from the same point that it one goes out I've got to replace a power
unit I'll give you an example we put solar powered signs out on the curve at
Hickory Creek where we had the accident here not too long ago those solar powered
signs we go out one night and found that none of them were working we come back
the next day we find out the reason they're not working is somebody had
chopped off all of these solar powered panels and taking the equipment off so
we've since replaced all that but depending on the height of where the
infrastructure sits that could be a problem I don't know for sure the cost
differential and I wouldn't be able to tell you the return on investment but
it's something that we look at consistently because as we see the
technologies improve much like LED when you came from metal halide or high
pressure sodium to LED that the cost differential is just continues to
decrease it might be something that in the very near future absolutely is what
you see on everyone. Yes ma'am. Do you think you might want to budget in for cameras now that we know
that people love to steal lighting? The Queen has to understand. I understand well
we we actually do put strip and we put cameras at each of our intersections
they're part of our traffic system so that we can monitor actively how much
traffic is stopped now we don't store that information we have talked about
doing that it's not that difficult to put something up but once you have a
system that's pretty well interconnected which is part of what DME is looking at
when we put these street lights up is that we have a smart system that
basically tells us when one goes out we know we can immediately go see what's
going on we also know better to then to have them seven or eight feet above the
ground where you can stand on the bed of a pickup and actually do whatever it is
they did to get it off and it's not easy to get it off for a lot of these
street light poles they're going to be 30 feet in the air so it's going to be
very difficult for folks to get to. I'm just like did you call the police like
oh my god that's a major
any other questions on street lighting?
are you proposing putting the street lights in the center of the median on
these roads like in those pictures or on the sides and then secondly are the
street lights going to be pretty basic or is the city of Denton interested in
actually incorporating a look and having a style of street lights? So let me answer
those two questions the first one I'll answer with my favorite engineers
question it depends absolutely depends on how much of a median you have it
depends on where we are at an intersection we're not going to put a
street light in the median you're gonna put it on the corners and usually be
tied to the traffic signal when you put it in the median it is especially an
intersection it becomes a target and when they end up getting knocked down
more often than they stay up but once you go down the pathway to go down the
side so I take a university drive there are segments where the median is wide
enough we could run a street light a string of street lights right down the
median and have it cover head off the middle there are other segments where
it's better to go down the sides because there's just not that much median the
other concern that we have with street lights is as you're starting to work
with them you when they back up to a neighborhood it's easier to direct
an LED light from the outside in than it is from the inside out so it tends to
work better when we put it on the outside because I can shield the homes
behind it and then guide all the light out towards the street whereas if I'm in
the middle of the street it's a little harder right it's just a little harder
you can do that and we do but you just have to balance the two the other answer
is DME is currently working with us and we'll be bringing to council with those
pole standards look like and they have a variety they're weighing that in the
balance of both cost appeal you know the aesthetics appeal what it's what's gonna
look like on the outside how easy is it to maintain and that maintenance is
everything from I've talked to maintenance crews where they talk about
how the the actual street light pole itself is put together has a huge impact
on how many people have to be there what they have to do to work it and it becomes
a cumbersome nightmare depending on which pole you buy and you thought oh
that looks great but then we have to go fix it it's like oh man that takes a lot
of work and effort to get there so we're balancing that and we'll be coming to
council later this year here's what we're proposing
which which one are you referring to
they are in priority order what's out there now versus what's gonna be under
construction for the next several years I mean that's really how we prioritize
those University Drive is active and wide open we got a lot of students that
do cross back and forth so that was number one 2499 it's open people are
flying down it at all hours of the night so that was another one and you have a
lot of homes in that area along with schools in that corridor and then you
get in 2181 and 377 they're both active construction zones they're almost
interchangeable either way 2181 tends to be quite a bit darker through segments
just because of the way it's set up 377 tends to have a little bit more light
because it is it does have a quite a few more businesses over that stretch of
where they put the the roadway improvements that's the active
construction area which will bring it all the way up to the interstate the
interstate by 35 we could it would just increase the number so it'd be a larger
expense just going further north I mean we can absolutely incorporate that it's
just a choice of how much further do you go we were already pushing the five to
fifteen million dollar estimates if you want to go further we can absolutely
evaluate further
from the bond proposed where we were looking at these roadways already built
out this these are the top four they're really in our minds ranked there is
there an overall street lighting plan yes there is but it really incorporates a
lot more streets that are in the works as we go forward so future bond programs
as we improve other arterial roadways and collector streets they would be
incorporated into those roadways because we do know that in the next 10 to 15
years we'll be tackling those roadways as well yes it actually goes past 35 it
goes western western western so it was all the way to Western and then all the
way over to 35 to Luke 28 on the east side of town and just a little bit past
it I think it's the Mayhill I believe it gets right up there to Mayhill it may go
past that a little bit yes ma'am
not currently we will be looking into that but because these were all you'll
notice they're all state-funded projects there's not typically those were things
that would have been asks at the time the construction was being done
sometimes I had text I will put those in as long as you're willing to maintain
them other times they like especially when it's often interstate they're not
as willing to fund it themselves you're like sure we'll build it if you'll put
up the money for it
Yes, ma'am.
I'm sure we'll get into this later but we know the tax rate repercussions of 12.5 million.
Do we know the tax rate repercussions of 5 million added to the bond? David?
Out of the top of my head I don't I don't think it would be too much as far as
talking a cent or laughing less than a cent obviously so I don't know the exact
amount that's definitely something we can come back with and talk about
increments of 5, 10, 15, 20 going up.
All right any other questions? Street lights. Yes ma'am.
I want to come back to the PowerPoint from our first meeting and it says staff recommended city bond funding for street lighting this evening.
Which one? Well that was because we we didn't when the original
recommendation to council that did not include was not included in the 210
million dollars and that was something that if anybody if you all recommended
in council agreed to elevate the funding beyond the 210 million dollars which we
would take to get any of these street light projects off the ground then that
number would go up but it was there as an optional item because it was not
included in the 210 million dollar recommendation. Any other questions?
I would just add to that as we go through the recommendations and we put those in front of everyone I think especially as we've gone through these
meetings and we've seen everything and in future meetings as we start to go
through prioritization that'll be where as you all as a committee start talking
through where those projects lie whether they go above that line below that line
start having those conversations of is it worth going above the 210 is 210 the
number so those I think all that goes together so this is not saying this is
what it has to be I think this is just a starting point for the conversation all
right any other questions? So moving on to public art.
I do not have a new presentation for this for this item
this was more just an opportunity to bring this item back for discussion as
we had the discussion last last week the committee sounded like you just wanted
to go back and think through your options and then have this discussion
definitely can answer any additional questions or if you'd like me to go back
to the presentation I can or I can just kind of skip to the options page and open
it up for any discussion. We had a couple people miss that presentation do y'all
want to go through it again or do you feel good okay correct yes well it's
just high level as far as the options that are that are that's before the
committee with the charge asked the committee to consider public art
funding at 2% or less in the current policy has those funds tied to vertical
construction so that would only apply to the public safety facilities
proposition and come out to about nine hundred thousand dollars the policy
itself stipulates between two and four percent and we you can't have a
standalone proposition for that nine hundred thousand dollars that would open
those funds up to be used for things outside of public safety or outside of
streets in that proposition but it would be voted on separately it would be a
public art piece to be voted on. So is there any thoughts on sticking with just
option one which is the current policy?
Well we have to choose between two and four. Right yeah I think I think coming
down with the percentage that you want to move forward with the charge was to
consider two percent but obviously the policy allows for that two to four. So I
guess that's the first question do we want to stick with two percent? I think
that's what we ought to do historically and we don't need to tack on a lot of
additional expense to this bond. Okay so I want to make a motion to that effect.
Are we allowed to vote without it being on the agenda? It's really not a final action it's it is just a
direction that we're moving forward until we get to where we have a final
vote. It's not it could be changed at any point in time. Yeah and they correct me if
I'm wrong but David the reason we're bringing this up now is if we're going to
go to option two there has to be some lead time to prepare that. Correct so if
we wanted option two and change the policy we need some lead time so if if
the direction we're hearing is to include it we can just have that as a
placeholder put it in in our proposals moving forward when we actually come to
make the recommendation we'll have it included at that point that's when
action will be taken. So it's just a consensus to go with option one and keep
it at two percent or less. I don't think that I don't think two percent or I don't
think the or less is an option because the current policy says two to four percent.
But the council would have to change the policy if you went less than two percent.
So there there's a the policy is two to four percent the actual verbiage in the
charge at two percent or less but you're right to go below two would have to
change the policy so to stay within the policy we would just stick with the two
percent and that would hit both the charge and the policy. So Tim do I
understand you're making a motion? I move that we that we do the part public art
at two percent. Do we need to stipulate that this time whether we want to
include it within the public safety initiative or to consider it as a
separate standalone proposition or is that something that we should tackle?
As I read it the third bullet under option one presents two different
scenarios. The current policy allows for the standalone proposition so if that's
something you all would like to go forward with it'd be if you want to have
that discussion now to give consensus to go forward because right now our options
are we roll it in with the other public safety. Right. Yeah I just think that we
have a public art committee that meets regularly I believe and allowing for
some flexibility of those funds to be used in areas where the citizens on
those committees feel it will have the greatest impact both to people's
enjoyment as well as to potential economic development and that sort of
thing might have some benefit and I really do trust the citizens of Denton
that love art or seemingly do to be able to pass a potential alternative or
separate state standalone bond proposition. I think you run a serious
risk of a standalone proposition on public art failing. It's too easy to vote
against. So I think that the data we had was we only had one nearby city who had
tried that. So Allen did have set the standalone proposition public art and it
passed that was we took a look that was the only one we could see that was a
similar kind of standalone proposition just for that public art piece that was
kind of associated with a percentage and say here's a lot of money that was the
only one that we found that was like that but you know didn't find it to the
contrary where they went forward with it and voted against either. And what
it could turn into and you know it's the law of unintended consequences. It
becomes a referendum on public art and it takes public art out of any future bond
packages. You can put it on a standalone and it fails. So just just so I'm clear
and I understand if it's within the public safety proposition does it have
to be on the grounds of public safety vertical building areas? Correct it does
but it doesn't have to be in necessarily what's involved in this bond package you
know the stuff station the fire station aid or the police station itself but it
has to be in a public safety facility. So it could be on the grounds of other fire
stations for instance? Correct.
Is it let me ask this is it possible that we could ask the council to amend
the policy so that the money could be included within one of the bond
propositions but have the flexibility to be used elsewhere? No that that's just
state law with propositions it has to any money that's in that proposition has
to be spent within the proposition. So can you go back to the option slide David?
So I think what I was my thought was first let's ask the question or answer
the question are we comfortable with just going with 2% and then the second
question is all right assuming 2% do you want to go with option one or option two?
Does that sound logical? The way I read this slide option I think I think more
like option A or B within option one. I think you probably mean this option or
this option right? Okay. Standalone proposition or the so what's the
different to me it's standalone is the same as option two right? No the
standalone is allowed in the current policy so you wouldn't have them in the
policy. Okay my bad so the first question that is do we want to go to 2% of public
safety facilities approximately nine thousand nine hundred thousand dollars?
And I think that's what my motion is. And that's what Peggy seconded. So that's
the that's the motion before us. Is there any other discussion? Okay seeing none
all in favor of going with 2% of public safety facilities approximately nine
hundred thousand dollars signify by raising your hand. And Theresa can you
get us a count please. Okay and all opposed same sign right.
So what was the vote Theresa? I thought there was four. Raise your hands again.
They're asking for us to raise their hands again. One two three okay so the
motion carries eleven to four to two percent of public safety facilities with
approximately nine hundred thousand dollars for a public guard okay. We will
include that in everything moving forward that you see that. Again this is
not the final decision this is just direction for consideration in the final
package of recommendations to the council.
All right. I have a couple more. They're not long presentations but we're gonna
get into calendar schedule and then we'll also just talk through kind of
open it up for questions moving forward that we can respond to on anything we
have we have outstanding right now. So perfect.
Okay so moving on to questions David. Well the purpose of this item was just
to touch base with the committee ask you we've tried to address questions that
come up within presentations I'm sure there are additional questions that have
not been addressed in the in the presentations themselves. Did it provide
one memo here with some questions from public safety facilities involving the
public safety facility some parking along with that so we can answer questions
regarding that try to be thorough with it with the chiefs there but wanted to
give this as an opportunity for any follow-up that you would like at the
next meeting for us to discuss. And you can continue to email me questions along
the way that we can include but wanted to touch base with everyone and ensure
that we're getting your questions answered with the presentations before
we head in as you'll see on the schedule before we head into start talking about
prioritization and get to that point for the committee to really talk through the
projects ensure that we've we've answered your questions up this far. So
has everyone had an opportunity to review this memorandum? Yes. Is there any
outstanding questions for what's been presented?
Hey asked me to ask this question while she was gone. She was concerned that when
we build the ancillary facility and improve the current facilities will
there be backup or redundancy in emergency services? Safe rooms in both
places since we found out we don't have any.
Safe rooms as in shelters or from the well? During an actual emergency like for a
tornado or something like that we now know that there's not a shelter room a
safe room in the police department and would there be one in both places when
we build it? Yes. And will there be backup communication? Yes, of course yes.
Yes, there will be safe rooms in both and there'll be a procedure in place for
communication. Thank you. Any other questions?
I guess I don't know when to ask that question then. So let me go ahead and ask the question.
Sure. Basically I would like to find out if staff could put together what it would
cost to have East McKinney Street considered in this bond package. I know
the state already had their schematic design. The state already had an amount they
expected it to cost and they even had an amount allocated for it. So I'm not
asking the city to go out and get a bunch of new numbers together. I'm saying
you could maybe use that as a reference. But is there any way that that could be
something to consider when we come back two weeks from now I guess if we're not
going to meet next week? Yes, we can. We can we can bring back a number. And is it
true that the state did allocate money and gave that to the city when the city took over a portion?
Yes, they did provide money. That money was is currently being used to do the
improvements on the west side of the loop. East side of the loop 288 going out
towards the lake. So it's out towards Ryan High School. It mostly covers that
distance. The 18 million that was set aside 10 plus years ago would have done
the job for quite a bit more, at least over to Woodrow, if it had been acted
upon in that original first year or two time frame and it wasn't. The
construction inflation rate has just eroded the capability there. Plus there
are significant right-of-way challenges once you get inside the loop. It's a
very arduous task to go down that pathway. We can absolutely get you the
price of what that would cost, our cost estimates for the entire project. That's
not a difficult thing. We've already been going down the pathway of design, so we
we have a ballpark where that's going to be and I just have to go get that and
bring that back. It will not be 18 million. It would be significantly higher
than that. So that's where our challenge has been, is where do we focus the
dollars that we currently have? We do have to use it or lose it. The time frame
was, I believe, last year, about this time of year. We did get an extension from the
Council of Governments, pending their agreement that we would be allowed to
retain those dollars, was that we get this project that we currently have
planned under construction before the end of this calendar year. We've already
started construction, so we've met that deadline. So we are absolutely trying to
take that money as far as we can, but just in today's dollars, it does not go
as far as it would have 10 years ago. So can you explain where it's been used again because it
didn't sound like East McKinney? It's on McKinney, East of the Loop. From Loop 288, way past Ryan.
You know, it actually goes all the way up to Grissom Road, which is very near,
was that Lakeview? That section of East McKinney, that's still state. No, that's ours.
We took the entire East McKinney? Yes. That was part of the agreement to use the money as we
had to take the entire stretch of that roadway over. We can't give you a number.
Well, I'd like to know, because it's a very busy road. And the next question is, does the committee get any access to traffic counts, to get an idea of, like, these
projects specifically, traffic counts on what they are now? We have that information. We can provide it, yes.
And that East McKinney in there? We have, I think we did that already with the current McKinney project.
We had done an entire corridor analysis for the entire length of McKinney. I think, for me, that would
help me determine and prioritize as well. Right now they're prioritized based on how much money
we're going to get from other people. So that really needs to be the biggest reason.
It's twofold. It is both of those things. One of the things that you actually see is we did the traffic studies on those corridors.
That's part of why it becomes a regional connector and the monies are being put into the project from our partners.
If they didn't have that volume and capacity as well as safety impacts, we wouldn't have even been considered.
And as far as East McKinney, do you think there's regional mobility money?
That's the difficult part where we would be getting money would be through other grants.
The connectivity that they're looking for is from a state road or a state facility to another state facility.
If we could get McKinney all the way over to, say, 35. Right. And originally the project was to go to Woodrow, right?
It was to stop at Woodrow. The reason COGS even going down this pathway with us at this point with McKinney
as we develop plans is because we connected it all the way over to Elm and Locust, which is still a state facility.
Problem is, it will not be a state facility for too much longer because when the state reconstructs Elm and Locust, they will turn that over to the city.
So we're trying to make it as regional an impact as we can.
The vast majority of those dollars will come from things like air quality funds, federal dollars,
some other funding sources that are out there that most likely will not be tied to those state funds.
That'd be a lot more federal dollars. When do they plan to do that? McKinney?
Now, Locust is the default. Oh, we have to get our utilities out of the way first.
So we're focusing south of the square first.
That's the PEC4 project that they are relocating franchise utilities right now.
We'll focus on that. Then we'll be going north on Locust and relocating utilities going all the way up University Drive.
Soon as we've completed relocating utilities, then the state will come in and start a Locust on Eagle and go all the way north up to University Drive.
And then by that time, we have to have all of Eagle or all of Elm Street, all of those utilities out of the way.
So they can turn around and come back south the other way.
So it's realistically there. They won't start on their construction until next summer for the roadway piece and then the following summer for Elm.
Is the city doing the intersection of Hopson and Country Club and the Shell Station and Fort Worth Drive?
That's the state. That's the state. Yes.
And that's another piece that goes with the Hickory Creek project is the state is also interested in improving
1830, which would go from Hickory Creek all the way up to 377 as a four lane divided facility.
I just wanted to add a little more context. Todd is very diplomatic, but the fact of the matter is on McKinney,
he and I went down to Cog last year, 18 months ago, and they were about ready to pull the funding on McKinney.
And they basically said, we're not interested in investing in Denton anymore because you've had Mayhill,
Kenny, you haven't spent a dime. And so we basically went there and gave them our word that if they would hold the funding forward,
we would meet the deadlines on McKinney. We would get Mayhill completed.
They persuaded them to kick another 14 million dollars into that project.
The idea is we can get a design on the road for McKinney from the loop back to Woodrow.
It's possible we can sew together some other funding sources.
So it's not on this list because we feel like if we can leverage state or federal funding and lessen the impact on our taxpayers,
but get the design on the street, that that's that's our preferred route.
Any any chance we get to leverage state and federal money and take off the backs of our taxpayers, that's that's our priority.
I get what you're saying, but we went down and ate a lot of crow and they they made us whole on Mayhill.
And we've been able to pull off McKinney where we are.
So I think by the idea is if we can meet those time frames, we should be able to get back from Luke 288 to Woodrow and see if we can't persuade them to throw some more dollars into the mix.
But we had a group that had just basically turned their back on additional funding for us for a while because we were making all these plans and promises and not spending their money.
So he's been very generous about it, but that that's really the fact why you don't see McKinney in there.
We totally agree it needs sidewalks and needs to be widened.
But it's just a recurring theme that we've tried to turn around since he's been here in terms of putting these plans in place and executing on those timelines.
I guess Mike, I completely but if it was in there and if there was some money that you all could figure out how much needed to be allocated,
then that's something you could also go to them and say, we've gotten this much free from the voters.
If you could kick in the difference, I see you want to do the other way around.
But there's two ways to go about it.
I don't see why you couldn't try it.
Well, I think I think once we have a design finished, which is still going to cost us several million dollars by the time we're done, we can use that to go out and leverage some additional dollars.
We've got plans already going in the hopper now in Hickory Creek, Bonnie Bray.
We know where our local roads are, and that's really what people care about, is they want their roads fixed locally.
We can certainly move some dollars around.
If you wanted to give us matching dollars, if we could leverage some COG funds, perhaps we'd make some other tradeoffs in the local road program.
We'd reduce it from 70 to 60 or something like that and see what we could do on some of the other roads.
But I think the big difference with this bond package is every one of those major projects up there, they're ready to go now.
And that's totally different from every other bond package we've passed, where just give us the money and then we'll figure it out.
So they're out designing a year or two ahead of time, so we're not losing that purchasing power.
>> Thank you.
>> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> All right, last topic is schedule.
I've got a slightly different schedule here from what is in the memo, as it's somewhat of a fluid process.
The biggest change from what you see in the memo first is just, is when we're going to go to council.
When we're planning on going to council with any bond recommendation from the committee,
we're now planning on August 1st to be the date that we go to council.
That'll also be the date that we have our budget workshop.
So the entire meeting will be devoted to our budget workshop for our operating funds,
and then for the bond proposition from the recommendation from the committee.
What it, by pushing it to the first, the difference from your memo, and this kind of goes back to our original timeframe.
It does open up that July 25th date as a date that the committee can meet.
So our thoughts moving forward would be, obviously we have next week off for the fourth.
And when we come back on the 11th, that will really be focused on trying to get some project prioritization with the group,
have that discussion of where you rank the projects.
Prior to that meeting, we're going to have another finance task team meeting where that should lead the way
into a discussion on what targets the committee as a whole wants to shoot for, for total bond package,
and a lot of the other variables that go along with that, which should facilitate the project prioritization discussion.
We can obviously also, we'll have staff here, we can follow up with any questions at that meeting.
And then I think based on how that meeting goes, we'll see how July 18th goes
and then see what the need would be for the July 25th meeting based on how the 18th goes probably.
And then ultimately, either the 18th or 25th is when the committee would take action on the propositions themselves.
We will, for July 11th and 18th, we will include in the agendas an opportunity for public comment
and invite that public comment, push that out so that the residents know they can come
and have their time to make, to say anything they like regarding the program.
I will say that that is just one piece of the public outreach that will happen.
Obviously, as we get to these other dates down here, you know, between August 1st and August 19th,
we could definitely have some community meetings.
Throughout the process, throughout the fall, we'll be interacting with the public, pushing information out as much
as we can and inviting the public to come give their comments on the program.
But definitely want to include that in the committee process as well.
So if anyone would like to come speak to the committee, they can.
>> Great. Sure.
>> Something that I don't see here that I would really like to see is the report
from the Finance Committee about what this is going to do,
what different possibilities would do to the tax rate.
I mean, I received the presentation --
>> Yeah.
>> -- just this afternoon.
>> Yes.
>> I can't read it yet.
>> Yes.
>> But how all -- what the Finance Committee has been doing is going to factor into --
>> Of course.
>> -- decisions.
When will that happen?
>> Patty, that's what he was alluding to.
We're meeting again on July 11th.
>> Yeah.
>> And we're bringing --
>> Bringing that --
>> -- recommendation --
>> Right.
>> -- at the July 11th meeting.
>> Or 18th.
>> Depends on how much progress --
>> Yeah, depends on my 18th, yeah.
>> Hopefully.
>> Fingers crossed.
Yes, well --
>> So I just want to be clear that email that I received from you,
you were stating that there's a finance group that's meeting early.
So are the finance groups that's meeting early before this meeting,
are they making decisions about what's going to happen for the meetings at 6 o'clock?
>> No.
>> What is this meeting for?
>> So this is the meeting that we approved at the very first meeting to look at all the variables
of assessed value versus tax rate versus how much funding we should consider.
So we met a couple of times.
We met this earlier today.
That was public.
Anyone could have come to that.
And we're meeting again on the 11th.
Okay, we gave the staff some direction that they're going to bring back some proposals
for us that are further refined for us to consider and then we're going to bring a full recommendation
to the entire committee for approval.
>> This is the task force, right?
>> Yes.
>> Made up of the people sitting next to you.
>> So Randy, Tim, Eric, Janet, Susan, John, myself.
>> So anyone that outside of you -- I see that there's veterans here.
I'm picking up that you all have been in previous committees such as this before.
So, you know, veterans, what have you.
But I'm trying to be -- making sure that I thought the first meeting was about all
of everyone that's in the committee.
We were trying to make decisions together and not anything outside.
>> And we're not making any decisions outside.
>> Okay, you sure?
>> Yeah, very positive.
>> The meetings are recorded so you should be able to go to the second half of the meeting today.
>> Right.
>> So they're just on the same page as --
>> But that record chronicle was here earlier.
They were here.
Anyone in this room is welcome to attend that meeting.
>> Okay.
>> And I remember you saying you didn't want to be involved.
>> No, I mean, I was saying that we voted for everyone to be voting together.
>> Right.
>> As a committee.
>> We are.
>> That's what we voted for, the first meeting.
So we were all supposed to be clear on that.
>> And then we voted to establish the committee.
>> And that will come back to everyone in the room to decide based on some recommendations
that will come forward, but everybody in the room could decide, no, we don't want to go
with that recommendation, we want to go with this one.
And so there'll be various scenarios.
We're just going to bring back one that is -- well, after we've had these meetings,
we think is the one we want to recommend to the committee.
But the committee will ultimately decide what is going to happen.
>> Okay.
>> And the focus is on the finance part of this, not, I mean --
>> It's on the growth rate and how the growth rate impacts what tax rate
and different scenarios come to pass.
>> The discussion we had about subcodes.
>> Correct.
>> Right, right.
>> So there is actually kind of lots of subcodes.
>> That's what I was saying.
But the committee is not making any decisions.
The committee will make recommendations to the committee as a whole.
>> And we're bringing three options.
We gave very specific direction to David today.
He's bringing back three options for us to consider.
We're going to vet those options and bring all three with a recommendation
of which one we think is best.
But that's, there's nothing, we're going to say this is it.
We're not going to, you know, there's no further discussion.
That's not going to happen.
Apparently, exactly.
>> Okay. Just, you know --
>> We're taking, if you took the presentation right here,
there was what, 20 different scenarios we went through today?
>> It felt like that.
>> Right?
>> Yeah.
>> About 20, and we narrowed it down to essentially three.
>> Yeah.
>> And again, those meetings are open.
They're just open committee meetings
so anyone can attend those meetings.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah, everyone's welcome to come next on July 11th at 4 p.m.
>> Yes.
>> All right.
Any other questions, comments, concerns?
All right.
Colby, can you make a motion for us to adjourn?
>> Yeah, yeah, make a motion to adjourn.
>> Second.
>> All right.
>> 715.
>> Thank you, everyone.