Jul 18, 2019 Special Citizens Bond Advisory Committee on 2019-07-18 5:30 PM

Good evening my name is Rosa Rios and I am your city secretary the time right now is 531 and in the absence of the chair and the vice chair the city secretary will has called the meeting to order under Robert's Rules of Orders the the board does have the ability to appoint a temporary chair the appointment will be for the duration of the meeting and the responsibilities will cease once the meeting is adjourned I will now take nominations on the floor are there any other nominations any other nominations with no other nominations I will now take so we have a man make that a formal motion sir we have a motion and we have a second so there's the nomination for board member Tim Crouch to serve as your temporary chair for this meeting all in favor please raise your right hand all opposed the motion carries with the majority vote your meeting will continue and your next item on the agenda is public comments and individuals are allowed three minutes to speak I'll now turn the meeting over all right and do we have cards we have cards and and let me just remind the committee that that it's important to leave your microphone turned on so don't turn your microphone on and off but leave it turned on so that if you start speaking it gets picked up on the on the streaming and of the meeting here so our the the first person I'd like to call is Rick would Rick would if you would come to the microphone up here at the podium please you have three minutes yeah we'll need your name and address if you would Rick would 80 11 Wood Creek Circle Argyle Texas seven six two two six within the Denton city limits and I just want to speak use my three minutes to address some concerns around the current proposal that would involve the widening of brush Creek Road near our neighborhood this will have a significant impact upon the residents of that section of town and we believe a large majority of us believe that it's largely unnecessary and maybe a better use of funds could be applied to fixing the current street conditions within the city according to the Denton record Chronicle in April of last year in an article didn't had a street score of 65 compared with a flower mound which had an 81 and Frisco as an example had a score of 95 according to that same article 25% of the 1314 lane miles were in poor condition that's about 328 lane miles Cindy City engineer Todd Estes told the council that there were 200 street segments to rebuild the financing for that was approved through a 44 million dollar combined bond package into 2012 and 2014 ultimately the city will need to budget more for maintenance to maintain what we have and the each year and according to mr. Krummer there was a next to an estimated 335 lane miles would cost about 193 million dollars to rebuild today previous bond packages that have gone to the voters were underestimated by 30 to 40 percent if this were to go to an election and to a bond approval we would be concerned that the money used to widen that particular section of road could be better applied against the current infrastructure improvements that are needed around the city today to quote mr. Heilman it's last year in April it's not going to matter how much maintenance funding there is if the roads aren't built right to begin with so instead of widening brush Creek and potentially displacing dozens of residents I would ask the committee to consider reinvesting that money into our current infrastructure and improving the roads we have thank you next Jennifer Lane Jennifer Lane I don't think there'll be an opportunity for public comment on items later if you want to speak you'll need to do that now okay next is Richard Shan house my name is Richard Shan house my address is eight zero zero one Wood Creek Circle in Argyle neighbor for mr. Woods and our interest is in the destruction of property that will happen if you're and I spoke last week as well my garage and my yard will be will be eliminated consequently my whole house will be rendered uninhabitable if a fork if a divided six lane highway with bike paths and and and sidewalks and easement come into come into being so I'm carrying the flag for a number of residents in our area that that are particularly and specifically involved because we would lose our homes and it seemed as though the last time I spoke here you guys at least some of you guys were unaware that that properties would be displaced and you know we put our heart and soul into our properties and it's kind of hard to see the city come along and and and propose a building a wide wide road through an area that is where the traffic is just not doesn't doesn't make sense I think you're the idea from the city from the head engineer was if we build it they will come the traffic and you know brush Creek dead ends into 377 and beyond where and West beyond that is nothing but farmland which would extend to highway 35w where there is no interchange so it's it seems as though that extension and all the displacement and the buying of properties and I would it wouldn't make as much sense as a proposal that we made to the council last week that was in the letter that was sent to the advisory board you guys to to Ryan Adams and others I've got a copy of it if anybody if I can leave it with somebody so that you know refresh your memory about it's very particular about a different proposal that you know seems to you know seems to us so much more meaningful when it comes to how it connects to 35 and how it hooks into joins the proposed loop 288 extension and in joining together with an already proposed widening of a road that up that way if I could leave this with somebody I would like to your time your time is up and again to use that money for roads that are and have been in dire need of denting in other areas thank you thank you next is Dennis Cox I want to begin by thanking all of y'all for that I know the time you put in you have you sit through the meetings everything you hear all the input everybody has their own concerns for whatever is being done to their roads just as we have concerns for ours and I appreciate the time that y'all put in and the consideration that you'll give on what you recommend to the council as far as the road repairs first of all my wife and I walk that Breast Creek Road frequently at different times of the day and I would say on the average in a week of us and we try to walk every day but sometimes it works out to about three days week depending on how hot it is eight to twenty vehicles you know at a maximum pass us when we're walking I don't know what studies have been committed to see what the future traffic would be if it was expanded I for some reason I can in my mind see where it would expand where it would need a six lane divided road so I would hope that somebody is doing all the research and all the calculations to make sure that it's needed and and I agree with with what Rick would said and that is you know there's a lot of city streets and everything that need a lot of attention for that money could be better spent at this time maybe in the future that might be a good idea second of all the two concerns if it does go through it's gonna wipe out the Apple's house and Dick's house and I'm the second house in on the on the cul-de-sac there and even if it doesn't wipe out their house I would be concerned about the the noise and I would wonder if if this bond proposal includes the sound barrier wall that runs down that road to to keep some of the sound away because I know on 2499 they have a nice sound barrier wall down through there so I would hope that something is being included in that another is the drainage I have on the backside of my pool about an 8-foot retaining wall and when they built that development behind us they put in the city put in three pipes that dump into that creek there we've had water come up almost over the top of that retaining wall and we've had a trampoline washed down the stream a brick seat that we sit on down there for little fireplaces washed down through there so I'll be concerned about how this is gonna affect the drainage whether it will or not I don't know I'm sure there's some engineers that would be able to answer that question for you and I would hope that you would inquire about that before making your decision Dennis your time is up would you give your address also please oh it's 8008 Wood Creek Circle thank you very much next up David Yoder my name is David Yoder I live at 940 and 950 brush Creek Road I am technically in the county but I am in Denton's ETJ we've lived there since 1986 and the ideal of six lanes coming down brush Creek Road takes away half my front yard in both pieces of my property and I think part of what we're trying to get clarification is is for for not knowing what y'all are calling it I call it Hicker Creek West and that is from River Pass to 1830 is that in this bond package the next one is from 1830 all the way down brush Creek Road to 377 and the third one is from 377 all the way up to 35 so at this point I'll even know I can't find anything that tells me what all's in the package that you all are proposing or is the piece from River Pass to three 1830 even in this package because if not we're probably talking to the wrong folks you probably need to go talk to the mobility people so I'd like clarification on that and if any of the three projects that are proposed why is it why is it coming in this package instead of waiting on till the mobility study is completed which I understand is supposed to be done in February of 2020 which means then it seems to be getting out ahead of what the city is proposing to do with the package the third one is is can any give us any information I mean basically we're going on state websites county websites city websites nothing shows me what's in the proposal so first thing I think for a lot of us it would be extremely helpful to just know what is being proposed but if if you're going to take 70 feet off the front of my property on two pieces of property you're taking almost a third of my property been there a long time I'm retired I went on found an old windmill restored it put it up make it work I don't want to see it go away thank you thank you next is Troy Fulkerson good afternoon my name is Troy Fulkerson I'm at 8204 Wickwood Court in Argyle and you know my question is is that y'all moved out to Argyle this area about 14 years ago was a nice quiet you know Tulane Road been West Creek and I came from Colleyville where Colleyville had the same battle here about ten years ago where they wanted the widened glade road if you guys were familiar with that road from 121 all the way up a policing line it's wonderful several years I don't assure you the traffic on that road on the glade road is probably a hundred times more what it is in West Creek my misunderstanding or maybe not understanding why we want to widened West Creek what's the point we have a county road right down the road which is country club road which just spent you know hundreds of thousands of dollars to make that road that goes all the way 35 how about that so why are we spending all these tax dollars on West Creek the county how we spent money on country club road what can't the seat of bitten in the county get together and have a great road is already in the in the infrastructures already there if we want to go any further off off of a country club road we can stand up that direction but my my question this is why that's the whole question why we will spend that kind of taxpayer dollars on a six lane road for a great little neighborhood for what purpose just to spend taxpayer money or can we take this money as the other gentleman said and use it for other purposes but I live in the hills at Argo it's not my properties being ripped out which is the ideal of taxpayer dollars and something that doesn't really need to seem to be done so that being said that's all I gotta say thank you thank you next Gary Davis my name is Gary Davis I live at 970 brush Creek Road in Argyle and what they said to be honest I worked for the city of Keller it took me forever to get here because you can't get here from there with the traffic really we just need I do this same thing for the city of Keller and I know that we're not going to change your mind on the route you're going to go that's already that horse is out of the barn but the thing that I don't know which is what David Yoder said is how many phases are there in this one how far does that take you when do the next phases kick in in a timeline type of format and I don't think that's asking too much and within that format some sort of a map that says you know here's the route it's exactly going to take and here's how much property is going to go from each side I would assume there's going to be some properties that you're going to have to buy out that's okay but none of us really know what that is now the question I have is when you go to the bond election in November I believe it is this if that bond passes is that more than just Denton is that also include County is that also include state whatever funding sources you have is that important does that give you all funding sources if not where the other funding sources kick in also what happens if it doesn't pass I'm sure it's not going to just die you've got to get cars from point A to point B what's plan B what happens when you do pass it what happens if you don't where the funding sources come in and what's the timeline for each one of those that's what I have to do with all of ours have to lay out straight maps aerials always help aerials with dotted lines that show where it's going to go that's what we know with a timeline thank you so much thank you and I have one of the card with but something written on it but I have no name okay good evening my name is Sam Slovak I live at 4905 Argyle Lane which is the corner of Argyle Lane and Brush Creek a six lane major highway cutting through a pristine area of Denton which many of us bought in that area for that very reason will completely change the character of those neighborhoods as you put in a road of this size and I look at the studies that have been issued you know they're still talking about rural culvert for drainage you take drainage off of a six lane highway and and that highway will be on the south side of all of these homes which backs up to a flood zone so you're going to exacerbate the flooding in all of those homes along the north side of that highway again it's been brought up tonight that you put a road in of this size you're going to significantly increase the noise traffic and there are no provisions in the plans that I've seen that address that issue as well so I for one find it absurd to think that you need a road of this size to be able to accommodate traffic out in 2035 when you look at the growth of the industry and the growth of the housing is not not lined up with with the path that you propose to take you're taking an easy way out down a floodplain area to build a massive highway that's going to disrupt the lives and homes of some some very nice homes in the Denton area thank you and the last card that I have is Colleen Mitchell hello I'm Colleen Mitchell I live at 1300 Brush Creek Road in Argyle we've lived in on Brush Creek Road since 2002 our property is on 40 acres and the front of it would actually be taken out but it would not affect our home because our house is way at the back of the property but if any of you have driven down Brush Creek Road you'll see and I followed the men who were setting up the that we're doing the surveying and I said what what are you doing and how how are you going to you're marking these and and here's here's utilities right in front of that do you know how many utilities you're gonna have to take out to widen that road does anyone who realized that a six-lane highway is like 1171 drive down 1171 and see six lanes there's no way you can do that to brush Creek Road without taking out so much land on this side and so much land on that side it seems insane maybe make it four lanes because I think going straight to 35w would be really a lot easier I mean it's a straight drop through but don't ruin our properties we've all cared about that property we've all taken care of that property for years and I ask for your attention to more detail on what you're going to do and let us know thank you thank you hi those are all the cards that I have what is your name Perry Dyer well good evening and thank you Perry Dyer 4,800 snowsills no show I don't know how we pronounce it but Argyle it's in the hills of Argyle moved out there just about two years ago I'm from a very small town out in Northern California and it has a lot of charm has a lot of loveliness about it I was living over in Corinth before I found this property with my wife and family and decided this is where we want to spend our time acre lots rural close to everything but not very far out if we decide that we need to create a draw to our area the small town of Argyle the rural area of Rush Creek and those areas in there we're gonna create a draw Roanoke is supposed to go insane in the next few years that draw will move all these people up to our area because they'll be looking to try to get out because we're in a unique situation where we have land for most of us we take that land away we've turned ourselves into every other little city around here and ruined all the charm of Denton South Denton in Argyle we don't want to do that we don't need to have that ultimate convenience it takes a good seven eight minutes to get to 35w from our house it takes 15 minutes if I go the other way to go 35e we live in these areas because we'd like to have a little bit of separation okay if I wanted to be five minutes from the grocery store or five minutes from the restaurant I would go move into any of these surrounding areas that are going gangbusters and are like that so I think we need to take a step back and realize that maybe growth isn't exactly what we need in all these areas and just step back and say let's let some rural areas stay rural and not drive a bunch of traffic into areas because frankly if that lane goes through on Brush Creek and it's six lanes I'm moving because I will not be having that kind of noise I'm a half a mile from that road and it will not have that kind of noise because I'd love to sit on my back patio and look at the stars and not hear traffic so thank you for your time okay thank you and I assume there are not any other cards Jesse Calvert I did see your card hello everybody we recently moved to brush Creek I live on 990 brush Creek road right on the corner of Hamilton and brush Creek I want to talk a little bit about the human element I'll walk my kids to the bus stop right there on the corner of brush Creek and Hamilton the bus stops is great you sit on the front porch sit on the back porch we moved from Dallas to get away from this type of thing I've got 50-foot pine trees in the front of my yard that have been there forever that this would take away and there's a lot more questions that other people have broached but it seems like a waste to me is as far as there's Country Club Road down that's wide enough to me anyway there's a golf course that in my opinion could suffer a bit more than the the residents of brush Creek personally my wife is suffering from three forms of cancer and this is a very large inconvenience to say the least for everybody on our street but it affects I feel like it affects our family horribly just getting the notifications in the mail and all these things have really sent her in a downward spiral with her health and just letting everyone know that there are people involved in all this and it's not just getting people from point 8 point B I understand progress but at what cost and that people have bought it brought up really good points about flooding and it does flood down brush Creek brush Creek a lot but please put in some thought to what we're dealing with and and the questions we have and what's gonna happen with us and with our property and to the the land it's I see this gentleman walk down the street all the time I'm in my yard every day with my family doing things so please consider all these things whenever this comes up thank you thank you did I miss any other cards all right thank you all very much for your comments next item on our agenda is to receive a report and hold a discussion regarding potential projects financial considerations and other requirements related to the proposed 2019 bond program and before David begins let me just sort of say I think that this is a critical meeting for us tonight I think that that we want to come out of this meeting with a sense of where our priorities are where we believe that we want to make some assumptions on the growth rate and therefore what the impact is on the tax rate so these this is this meeting is one tonight in which we need as the committee to begin to take ownership of this bond package we've had a lot of presentations from staff but over the course of this evening it's it's in our hands and and we need to own this package because ultimately when it comes time to go to the voters we're the ones who are going to have to make the case for this bond package city staff can't make the case and city the city council members cannot make the case it will be this committee that will become a political action committee to work toward the passage of this bond and in order to do that we have to own what this bond is about and that's what tonight is is taking ownership of this so with that I want to turn it over to David good evening committee David gains director of finance for this item we're going we're going to take a step back and look at the projects in total go through many of the financial financial considerations that we've talked through up to this point and some updated scenarios based on feedback from the committee and then after that we'll get into some more detail on the street rehab program to answer a few questions and on Ryan Road as well so that's the purpose of this presentation following this perfect presentation the next item on the agenda is the prioritization presentation which will go over the results of the most recent priority prioritization survey obviously these will go these will really work hand in hand with each other as you all start to make those make those decisions so to set the stage here's our current project cost that we went over last last meeting last week as we got those updates to the police renovation and police stuff six substation projects so you can see the potential bond cost here in the middle our total project costs that we've seen multiple times this total project cost obviously including the other funding sources that come in for those major roadway projects and then a funding option here I've highlighted a few of these projects on the funding option column just because I think these are some of those decision points for the committee to consider especially as we get to that prioritization piece of today's conversation of what funding level the committee wants on these projects Ryan Road is one have plugged four million here obviously we have that four million to 19 million dollar range at the end of this presentation we're gonna have a few slides that really get into the detail of what that means so that you have concrete examples of what is four million mean for that Ryan Road project from a city perspective what is 19 million mean from a city perspective so we want to go over some of the financial assumptions that are built into all of our scenarios that we've shown this shown this previously and just go through how we got to the numbers of where we're at beginning with our debt issuance and next next year for FY 1920 we are we do it have in our model to issue the final fourteen point six million dollars of our 2014 bond program this will close that bond program out have no nothing left to issue for the bond program but it is included in all of our all of our models moving forward we also have five million dollars in certificates of obligation for vehicle replacements and facility improvements three moving forward in each of the years that's that's something that we budgeted for multiple years now for annual improvements for our facilities and for those replacements of vehicles and you can see the total there with our vehicle replacements we typically do five-year debt and for facility improvements we tenure down we are utilizing in the first few years of the bond of our bond schedule to draw down a fund balance that is built up in our debt service fund that fund balance really has just built up simply because our assessed values have come in higher than the certified values over the past few years it's built up a balance that's not necessary in our debt service fund so we're able to then use that balance to pay off debt service in the next few years which mitigates some of that increase that we would experience in the tax rate with increased debt service payments for next year we currently have a seven point three percent increase in our non frozen assessed values and we'll talk about a little bit on the next slide but that's up through our last preliminary values from the appraisal district we got those last Friday that'll be those are the last values we get up until next Thursday or Friday when we get our certified values and then we can really put some concrete numbers to what we're expecting next year this is our estimate based on the preliminary values we've received so far I will say the appraisal district has experienced greater number of protests than they've ever experienced so that number has fluctuate quite fluctuated quite a bit we've built in some room in this estimate to anticipate that dropping further next year so we feel comfortable right now at the seven point three percent number in non frozen values on assessed value assessed value increase we'll talk about this on the next slide as well but our assumptions that you'll see moving forward have a five percent growth estimate for assessed value in future years past 19 FY 19 20 and then for our interest rate we're currently assuming next year to have an interest rate of three point seven five percent which is still above we just issued debt this last week at three point seven five percent is above what we just issued because rates are as low as they've been in a long time right now but to be conservative we've kind of anticipated that to inch its way back up and then have four and a half percent as an interest rate in those out years past 2020 and that's been an emphasis to it for the city especially over the past year we've really stepped back and take taking a look a hard look at all of our vehicles at our replacement policies we've been able to take some vehicles that were utilized in multiple departments but not utilized very often their utilization wasn't very high combine those and have some sharing across the city so we've been able to reduce that continually to reduce that this fiscal year and next fiscal year so it's possible that three don't need that three and a half every year that may be a conservative number but that's what we have built into the scenarios so obviously the assessed value is one of the the most important of the assumptions that we have whatever number we whatever percentage we pick for assessed value has a direct impact on what that tax rate is needed that the tax rate increase that would be needed on the debt service side to pay for our increased debt service payments so you can see the history of our tax rate since 2014 we have been experienced and really since 2011 2012 we started the growth but since 2014 significant growth that our assessed value that's not surprising to anyone and here as you've seen your property values grow and the growth within the city up through for comparison stakes in 2018 and 2019 we've shown our total assessed value the growth of our total assessed value but we've also starting in 2018 had the first impact of our over 65 tax freeze so for comparison sake showed the total but really what what is important right now for our considerations and what the new revenue that's coming into us is a seven point three percent of growth in our non frozen values and David I think this might be a good point for the committee to have some discussion about the assessed value growth that that the task force is recommending but is also in the hands of this committee to decide what do we want what do we want to assume in terms of property growth for the coming years the committee looked at a number of different scenarios when you when you see the growth that's occurring around here there was this question of what's the right number there was some concern within the within the task force that that it's been a while since we've had a recession and what happens if we have a recession and we can look back in an 08 no 9 and 10 and we can see the recession numbers that impacted our property values at that point in time so that was one consideration the fact that the we have this much lower increase because of the non frozen values became another consideration and so the the that the task force in looking at that felt that four percent was too low and we looked at six but settled on five and I think that the question that is really before the the bond committee at this point is what are we comfortable with are we comfortable with that five percent assumption do we want to be more aggressive or do we want to be more conservative and so with that I would just sort of turn it over for your comments and and thoughts on this this is one of those pieces we need to own because this will also impact what the what the tax rate increase might be David I know there's been some some bills passed recently state statewide or state level that have affected cities in multiple ways one being taxes I wonder I guess my question is that what is you know does any of that affect some of these values that affect us locally or should we take that into consideration sure it does as far as for the conversation just on the AV goes there's nothing that will affect affect the I think later on and I'll just I'll come back to this slide but just kind of give you a preview of some of the numbers there's a lot of numbers here but one of the pieces I will talk about is the the largest impact to cities right now as far as tax rate is a three and a half percent rollback rate that rollback rate really is focused specifically on for the most part the M&O the operations and maintenance rate so what we do on the debt service side doesn't have a direct is not directly impacted by the three and a half percent rollback so I'll talk about that a little bit later but that that's the biggest impact and it doesn't have a big consideration for what you do with the debt service tax rate thank you not to give you get you off track but I've been requesting some information for the last month a month and a half do we get it today time I got it we will get to that on slide 25 but we have can it can I suggest that we come to that a little bit later let's focus on our assessed value question and and what the assumption is that we want to make as a committee on on the assessed value growth so as more and more of our citizens become over 65 and properties continue to freeze we know we see the spread between seven point three and eight point oh what happens have we thought about that you know consideration it's definitely something it's still someone new for us to try to try to plan for that I think when we first were considering the freeze if you go back and look at some of our projections previously we're expecting more of a gradual hit from the freeze but we really kind of had that up front and now we've seen some gradual growth and what the frozen amounts are as far as more people getting on to the freeze so I think as we continue to see that if that trend plays out it'll allow us to eat more easily project that in the future I think in future years is the gap between those won't be as high because we're still having people add to the freeze right now which I think it makes that gap a little bit wider than it would be I think normally if we were looking at just non frozen versus non frozen and frozen versus frozen it should be about the same so I think it's just I think the majority of that is just because we're still at the beginning of the process okay I trust you okay go ahead Patty then Randy we talk about growth but I think within that growth we need to look at what kind of growth this is what percentage of it is commercial do we project will be business growth commercial industrial which has a very low cost of service compared to residential and especially multifamily so how has that factored into these projections have we considered that at all have we considered cost of service there the our projections have just been at a high level of here's the total AV as it grows as it's growing so we haven't got to the level of commercials growing in X amount residential is growing in X amount because traditionally as we dig into those numbers it all kind of comes back to the high level three four or five percent on the growth it's also difficult to to get to that level and have have validity in those numbers as we get down to that point the cost of service question is one that that we always that we have frequently and it's one that right now we're you know engaging with different consultants to try to understand what is that kind of break-even point but it's a little bit different than this conversation but it is a valid point Randy yeah just question about the so 2019 let's use 8.07 just for comparisons but that's eight billion dollars an increase in property base is that correct eight million you sorry yeah yeah that's the eight yeah eight this is the total amount of the increase that's correct you're right that's a total eight yes that's not a million dollar increase eight billion dollar increase should be about eight hundred eight hundred million dollars I know our total is around 11 to 13 billion so eight hundred million dollar increase so the eight hundred million dollars and I know we've asked we talked about this and the task force deal I just wanted for the committee to hear it but that how much of that growth is new properties that have come on the tax rolls versus an increase in existing properties so this year it's about four hundred and fifteen million of that is new growth of the eight hundred million so about half of strictly the increase yes okay so if we're talking about a five percent increase and I know everybody is seeing all the projections on development the on the around the loop and on the south southwest part of town is that we have any idea what what that would mean to that that increase number we haven't right now in our model essentially we're saying four percent growth and new value and regular and existing value we right now don't have number a different percentage for new growth in those different areas that's definitely something we could look at though okay yeah I just I just want to clarify that you know if there is if there are new properties coming on to the the tax rolls and if it becomes more than the more than 50% of the annual project or the projected increase I think that gives pretty good credence to five percent versus four I'm with I don't think we should get as high as six that's too close to seven point three in my opinion but you know my mind started at four percent in the very beginning so I'm that makes me feel more comfortable with five if we think there's a lot more development and properties that can be added to the tax rolls in the next five years which all indications are it's gonna it is gonna happen that I'm okay with five percent that's just other questions or comments the end of next week day after our next meeting right possibly the day Anna my law firm could run its entire practice on protest for taxes this year just very quick question if we're going to be honest with our citizens about raising taxes what does the five percent mean to them well what let's let's it's about 25 about $25 a cent so thank you but I think there's as we'll go through the process is important caveats to them when we say five cents we're not saying five cents every year we say go up to a five cent tax it's in one year if these assumptions fill okay comment I just want to make sure I fully understand this so my understanding is that the growth rate assumption that we assume will then determine how many cents on the tax rate we tell people that this could cause and then it is the city's intention although they are not legally bound to ensure that the debt service rate does not rise above that increase over the period of the bond program is that a reasonable summary yes okay thank you okay Queen did you have something oh no I think somebody said $25 where did I get that from there's something about something you were saying and then for just yeah on average on for our average taxable value on a home it's about $25 per percent that increases okay the questions and comments on the assumptions for the growth rate yeah so would it be but I'll try again please feel free to jump in so sure the July 11 2019 on program financial presentation page five I think that might give a little bit more context so Eric while you're at while you're restating out of a thank you I will run the risk of not looking at paper while I speak so so my understanding is that the growth rate that we assume and also the size of the capital package we asked for determine the projections of the number of cents the tax rate the debt service tax rate may have to increase in order to fund the the bonds right and then it is the city's intention that if you can you go back to the chart with the sorry when it shows the the debt service and or maybe we haven't gotten there yet yeah just that shows the the combination of the debt service and the M&O rate the table sorry yeah yeah so so then it is the city's intention that the second column there the debt service rate would be held to whatever number of cents that is above the current rate of 21.5 cents throughout the the term of the bond program and so if economic things change then they would change the issuance of the bonds the schedule or something like that in order to not exceed the number of cents that we told the voters that they might incur yeah isn't that when you when you put it before whoever you buy the bonds from this is what your guarantee is for X number of years of the bond unless it goes down that's a it's a little bit of a different question the target when we're talking about the debt service tax rate increase as Eric was saying that's really a number that we say here's what we anticipate the impact on the debt service tax rate which all the debt service tax rate does is pay our debt service payments so I mean it's involved with that our debt service payments will go up as we issue more bonds we anticipate that on this scenario it won't go up over five cents but as Eric mentioned that's not you know in official language if we there was a point and we had to make considerations we would obviously work through the oversight bond oversight committee and City Council but the intention would be to not cat go over that five cent debt service tax rate that was that was published with with the bond program and the point is if we if we assumed a 7% rate every year then we could say oh it's not gonna go up any more than three cents in the next five years but I think it's it's much better to have a have a somewhat conservative growth estimate and so that we know that this this five cents is gonna be the maximum because we did keep our growth estimate at 5% which hopefully is a conservative number are there are there any other questions or comments if if not I would entertain a motion about what we will use as our assumed property value growth rate assessed value property growth rate I'll make a motion that we assume 5% a B growth is there got a second anyone want to make a speech for or against that seeing none all the way I'm sorry so we can't hold it at four no it's not good it's not doable I'm trying to understand okay maybe I'll just try to add a little bit to what I was explaining before I'm sure I get to the 200% mark the risk that I see if we assume a higher AV growth than materializes is that or an aggressive goal in other words would be that it's more likely that the city would either have to change how quickly those bonds are issued to stay under the the projection of how many cents it rises or that the city would have to renege on that projection and raise it above that amount of sense is that accurate I say the third option would be to not do a project I mean obviously the leader laying the project or not doing okay but most likely would just be delaying the project and fitting it into our issue and schedule if we delay a project that gives more opportunity for inflation and and cost overruns when we finally are able to do that correct which is why the goal is to set a rate set a tax rate increase that we feel comfortable with that we don't end up in that situation I think you know we have this slide later where we talked through this was a question that was brought up last time of our last three bond programs did we go over that max rate and we did not we've stayed significantly under that rate so in 2005 bond program we said we were gonna have up to a four cent tax rate increase so I'll just kind of describe what these lines are here this black and black and blue line is our debt service tax rate since 20 2005 and the dotted blue line above it is our max tax rate so as we go forward if we say you want a four we go with a program that's a four or five cent that then becomes our max starting next year so you can see throughout the 2005 bond program we stayed well under our are the max four cents that we could have issued through that program in 2012 the only reason it comes down here is because in 2012 we went into a program that had had no anticipated no tax rate increase so those just essentially stayed the same in 2014 we said we would have a four cent tax rate increase and we're at a point now where we haven't used that force those four cents because assessed values came in higher than we projected so if we say we want five percent and that's equated to a four or five cent tax increase but we get we get rates like we just saw worth eight percent to ten percent over the six years of this program we're gonna stay you know well below or not even increase the debt service tax rate to get there what rate did we assume growth during five twelve and fourteen percent four percent so and I'm running numbers because I'm trying to think of having the commercial businesses residential and all these tax increases so I'm trying to get the numbers right I'm sorry guys but I do think it's good on four I do come I see where it is on five as well I don't know I'm just gonna get these numbers right so you want to go to a different side were you looking at could you please I think the one thing I would want to add at four we will have to assume a greater tax rate increase and that's what we would have to take to the voters and with the voters authorize a bigger tax rate increase and at five we kind of split the difference potential potential right but we have to tell them what it potentially could be we have to really guess based on this alive Mike yeah based on past experience and whatever brains in education we can bring to it because the AV is essentially set by the county it's not but it's not a city unit the city is not setting its own valuations so really what we have to do here is base a lot of our decisions on a guess so how comfortable does the city and the staff fill with the five percent right because we were initially given a four percent right we've used four percent of the past can we get your kind of feel I ultimately we felt we're comfortable with the five percent I think if if we weren't comfortable that we would definitely give us raise alarms and I think I mean I think if we started talking about six or seven percent we definitely want to have a detailed discussion on that but five percent is something and it comes back to the new growth and in the trends that we're seeing so we do have a motion and a second on the floor is there any other discussion seeing none all in favor of supporting the motion for a five percent assumption on the assessed value growth please say aye do you need a you need a you need a handbook okay all right raise your right hand or your left hand I don't care great all right so as we move forward now we'll work from the assumption of a five percent growth rate and what the impact would be with the various aspects of this and and David one of the things that I think that you indicated to me earlier today was that that you all have kind of rerun some numbers in terms of what five percent might mean at different levels and I think that's what this slide is about it is so this kind of leads into the forecast assumptions you know the other the other variable that that plays a part in the total tax rate and the whole plan itself is when do we issue the debt when do when do we need these when do we get dollars for the program so we step back with our financial advisors and looked at what how can we time the issue it says so we can get the projects done but also at a issuance rate that has the least impacts on the tax rate so that's what we're that's what we're presenting here you know obviously as we look forward on this program we're gonna have a lot of cost in those first couple years as you've seen the schedule for the police station the police for innovation and a couple of those major projects so there is a big impact in those first few years to our debt service that is where we're also helped by that having that debt service fund balance that we're able to utilize in those first few years to mitigate that impact from the debt service on the debt service tax rate from what we have to pay with debt service so all those are the factors that really play into it but we will by doing that and by taking that look we're able to come here and say we have a five cent increase right under a five cent increase on the two hundred thirty five million dollar project we this was discussed if you would would you update the committee on the action that the council took so obviously following last Thursday meeting last Thursday's committee meeting one of the action items was to go to the City Council and request that would they revise the resolution that that formed the committee which had a not to exceed amount of 210 million dollars that amount has now been increased to 235 million dollars there was some discussion during the work session we presented the item to City Council a lot of positive conversation from that from that meeting and they ultimately approved it on their agenda and I think the the intent from them to approve it was to just give the committee all the capacity they needed to have a full discussion of the projects as presented all right thank you any other questions in terms of this particular slide yes I was yeah I was agreeing with you were saying we were at four point four four percent and then if that change had happened today so I was just concerned you know hope you don't mind that yeah I was just really concerned because we did say four percent sounds like oh my goodness when we changed to five percent it rattled me a little bit because I was really stuck on that does that make sense I don't know okay all right let's move on to the next slide so this is a slide that was developed early from conversations with the committee of different pieces that everyone wanted to see with each of the scenarios so I'm gonna go through I'll go through fairly quickly because there's a lot of numbers here and I'll hit on some of the the numbers that I think we're of most interest but definitely can answer any questions as we go through but for the 235 million dollar program we anticipate a five cent increase in the debt service tax rate and you can see that on the debt service tax rate here the second column that's bolded of how it how it increases through the years where we really gradually come up to our largest increases in FY 23 and 24 and through 26 and then it'll start going down after that we also show our total tax rate which is a combination of our maintenance and operations rate with our debt service tax rate and this is our maintenance operations rate at the effective level for the entirety of the program and then have shown here the three and a half percent rollback rate and this again doesn't have a lot is not impacted very much by this bond program itself other than some maintenance costs associated with any of the projects as they move forward but wanted to show this here for context but three and a half percent rollback rate is a new is new in the legislation that was just passed by the Texas Legislature this year it'll go into effect next fiscal year for us in our budget considerations for FY 2021 and what it says is we can't go over three and a half percent of our maintenance and operations rate that's actually that's paid by existing values so of the values that have assessed value right now if they're if their assessed values increase what is the tax rate next year that would be that would be needed to pay the same amount of taxes they're paying yes this year and that's how that's that's based on three and a percent over that I know that can be a little bit complicated so I can definitely answer any more questions on that piece but I think it doesn't have a direct impact on us here but it is an important consideration for us as a city as we move forward over the next year six years of this program and after that of how we pay for our ongoing operations and maintenance costs that are increasing but also deal with the three and a half percent rollback rate yeah I did not the currently it's eight percent or currently the the eight percent is the rollback rate and the Texas the legislature has now moved that back to three and a half percent and it's based just on the maintenance and operations rate it's what existing homes the value that would be amount of property taxes we get for maintenance and operations from existing homes this year what would the rate be next year to get that same value and that becomes essentially an effective tax rate and then we can't go three and a half percent over that that rate without going to the voters to get approval for that new rate this is essentially saying in this year based on projections we have now we could only increase the maintenance in operations rate 1.3 cents before we'd have to go we be over that three now I these are based on a lot of projections the first year we're doing this so that I think that number is probably between one and two cents in some range but it's there for consideration all right you want to look at the next scenario we had another question and it may be one you can't answer because it's a future question does the city anticipate having any more bonds going forward in the next few years so I think that comes back to the assumptions question if we're a five percent assessed value growth and we say we get five percent every year of this program I don't think it would be difficult to go back out and ask the voters to do another increase but if we have a percent and ten percent and there's there's room there within the debt service tax rate I think that's when the considerations would happen I think it's also a very safe assumption if we're gonna grow the way we're growing we're gonna have more bond packages in the future so David I have a question for clarification it sounded like in your procedural description of the three and a half rollback rate that that only applies to the M in a row rate the way I see this table the three and a half rollback difference really looks like the difference between the your total tax rate that we're planning on and the three and a half percent rollback rate that's computed over the entire yes is that correct you're right I was trying not to confuse everyone no it's okay I just I just want to clarify so really what that means is that this is sort of a benchmark target that we're trying to hit to stay below that three and a half percent rollback rate for the entire tax rate however legally what is required by the recent legislation is that the city must go to the voters if just the first column of the M&O rate right so when you collect the roll when you when you calculate the rollback rate you take the maintenance and operate the effective maintenance operations rate you three and a half percent above that right and then you add in what your debt service tax rate is so the actual rollback rate is the total it's just only impacted by the maintenance and operations okay so I did not confuse so the number that's presented is is the complete amount okay so is that column that says three and a half rollback difference is that computed the way that you just described correct okay thank you so I think we're going to go through a couple other scenarios here this is that this is assuming this is at 235 million which is the cap of what we could do and it would be a five cent tax rate increase if we did a smaller package at 210 which was the original number I think that's our next slide it is I do want to point out as we look at all these scenarios and this was one of the emphasis is from City Council as we went into the program was to not have a program that would exceed our total our current total tax rate and obviously the 235 is going to be our largest program that we look at and it it does not exceed the total tax rate that we current have currently have and none of the scenarios moving forward do it either understanding those are all with our operations maintenance rate at our effective tax rate which is a different discussion with council each year on the operation side the 210 million dollar program which has been the somewhat of the benchmark as we that we've looked at throughout this process you can see again the debt service tax rate here all the other numbers as we talked about previously that service tax rate going up a little bit under under four cents so we would say the max tax rate that we could see in this program at 210 million dollars would be a four cent tax rate increase but you can see the total tax rate here remaining under our current tax rate throughout the life of the program and so four cents would fall in line with what previous bond packages had as as the high high total of potential taxing 2005 and 2012 and 2014 5 and 2014 4 in 2014 2005 and 2014 they Queen is just asking about we'll be addressing some of the some of the specific projects later after we get to get through the some of these important discussions so the next scenario to that the committee asked for last week was a hundred eighty million dollar scenario and really these scenarios worked out fairly cleanly where it kind of went a cent per scenario 180 million dollar scenario was equated to a three percent increase at some point in the debt service tax in in the six-year program and again it just to emphasize even when we say six cents here you're not really experiencing that until 2023 2024 it's not every year you're gonna be over that amount and so one of our selling points here and what the council gave us was that there's there would be no impact on the effective tax rate for homeowners on whatever scenario we work with is that right on the 100 million dollar scenario the goal the goal was to keep the effective rate where it is which is basically where we are in total when you look at the kind of the way that the hundred million dollar scenario works out on the because the effective rate on the the total effective rate is just the tax rate that effective rate will increase as we increase the debt service tax rate but on the maintenance operation side we've kept that rate at the okay thank you so 180 million three cents increase and then the hundred million dollars has no tax rate increase on the debt service tax rate and actually as you get to the the final years of this we are of this program we actually our tax rate then goes on the debt service side below our current tax rate I I think it's important to talk about the hundred million dollar scenario because obviously when we spread a hundred million dollars out for six years that's true we wanted apples to apples comparisons if we wanted to go forward with a hundred million dollars in program we would really need to step back and have a different discussion because to do the police station to the renovation the substation and some of these street projects where we need a lot of dollar dollars up front that may become a four-year program that does have a debt service tax rate increase so we've shown this here and obviously we could you know we would take a detailed look at how we would issue a hundred million dollars but it would not be the same way that we would issue the other scenarios okay we showed this chart previously just showing that gap between the max tax rate and our history on the debt service tax rate side and that's the chart that shows that we did four cents previous right so we have the four cents there in 2005 and the gap between that and in 2014 we had the four cent max that's that service tax rate increase and we stayed below that through the life of that program so over these not these next few slides of show some of the same information but just show the impact to our debt service tax rate our debt service payments for each year of the different scenarios this came up last week as we talked about the number of our total debt our total debt outstanding versus what the debt we would issue would be and how all that debt doesn't hit us at once that we have debt falling off as new debt arises so our debt service payments are that obviously the payments we make each year on our general government debt so this year about 25 million dollars in debt service payments in general government and you can see if we were not to issue anything going forward how it would drop off over the next 20 years and just similar to a home payment where you have your interest out front and then you're paying more principal later in the program so there are quite a few lines here but I think there I can explain them fairly easily to everyone the red line is all right what we just saw that's essentially our existing debt service over the 20 years and you can see how it falls off the greed that the blue line is that we just issued debt this this week with City Council to for some certificates of obligation and for our 2014 bond program so you can see that already increases that red line to our starting point the green air the green line is the deditions I mentioned earlier the 2014 the fourteen point six million dollars will be issuing and then the orange yellow line is are the certificates of obligations I mentioned that will be issuing each of those years for facility maintenance and and the vehicle replacement so essentially this this yellow line becomes if we were to do not do a program at all and not do a program any bond program over the life of you know the next 20-25 years what would the impact be so if we were to do no bond programs for 25 years here's how the debt service rate would decrease with the 235 million dollar number you 235 billion dollar program you can see how that debt service tax rate does increase as we start as we issue those bonds and then starts decreasing as we're just paying those those bonds off but to kind of tie it back to the earlier conversations in this scenario essentially what we're saying is the additional five cents max could pay for the difference between this blue line and the purple line so that the tax rate increase does also pay for some of the other debt will be issuing in future years and can you remind the committee what the current total debt that the city has it's supported by property tax sure I mean I'll pull it up to be exact about 260 million dollars but I have it on this other presentation so 260 million dollars is our current outstanding debt and so this would be if we did a 210 million dollar program we showed last last week if you with the interest on that over the life of the debt we were anticipating that would be about a 316 million dollar program so when you look at those numbers side-by-side it looks like we're doubling our debt but because as we showed the debt service is falling off on that existing debt and then is getting to plan and obviously going above our current debt service amount but that's how that interplay works and I think you said last week about 98 million would be retired over the life of this this current bond proposal yeah over the six years of the bond program about 98 million of our current debt would be retired so the remaining slides just kind of emphasize the point on the debt service tax rate as we have each scenario you can see that the jump there isn't quite as much as we as we come down but a similar story and for the 180 and I think it's I think just to point out even with this hundred million dollar hundred million dollar program which we've looked at for comparison and we're saying that would have no debt service tax or an increase and in fact a decrease in latter years you still have it going up but what this increase in assessed value that we're going to experience the debt service rate needed to pay off is doesn't increase any questions on any of that yeah so each so you can see it kind of as it goes up each year it's in 2020 we're issuing issuing our first round of issuance for bonds for the for the program in 2021 we're issuing our next round and then all the way up to 2025 26 where we've issued the all of our bonds for the program and then it starts decreasing because we're simply just paying the debt service down at that point so keep this all in mind as we move here shortly to what what the prioritization list is and where that running total is because that will be part of what we ultimately are going to take up here in just a little bit David you want to continue I I'll go through these slides but obviously Todd essence here as we go through it we wanted to touch on the street rehab program and the neighborhood streets and just make sure obviously this is a discussion we've had previously but just to make sure everyone understands how what the plan right now is just to spend that 70 million dollars and how it breaks down for district and in different areas of the city so our neighbor the neighbor one of the one of the opportunity the plans that we had as we move for look in our street rehab program was to focus on neighborhood streets like neighborhood street neighborhoods throughout the community and have that be the basis that we that we that we that we did our street rehab program this year as we had conversations with the committee and considered other alternatives we ultimately decided to do the hybrid approach where we said we're going to focus on these neighborhoods that we gain efficiencies on by having the roads near each other having those connector streets able to do water or wastewater improvements along with the street improvements along with the next slide which will show the focus with the other half of the street rehab dollars on those low OCI those the streets in the in the city with the lowest quality so I'll just touch on the financials here quickly and then turn it over to Todd on the neighborhoods on the neighborhood streets you can see with the recommendation right now street the neighborhoods one three and four are included in the 70 million dollars and I'll turn over to Todd to kind of go through those neighborhoods Todd Estes City Engineer we've been through this just briefly but hopefully just a little bit more detail and what the city staff has been working through as we try to prioritize what goes into these neighborhoods this neighborhood program as we would call it so we're looking at several different neighborhoods in the area there's no again no prioritization assigned to these numbers that was just when we numbered it we started at the top and we numbered going down to the bottom it was one two three four five six seven that circle back up to the middle there's no rhyme or reason to the numbers but we are going to roll through just what these neighborhoods look like that we're proposing as the top three neighborhoods that be included in this and and they do as we've talked about before realize the actual lowest average OCI throughout those neighborhoods of all those seven that we had considered these were the seven worst as a neighborhood considered average OCI so the top three are the ones that we were nominating to go forward in this program so as we look into these streets and these neighborhoods so neighborhood four was actually our lowest average OCI that is the southeast Denton there in neighborhood area so if you look at that area we talked about last week that's about twelve point eight lane miles of roadway that would be totally reconstructed combined with that would be water wastewater improvements a lot of aging infrastructure that needs to be improved all at the same time plus there's another seven to thirteen lane miles of maintenance that needs to be done with those roadways that are not in that 45 OCI and under they're over that 45 benchmark so that's still in the area where we would be doing maintenance I don't care where you're on the city we'd be doing maintenance of different scales different amounts over time to prolong their life the next neighborhood this neighborhood once upon the north side of town through previous bond packages this is one of those neighborhoods that really fell into that shotgun approach we talked about in the past where we took the absolute lowest OCI we tackled those in the bond program and then in an effort to try to stem some of the frustration that the neighbors felt in those areas we came in with O&M money and tried to tie those segments together so there were roadway pieces in that neighborhood that were left out this closes the gap on that neighborhood so that we're not coming back in the next 20 25 years working on roadways that we did 30 years ago and then five years after that coming back and doing the roads we could have done again so this closes that neighborhood that neighborhood still on average has the lowest overall OCI up from the southeast Denton neighborhood area so this would be the same and that we would be tackling all of those infrastructure needs at one time the water wastewater drainage and streets at the same time and then the next is neighborhood three that's really over South University Drive more in that area around Denton High School just north of North Texas north of the Hickory and Oak area this area still has quite a few holes left in it from an overall OCI plus a lot of aging water wastewater infrastructure that just needs to be addressed so that was where number three came on staff's list as the top three projects those three round out to about 39 million dollars combined when it just in roadway improvements when you add in the water wastewater improvements it almost doubles that number it's a nearly 70 to 80 million dollars worth of investment in those neighborhoods that does not include the O&M costs that would also be associated over time for those roadways that don't fall into this category of needing to be totally reconstruction 45 or less so then the remainder of those roads were what we've looked at how do we get to a 70 million dollar somebody had mentioned as we got some savings out of Ryan Road somebody on this committee asked what if we took to get up 70 million dollars so that we can round out that number to 210 again or some other things have happened for that numbers being considered to be larger so at 70 million dollars the cutoff point for if we kind of do this hybrid approach of we we tackle three neighborhoods that are in need holistically and then address all of the worst roadways left we could get up to about those roadways that are at 20 OCI and less so they're really on the lower end spectrum of the OCI scale again that OCI goes from 100 being the best zero being the worst 20 really becoming a safety problem as well as a maintenance problem for us just consistently going out and doing things when you add those elements back in that brings back up brings the total amount to roughly 70 million dollars it's 69.8 so round it a little bit as engineers we love to get into significant figures and that's where we ended up at 69.8 but it's 70 I can take into account some other things you can get there so this map shows one of the questions we had what does what does the 70 million dollars do from a council district perspective how many of those roadways how many lane miles how much money is going to each district so what this chart really shows you is that and I don't know why the average OCI is popping up here that was left over that has nothing to do with this up here my apologies for that these when you look at this we were broken into two groups so you've got the neighborhoods which are these lines in blue so they still contribute to how much money of that 70 million we would be putting into that into this bond package so we group them by district so if you see an N next to the number district one N is that neighborhood so that's that southeast Denton neighborhood for district one looking at roughly 11 million dollars in roadway cost of that 70 million and then there's another 6.3 miles lane miles of work to be done in the 20 and under OCI category that doesn't lie just within that neighborhood so that brings it total investment in that area to roughly 17 million dollars so that's really how you read this chart the total comes up to 70 million dollars but anytime you see that in it's that neighborhood and of course see in district for we're not proposing a neighborhood at this time to go into this program by and large most of those streets will be handled by the current ongoing maintenance program that we have and then at a later date there will be roadways that fall under a future bond package then you've also got 3.9 million in low OCI roadways in district for so any questions about what this charts show and this map does this include streets that have OCI of 20 or less that will be reconstructed already with previous bond funding no it's correct and does this include streets of 20 or less that will be funded in this bond program but don't fit within one of those one two three or four neighborhoods yes that's why the separation between those two lines so there are streets that fall 20 unless 25 unless they're in that neighborhood so the two categories are separate from each other so yeah so I'm speaking like for instance if I just look at the map there's one street just south of Windsor on the west side of town next to I-35 way west oh back over here yes that's not in any one of the four neighborhoods that you've identified right now you can see the neighborhoods we've identified yeah they are the blue lines so here's this is number four neighborhood four this is neighborhood three and this is neighborhood one those are those blue lines okay so these kind of purpley pink lines those are all the other streets that are under a 20 OCI yes everywhere else in the city understood and are those pink lines it elsewhere in the city are those included in this table that's that's what this second line is right here those are all the OCI is these pink lines okay those are the low OCI streets 20 and under that are within district 1 and then here the same thing for district 2 okay I'll have to go back to a previous presentation because I in my notes I had that it was about a hundred and one or a hundred and two lane miles for the total reconstruction program I know there are segments 102 segments maybe confusing segments and lane miles okay thank you very much what's the one what's one in where's that where are we handling so district one is here okay so one in is the neighborhood we're proposing as far as back in so that's that southeast end in the neighborhood that's all these lines in blue and then there are other roads within district one that are also under 20 OCI and they are these pinkish purple lines within district one that's what the second line shows other questions or let's move on to the next slide so just reiterating how we kind of arrived at this program it really is a hybrid of what we've done in the past where we would like to go is more the neighborhood approach so we really impact a neighborhood one time and then not have to come back other than minor maintenance for a good 30 to 40 years longer if we get that lifespan how that roadway through the robust maintenance program that we have right now so that would be the goal but recognizing we still have a lot of streets that need that attention that are leftover from a lot of inattention over years we're combining that with the old shotgun approach which has been the the preferred preferred model from the previous bond packages so we're marrying the two together do we have so the neighborhood approach takes OCI 40 below do we have a map that shows every 40 below street in the city yeah we actually have every street within the city and it's current OCI mapped and then we'll be double checking that degradation model surveyed in 2015 we'll be doing that again this fall so that we can check our models to make sure they're accurate and what they're predicting is that I'm sure it's probably not available tonight but I would be curious to see that just just to see I like the neighborhood approach David will do the technical okay we do have that mapping and we did show it at a previous presentation where it showed all the streets within the city and we can break it down all the way down to a one-point difference it's hard to read the map what we had broken down was arranged very much like this where it's color-coded we can see all the streets that we we know of throughout the city of it now this does not include new developments that have been placed since 2015 that's what the new survey will also capture is all those new developments as well right any any guess if we did the neighborhood approach and instead of 20 OCI we took it to 30 OCI I guess yes it's hard to get an idea of how bad an OCI 20 Street is so if you go to a third and agree I mean once you start getting below 40 it's difficult it's varying degrees of bad so a street that falls into a 20 OCI may have a variety of issues with it one what we would call base failure but you would see it as several segments of the road really dropping beyond another segment of road we might see some heave where one piece of the road elevates over the others you see a lot of large potholes you'd see a lot of what we would call alligator cracking it looks just like an alligator scales across the pavement as those get wider water infiltrates into them then you start running into issues or whether roadway tires on the roadways start pulling them up as they hit them if we go through any kind of freeze thaw cycle the once or twice in a year we get here if there's water in those points they also get in there water expands pulls that stuff up and then you get your next pothole so they may also be base failures there's a there's a whole host of things that could happen once you get below that 30 OCI but it from a number standpoint our estimate has been about 95 million just to address 30 and less that doesn't include the neighborhood right right okay so if I'm reading this correctly so zero to 20 is 35 so the neighborhood approach is about 35 and we've refined that since since why these numbers are just a little bit different now we continue to refine that number it's actually just a little over so if we wanted to raise the standard to zero to 25 plus the neighborhood it'd be another 25 million dollars yes okay that's that's where I was trying okay I have a question about the roads and everything because this afternoon actually this morning as I came back into my house there was a water main break underneath the road on Locust anybody trying to go north on Locust yeah sorry but so when you're looking at the OCI you're looking at the top layer obviously yes and then the banks and are you looking at the water mains underneath it and the age of those water mains so we were it doesn't fall into the OCI because that strictly is a pavement assessment but the water department the wastewater department has a similar so categories that they line up all that grade all their infrastructure similarly and then we work with them Danny is it quarterly monthly that y'all are talking about your next 30 60 90 and then five-year outlook monthly they're working closely together to make sure that water with it being under pressure when a pipe gets to be 20 30 years old or there could be other things coming online if just a lot of different things that could happen in the 1940s right yeah because that I mean that affects those three neighborhoods too that we've looked at that's one of many reasons why some of those roads are so bad is the underlying and that's exactly why we want to go to this more holistic neighborhood approach is we want to replace everything in that roadway so that it's not that problem going forward there is I mean from one standpoint we can actually contract a lot of this work out to a general contractor and he handles we get a lot of economies of scale so we can get the price points better we can get the work done faster because the general contractor is in control of all of those facets the water the wastewater the drainage the roadway he can schedule it it's his task to be done city crews what typically happens for our crews is we get called from one construction site to an emergency and then another emergency and then we disappear from a construction site not because we don't want to be there but because there's another emergency like a water main break on locust that we've got to go and what people don't realize is as soon as the water department goes then following right behind them is the street department is they've got to come in they've got to fix that roadway piece now that had to be torn up just to get to the waterline so you get better economies of scale just from a price point and then how quickly we can get the work done because we're not so distracted and distractions not because we're not focused on the work it's just there's so much work to be done and very few crew members to actually go do the work internally it's a better use of staff time and resources as well as taxpayer dollars to let them do what they're really good at we can put them where the emergency and the high priority is but not keep them focused for months on end right there if I could suggest let's let's try to finish this part of the presentation and then we'll be taking we'll take a short break but let's get through the rest of the of the initial presentation and when we come back we'll be moving into the prioritization list okay so any more questions on the neighborhood streets okay so the next next item that we took as a task this last week was give you an idea of what does say a 10 million dollar Ryan Road look like versus a 25 million dollar Ryan Road look like so really the difference between those two spectrums was how much do we want to invest today into Ryan Road our current area study for that area shows that the demand for Ryan while still the roadway needs to be improved it doesn't need to be improved to a four lane divided roadway which also helps us on some of the cost it shows that long term up to 2040 our current projections are you really don't need more than a three lane roadway and that's to help with the vast majority of these neighborhoods that are come have come in over time where the roadways don't line up as intersections which allows us to put in a four lane divided roadway or a two lane divided if you ever had a chance to need one where I can put in a left turn bay and get people off the travel lane to make their left turn when you have so many left turns all the way throughout a corridor then the best thing to do is to put in that middle lane to where you can allow people to get out of the travel lanes and get in the middle you see the similar effect when you build a four lane roadway with no median a four lane roadway works almost exactly like a three lane roadway because what happens is as you develop you get the same thing the inside lanes become left turn lanes that's where people sit and wait to turn and now you've only got the outside lanes left so where we've pushed is as we start looking at more of a truly contact sensitive roadway where I'm gonna put in all modes of transportation is how much roadway do I really need for a vehicle for the motorist and how much room do I could I also use not to build a very big road and a lot of expense going into the road but also put in pedestrian infrastructure bicycle infrastructure take care of the drainage issues and floodplain issues that exist so one option would be if we went with the ten million dollar option would be that we would go to the state for the intersection improvements on both ends of Ryan so they they have a policy of within 600 feet of an intersection that the state engages in intersection improvements so that is an a hurdle that we are working with the state on just to get that piece done as they work 2181 and 1830 they have dollars for both we know that exactly for 2181 because everybody's seen the cone still sitting out there and then 1830 they are we're working with them currently on what is 1830 look like as they have dollars coming to the table over the next two years to spend on that roadway so those two projects and where we're pulling about six million dollars off of the overall budget whether you're doing the 10 million or 25 million dollar option that's intersection improvements purely so the remainder is how far would you like to go to put some improvement into Ryan Road so that 4 million would allow us to basically construct three lanes but really not a whole lot else out there so we could put the three-lane roadway in but the other amenities the side paths bicycle paths walking paths a lot of the street lights and you'll see that on the next slide you know street lights the street trees kind of give it a much more accessible feel a more aesthetic feel that scenario would be more of the 20 million or the 19 million dollar investment on our side because it does address a lot of other issues one of the other driving factors here is your drainage of improvements you really I know this graphic shows curb and gutter on both sides it would not be curb and gutter is one of the largest pieces from a cost perspective in any one of these roadway projects is drainage and if I'm only having to focus on the low spots on the road improve that culvert and build it up so that it does handle the hundred-year storm but I don't have to put in curb and gutter storm inlets storm drain pipes down the entire length of the roadway my cost goes down substantially so I'm relying on bar ditches at that point and it still has much more of that rural feel to it similar to what's out there today so that's the biggest jump in cost when we start going down that pathway this would also the this 10 million dollar option would also not be three lanes the entire length it would be through segments where it made the most sense so it'd be like segments in front of the school to make sure that there was plenty of room for queuing of vehicles for pedestrians and students to get where they need to go and then some of the other places along that area which we were still in the process of figuring out where exactly would those locations be the overall 25 million dollar project would get you the three lanes the entire length with all the other amenities so that just gives you a snapshot of what is really the difference between these two projects any questions yes ma'am two questions one sidewalks in front of the school not an option right there have to have sidewalks in front of this we don't disagree with you on that one and that's not where we would be talking about not doing that that would absolutely be part of our safe rest the school program as well so that would be a yeah yeah yeah aren't they already there I think are in front of that school I think so Ryan they're only on Ryan but they're not from the neighborhood so it would be nice if we could complete that but my other my other question is Teasley which part of Teasley is kind of constructed like God help us it is the segment from Teasley and Teasley where Lillian Miller then takes off north and then go and it's all the way south to right around the corner of Geier high school so all of Teasley yes and I know it's going to be two to three years before pretty much before that's before it's completed so that project is has a challenge right now from the standpoint that the contractor that text on had contractor with went bankrupt right so they terminated that contract we do understand from text out that they have a new contractor coming on board through their bonding company and they're negotiating terms with that as far as a timeline of when they get started I don't know okay because how would that impact the construction of Ryan Road it wouldn't miss well I mean any construction has an impact but as far as timing it wouldn't necessarily impact the Ryan Road construction even in the intersections on both ends is typically when we're working with the state there's always the fundamental question if their state funds tied to it of are you building it or am I building it and then we enter into what's called a local project advanced funding agreement and we determine who's building who's doing what and that would go to council as far as would we build that piece I would say we probably would that would be our posture at the point but until we really negotiate the terms of that agreement I wouldn't tell you where it landed I had a question about the sidewalks and things on Ryan Road and I understand on both sides you would need to do the drainage and you would do sidewalks on both sides and that's what's bringing it up to that cost of 19 million right because the neighborhoods the housing primarily is on the one side and then the school is on the other side so you kind of need that the sidewalks getting from the neighborhoods and everything so you'd want to have sidewalks on both sides right if you wouldn't just do sidewalks on one side of Ryan for the 25 million we wouldn't that would be sidewalks on both sides yes it wouldn't be anywhere near that price I mean sidewalks is not a cost differentiator and it could be something that would be rolled into the sidewalk program in general just because of the elementary school because of the neighborhoods because that's where the retirement village is that's where Wrigley Park is I mean there's a lot of walking that's done on yes and I believe the sidewalk actually exists from Forest Ridge all the way over to the school so that is in place right it's continuing and the challenge here is you've also got a division in the school district here so when you follow El Paseo these homes all filter to Ryan everything to the north of it all goes to Sam Houston and they're in the same boat there's really not a sidewalk network over on that side for children to walk over that way so there are several ways to get there our first focus would be looking at safe routes to the school program and that tends to be where we get the biggest bang for our buck so a question in the past it had come up as to how much money had been spent the southeast Denton neighborhood area and this just gives you an idea of the funding from the 2014 bond segments that was actually put in to the southeast Denton area one of the areas that I know is under construction currently this curling right water and wastewater and then the roadway comes after that so that's currently under construction right now and then you've got a list of the different streets here where we've done some work within that area over the in the previous bonds the question was asked that where it is we're absolutely looking forward in 2019 to be able to put a vast majority of resources into that area and bring it up to where it should be so do we plan on having these streets that are remaining completed by 2019 I'm sorry can you tell me that again I'm some of the streets in southeast Denton that are on those 2014 that are left remaining to be fixed are we planning on having them complete it this year next year it'd be 2020 I believe it's what the last on that streets segments would be from the last time we looked at that prioritization it would just it'd be 2020 we have a whole host of roadway segments that will last linger into 2020 to complete the 2014 bond so this is the amount that's actually been spent on repairing southeast didn't on it from the 2014 bond right 2012 and 2014 right did you have the maintenance numbers overall man is that what this is okay so that's the street maintenance we put in you remember how many lane miles that was so maintenance dollars typically go a lot further then total reconstruct dollars so from a maintenance standpoint we can tell you of the actual distances but that is the amount of money understood that was a question before and we can get more detail if you would like that the actual dollar spent that is where it is okay yes I would now I do have a question um with southeast didn't we have a lot of streets that need to be repaired but we're trying to do an area over here by Argyle where the residents haven't even agreed to it yet when we can either cut it down go a different direction and spend this in southeast didn't or central didn't to where we don't take them out for their property or cutting to their property or we can push it for further back I mean push it back to where we can wait and do it another time like in April of 2020 instead of right now because these are other areas that need to be fixed why haven't we done why aren't we considering that that is the purview of this committee this was our starting point this is the purview that committee to have that conversation when we come back after the break we're going to go into those specific projects and that'll be the appropriate time to really dig into that okay that's fine okay so with the bond that we have now we're looking at ten point eight million for southeast in yes ma'am right I know in the bond reconstruction dollars right for streets that's just for streets the water wastewater dollars approach almost 13 million dollars and then overall maintenance for the other roadways that don't fall into the 45 and under category that's another two million dollars two and a half million dollars that gets put into southeast Denton as well there was a street that was just fixed bushy bushy Street in southeast didn't there was nothing wrong with it can we tell can you tell me why was it redone I'd have to look into the particulars I don't know and I'm asking about this tree because it's a block away from me and I drive down this street everyday I couldn't tell you what was actually the impetus there it could have been a host of reasons and I don't know a lot of times reconstruction also gets confused with I know my wife did this with one project where on our street they blocked off the entire street after having rebuilt the entire roadway about a year and a half before and they came out blocked off the whole street and then they were gone by the end of the day but not after five phone calls from her telling me you're out here building the roadway again and what they were doing was maintenance on that roadway so that's why I stopped and talked to the guys and I asked them was there any water leakage or anything or the pipes or why they were actually fixing that stream they told me no we just wanted we just came out to fix it really I have his name written down so that would be good if you let me know how it is but I'd have to look into that okay anything else that we need to address with Tom before we take a break here yeah yeah and it says five minutes so let's take a break five minutes we do have quite a bit of work still to do and we'll come back and we'll get into the prioritization way as return as we return to our meeting of the bond committee we're going to move into prioritization questions and to start off this part of our meeting we'll turn back to Todd we've had obviously a lot of questions about Hickory Creek Road and and let's try to address those questions all right so Hickory Creek Road it was a hot button earlier this year and it still continues to be that so one of the issues that I've heard raised so far is why the six lane facility well six lane facility was on the 2015 mobility plan the traffic demand model used to develop that had shown Brush Creek Hickory Creek going all the way over to 35 W you have it up so this is the 2015 mobility plan this is what was approved in 2015 these red lines are primary roadways they're arterial roadways they would be up to a six lane roadway it was contemplated in 15 that these roadways with this is Brush Creek here all red continuing over and then ultimately as development progressed on the west side of 35 W there would be an interchange in frontage roads and you are seeing that today with text dot now bringing the project forward to build frontage roads on I 35 W that's the next step in this 35 W improvement so as the frontage roads come they will build that piece and then the main lanes get improved along with all of these improvements to the interchange is so that long term already does become an interchange now one of the concerns I've heard raised it has been why a four lane or a six lane roadway could we squeeze it down to a four lane absolutely that is absolutely where our study tells us we did an area study because we didn't know exactly where the 2015 model came from when it was really looking at its connectivity points where these points were ties into the highway it the models only as good as those tying points so as we start looking at alternatives this 2015 mobility plan is one alternative the other alternative would be bringing a Hickory Creek over the floodplain straightening out this roadway bringing it all the way across at 35 which does I know it sounds a little reverse and the logic but yes a lot of people travel 1830 and 377 and 2181 today because they have no other option north they could travel those two lane roadways but where they're trying to get to takes them north which is also causing some of the increased traffic we see on roads like Hobson Road and Ryan there's people trying to get north to ultimately go south whether it's 377 or 35 W or 35 E as Hickory Creek becomes a true connection and not just a jump to a roadway and then skip to another roadway if it's a true connection that would ends up happening at that point is the demand to the north comes south as people try to get to 35 W or 35 E so that's where our projections came from as we were looking through where does this roadway go again it still follows the 2015 mobility plan now all that being said we are not designing this in a vacuum we were given design dollars earlier this year after the fatality accident that occurred on Hickory Creek Road down in this area city council gave us three million dollars to look at alternatives and one of the keys that we went to is as we start talking to our local partners whether it's the county the state city of Argyle also the Council of Governments we're looking for alternative funding sort of sources so that we can start planning this roadway and putting it in place so the 30 is a 34 35 34 million dollars that we are talking about as part of our bond program leverages it's our match so to get those other dollars the city has to put in some amount of money to leverage those dollars further so that 34 million is our piece of that ultimate 160 million dollar project so what 36 million say those things don't pan out say we don't get the funding for some reason then what that does do with that 36 million dollars is it builds one bridge of ultimately two bridges so there would be two three lane bridges that would go over the floodplain that builds one of them so instead of having two parallel I would just build one and then we'd put a three lane roadway in that covers the cost of a three lane roadway with no help that's a right away that's the infrastructure to support it that takes care of everything to get us over to 1830 from River Pass it also goes over the railroad tracks so you don't have the concern of vehicles pedestrians cars intersecting a train as it goes through it separates the two and takes us up over the railroad tracks and then continues across the floodplain over to 1830 so it takes those fatality chances almost to a negligible point then as we continue to go west what we're cognizant of is one of the things we talked about earlier is development is coming in this area so there's a significant amount of development that has submitted for application is currently under construction or we've already had multiple conversations with developers who own parcels or properties out that way that are building that does not mean that we're just gonna go put in a six lane roadway for the fun of putting a six lane roadway in our charge has been to dot design this in the most context-sensitive way as possible we do that with every street we're doing and that means we take into account what is the setting is it more rural in nature is it more residential in nature is it more of a commercial industrial district each of those has a very different feel a very different amount of transportation in different modes so a lot of pedestrians cyclists vehicles in a much more neighborhood type setting versus an industrial sector where I have a lot of public transit that brings workers to work so my sidewalks are there just to get you from the bus stop essentially to get you to where you're working and then a lot of room for big trucks to drive through so a heavier duty pavement wider areas so that a truck can move back and forth as it needs to be so as we look at Hickory Creek Road and we look at its ultimate design going forward we are going to be very interested in what areas of this roadway might need to be a little narrower because they are in that rural area they're in an area that the potential for growth may be less than in other areas where we've got a lot of homes coming in right on top of each other so those areas there's absolutely room for a narrower roadway for not having to have as much right-of-way taken and I'm thinking exactly of the Brush Creek area when you start getting into that area there is room for both to coexist our current traffic demand model for this area the revised model when we looked at Hickory Creek and would be incorporated into the ultimate mobility plan update looks at this area as being my you can help me out where I start to falter with words there pretend because he's the traffic guru we're looking at that area as it's rural I don't know you've got one acre homes there established homes you're absolutely right we don't want to come through that area and just cut a wide swath of right away through there that we're not going to need for 40 years our study goes out to 2040 and even at 2040 we're not seeing a projected need for anything beyond four lanes so much further into the distant future that might be an occurrence where you'd need six so what we would typically do on roadways where we've already said at some point you will need the six lanes maybe it's 40 years 50 years out we would get the right away width for six lanes especially if we have a lot of commercial development a lot of heavy small residential coming in the area where you're gonna have a lot of traffic I mean in these six lanes a lot faster so what I might do is build the roadway where I've built my two outside lanes and that very wide median so I could impact traffic less when I do have to build those into inside two lanes what I may be able to do in other areas and this is why a lot of letters have been have gone out about the city wanting to come and talk to property owners about property and where the roadway would align is we haven't nailed down to the nth degree where's the center line of that road going to go over the next year there is a lot of conversation we had with property owners about the impacts to them the impacts to where that right away would go where the road would go we're doing an environmental analysis on the entire stretch of the roadway including the warrants of a sound wall so we're looking at all those impacts and how that would impact the overall design this is an evolving process and when we've gone out and done the survey work today what we've done is just simply gathered the upfront information so we can start having the conversation with folks about where we go what challenges are ahead of us long term even in 2015 but going forward we still see the need for that roadway to be a prime connection to 35w if we miss too many more chances like we've missed on East Denton on the east side of Denton where Mayhills going in where loop 28 is a bottleneck if we miss too many more chances anywhere then we will have a locked-up navigate a transportation system across the board and we'll be fighting the same scenario of gridlock and places where it's very difficult to get around you got a lot of signals where you're just stopped at so you know I'm not a traffic engineer by trade I've learned a lot over the last 10 years of how to become a traffic engineer I'm a stormwater engineer so I hear the concerns about floodplain and I immediately go there every time we start one of these projects but what I do know is that when I look at these projects we've got to start planning for the future we have to draw that line somewhere from staffs recommendation this is the alignment that makes sense it doesn't mean that we bolted it down that it's not going to vary we absolutely are sensitive to the context of where we're going to be in this area so there is a lot of conversation to be had between now and when this project were to actually go forward if this group chooses to keep this project on the bond list how much of that Hickory Creek are you asking us to recommend in this bond package all the way over to 377 the 34 million dollars would if no other financial partner came in would construct from River Pass to 1830 it would also get the design all the way over to 35 W now if our partners agree to continue down this pathway with us we could go to construction much faster than the entire length could you put up a map and show us where the outer loop is projected to come out or loop 288 huh outer loop or loop 288 well loop to it okay alright it's taking a minute to reset but loop 288 on the west side comes down into 24 9 24 49 and then over to 35 W here at vintage and then it would have said four cents of direct connect that basically peel off the six lanes that would be out here to just four lanes coming across the bridge to vintage and those we call them direct next their flyovers or you've seen a word on I 35 and dollars for worth we get in a lane and you fly over a ramp and down tie directly into the intersection or to the interstate okay I have we've been told and heard for some years that vintage was projected to be six lanes in the 20 I'd have to go back and look at the mobility plan shows for 2015 I know that our current area study shows nothing more than four lanes divided and I think the 2015 shows that it's a four lane divided roadway that's what the funding was set up for actually look at different propositions and agreements it was all for a four lane divided roadway which it is great well it's it's a three it's a two lane divided roadway and then we're going to build here later this year the outside two lanes so if 288 is going to come around and hook up with vintage doesn't it make sense for that to continue all the way over to Taysley the either Ryan or Hickory Cree you have a lot of disadvantages and one would just be could you do it sure there anything is possible 100% the reality is as soon as you bring vintage over to tie into Ryan you have the intersection of two rail crossings so at this rail crossing we would have to go over one and leave one at grade so there's a potential safety issue there I would not want to have a signalized intersection right next to two railways because you have to do what we call preemption which is I got to allow some cars to pass when the trains come in now I've got two legs that have to do that the exact same time opposing each other and that's a scary scenario anyway you look at it so one would have to go over the other so we would either need to pull Ryan further to the north and get it away from that intersection so they had plenty of room so we'd be cutting through this area and then going across to Ryan or we'd need to elevate which would mean we'd have to drop lanes on both sides probably starting right back over in this area maybe even a little closer to the school you got to start and drop a lane on both sides essentially a frontage road to the bridge it would ultimately go over and then depending on how wide you make it you would have to make it four lanes divided all the way down Ryan because of the incoming traffic over to 2181 so Hickory Creek does a couple of things for us that Ryan doesn't do Ryan's disjointed when it gets over to 2181 so it stops at 2181 it causes another problem so if you add additional traffic onto Ryan by bringing them off the interstate then now I've got additional potential traffic over here all the way on to 2181 that's trying to get to Robinson or wherever else they're trying to go they're making a lot of decisions at that point Hickory Creek does allow you to get all the way over to 2499 at one time all from 35 W all the way across so from a traffic perspective from a transportation perspective it makes the most sense for getting people around from my perspective but again that's just the purview of this committee is to make that choice in that recommendation of where this goes of course if you went to Ryan even though it didn't wouldn't go on over to 24 to 2181 you would have fewer lane miles to have to build with that offset some cost of elevation it could potentially I'd have to run further numbers on that one but you have a longer bridge crossing to get over the floodplain plus we would have to go back and re-evaluate the ultimate configuration of vintage back to that six lane and it has cost implications at that point as well so as far as the actual number I can get you a budget number on that to let you know what that would look like cost from a cost difference standpoint another proposal was to take Hickory Creek over to 1830 and then skirt the floodplain a lot of that floodplain is in a floodway so the Stark area is in the floodway I cannot get into that area unless I'm going to go over it then in the floodplain to make it a true regional connector I've got to elevate the whole roadway out of the hundred-year floodplain so I'm going to be bringing a lot of dirt there's a lot of potential impacts to the floodplain upstream and downstream that could result in further construction just to bring that roadway over another reason why Hickory Creek we were looking to just span the floodplain one time and then we would still need to build the drainage infrastructure to handle the hundred-year flood all the way down brush Creek and all red which would be done with that project and as part of the current design but those are some of the things that can be addressed much more quickly and cost-effectively than trying to skirt the floodplain well it seems like we're not going to solve this today but and there's still going to be a lot of conversation about it yes and of course I would like to see us not impact homes impossible so there's there's but let's let's speak for a moment about the public safety question and the desk that occurred there that's what could be addressed by building the bridge is that right yes and and that was one of the drivers are going straight there was its cost it gets us over the floodplain quicker but it eliminates the potential for those types of fatalities and accidents that have occurred over the last 20 to 30 years at a minimum so we know well we haven't we haven't tried out the guardrail which is now up and I would hope nobody wouldn't that be a factor to help deter it definitely helps kinds of accidents that have been fatality accidents so we're talking about switching the focus to Ryan off of Hickory Creek in terms of matching dollars that we could get from outside sources what type of an impact would it have on you know Ryan versus Hickory I mean are we able to leverage Hickory Creek more so than we are Ryan yes you do get much more leverage capacity out of it because this roadways we've already identified in the mobility plan that are now eligible for that help in funding long term whereas with Ryan we're basically fitting the bill for the vast majority of it but this area through here yes ma'am I know currently there are no streetlights all along Hickory Creek would lighting be part of yes this package this would be bicycle lanes would be bicycle trail it wouldn't be on the lanes it'd be separated from the roadway bicycle trail on both sides would be sidewalks tied into the parks network trail system it'd be streetlights and then it'd be of course signals or whatever other intersection controls might be needed throughout the entire corridor could you show us where Brush Creek ties into so Brush Creek ties in right here so if you look at where we're going currently we're talking about taking Hickory Creek over so the current Hickory Creek alignment if you've driven it has a very sharp incline it's also a place where we have other accidents occur at that intersection because it's hard to get up it's difficult to get up that incline and you've got a lot of commuter traffic that's going north and south on 1830 as people are commuting back and forth so this would take it straight across the floodplain over the railroad tracks eliminate multiple safety concerns and then bring it across now what we're working with TxDOT on is if this is the alignment that stays then we would be working with them on where does 1830 tie into this so they have money available right now to improve 1830 all the way down to 407 what they're what they're looking to do right now just because Argyle is really not interested in utilizing those dollars they are very interested in what do we want to do with 1830 from Hickory Creek North so it's that four lane divided roadway six lane divided where are we going with that roadway and that's the conversation we're having with them that absolutely impacts this intersection the other concern at this intersection even when Country Club Road was redone there is a steep curve as you go around almost looks like a NASCAR racetrack right and that's to keep those 55 mile an hour traffic on the road the problem is is that's not a good transition to Country Club if you're trying to get to 35 W unless you really slow down now they have tried to put a right turn lane to pull off and that does help because you got to slow down and get out of traffic and get over but you're still going up and over and then if you're coming up Crawford so you're coming this way up Country Club Road from Crawford then you've got to go up and over the crest of that embankment to get left or right makes it very difficult to see who's coming and going because there are significant declines in the roadway going both directions so one of the things that we have been talking about is with this alignment we've been working with the city of Argyle and the I guess town of Argyle and the county along with Gog is potentially realigning Country Club Road to where it would tee into the Hickory Creek Road when we push this and make it a much safer scenario so you've got a lot of drivers here that we're also trying to resolve some current existing issues with this one project okay so repeat your answer what you're asking the rest to do is recommend the extension of Hickory Creek across straightening it out to 1830 and then the rest of that would be a steady if our if our partners our funding partners for whatever reason didn't and that's not the inclination we've heard from any of them as we go forward to the election we would be getting that noted and documented in a way that people understand that is a reality if that were to just not happen then yes the project would carry three lanes of roadway over to 1830 and build two three-lane bridges one three-lane bridge over the railroad tracks and one over over the floodplain and then the other bridges would have to come in at a later date when it gets expanded I believe one of the gentleman asked about phases and when the timing and anticipated completion can you dress that so the phases so much depend on when those funding partners come to the table so if we continue down this path and our partners do commit what they're just in verbal discussion and in meetings there they seem like they're going to commit to if they commit to that then we could begin phasing this entire project in a five to six year span all the way over to 35 W it could be accomplished in that time frame now if they don't come forward for whatever reason then we still would be able to get to 1830 over the next three years we as a city do not are not committed to six lines on Bruce Creek Road no right no the only part that we're building provision for a six lane facility is on the bridges knowing that at some point in the distant future six lanes most likely is required it's beyond 2040 timeframe which is why we're not recommending that they get built the entire length but the bridges absolutely need to be built to six lanes there is a very small piece between the two bridges between the railroad crossing and the floodplain crossing where it touches down just briefly and that area it's actually right in here that area right there we would build six lanes a roadway which stripe it for four but we built six lanes because it ties into both bridges that make any sense to make you whip over and then went back where the city limits in terms of Brush Creek so it's not all in Denton no not currently so it follows along the center line of Brush Creek Road all the way to just past the hills of Argyle and then comes up to the north and down and then back over so the gray is Argyle and the yellowish is Denton unnecessarily most of the time the gray is it's unincorporated so it's in our EJJ technically it's still in the county guess I'm gonna advocate for the people that live on Bushy or so when are you guys gonna help out with the flooding too because there's issues now I'm sure you've gotten complaints already when are you guys gonna start addressing those issues that this project would address those issues because those all get resolved with draft with the actual roadway project so that's part of the hundred sixty million dollar project is we'd be resolving all the floodplain issues that we would come across out there as well without that we don't currently have a time frame because the funding is not there at the moment for those drainage scenarios so that would be the proposition that we want voters to vote on okay this is what they would be voting towards I'm sorry do we as a city if we're gonna lobby for that hundred and sixty million dollars and get it do we have a say so in how wide the street is or the road is on brush creek yes absolutely and that's part of now we're getting most of the money from I mean but it's it's the city's decision and so the funding sources we're going to it's not like what happened in Fort Worth about five years ago you saw it on the news Rosedale was built to six lanes it was federally funded the federal government said if we're gonna build it and we're gonna fund it it's gonna be six lanes city of Fort Worth said okay but then right afterwards their traffic model showed they didn't need six lanes they could not convince the state or federal government that they didn't need six lanes so to get the money for the taxpayers they built six lanes and then they immediately put the roadway on a road diet so they built a lot of parking on street they put landscape islands once it was turned over to the city so that is not this scenario we haven't gone into this discussion with anybody in in that similar vein it has been purely what the results of our traffic study has shown the entire we looked at the entire area and that area study shows that we for the next 20 years plus we don't need anything more than four lanes now you get beyond that that's why we redo these studies they do them redo the mobility plan and updated every four to five years is development and traffic patterns change over time so every four to five years we revisit these studies so that we can see what's really happening it could be that five years from now we need to add the other two lanes because there's that much traffic demand out there I don't know right now our current projections is that we only need four for the question specifically about this project yeah I have some thoughts I I have no doubt in our city staff that they're able to figure out where and how best to plan a regional connector in this region and work through all the floodplain issues I think they do an astounding job most of my concerns are more just whether or not the the residents of our town actually want a regional connector in this region would I don't know if you can pull up the current future land use map I don't know if it's on the public GIS or not but it it's on the website if it's not there as you look for that I'll just start to say some things so so first of all thank you for bringing up the the recent safety issues I think that that's important to keep in mind you know with recent community comments and I think one person on the committee last week mentioned the Denton 2030 plan so I actually went home and read it it's it's only 415 pages so but I won't read the whole thing to you but I have pulled up several quotes from it that I think are help for people who maybe weren't present through that process orient them to what the current long-range plan of the city says so I'll summarize some of this and then I'll get into some of the details but basically the plan went through a variety of different thank you so so I think right here you can kind of see the the city limits down there where we were talking at the sort of the intersection between the ETJ green area and the city limits so my understanding is that that entire green section is earmarked as a rural area right which with our zoning would typically be agricultural use or homes on five acre or larger lots so anyway so the the the 2030 plan they presented several different growth scenarios so I said the starting point for the development of land use concepts was the depiction of the growth trend scenario the likely pattern of growth and development in 15 to 20 years if there were no changes in policy to alter present trends the preferred growth concept was developed to present a conceptual vision for the form character and general location of development for Denton that reflected the input and expressed preferences of the community the general location of the new development and areas for intensification was the basis for the development of the future land use map and then through that process the the growth trend scenario which was sort of the business as usual more stuff got about twelve percent of the community votes it was the lowest one and then so then on land use policy it goes on it says the availability of rural that's getting tongue twisters here rural raw land coupled with an incumbent an accommodating development approval process has facilitated development in Denton that outwardly expanded the suburban fringe at a relatively low density and intensity this trend has resulted in a land use pattern that has tended to further extend distances between people between where people live work and shop resulting in a rate of land consumption and spreading out which is faster than the underlying growth of the population producing an unsustainable trend that is costly for the city and taxpayers alike the consequences of this spreading out trend has been experienced in longer auto trip lengths greater levels of congestion strained environmental and fiscal resources and challenges for public services and facilities to keep up with the demands of this rapidly enlarging development footprint it goes on to talk about some suggested changes and tempering of the current city's annexation plan in light of that then it has some things to say about infrastructure infrastructure planning says another important citywide land use consideration is to foster greater coordination between land use policies and policies for mobility and infrastructure Denton plan 2030 should become the key policy document to which future revisions of all plans and programs like a bond among all city department plans and policies should be revised for consistency to ensure coordination of land use mobility and infrastructure planning so and then it goes on says the preferred growth concept seeks to use areas of Denton with the infrastructure capacity to absorb additional development to support increased density potentially creating a more fiscally balanced or profitable land use mixture given the revenue structure and capital demands of land uses in the city the best means to maintain fiscal sustainability is to diversify and intensify the developed core and at the end it gives some information about how this plan should be looked at in the future and amended if necessary says basically plan amendments are periodic substantive changes to the Denton 2030 plan and its associated goals policies and actions as well as changes to the future land use map which are necessary to accommodate changes for unforeseen circumstances in a manner consistent with the public interest the planning and zoning commission and City Council will accept applications for plan amendments in a biannual basis via staff requests so so that's kind of just some some snippets out of the 2030 plan that I found I think as I look at this the the traffic studies in the regional area as I understand them assume a density of development in this area that is much higher than the current future land use map would that be an accurate statement Todd I'd have to go back and take a look at what we actually went into that off top of my head I don't know what it was referenced in the task of that model was to look at what's currently going in so there have been a lot of zoning cases over several years last several years in applications where density is different so that is the reality of what we as traffic engineers and as transportation engineers are trying to adjust for is that what we may have set out one way in 2015 at both the time the mobility plan and the 2030 vision plan was things change and evolve over time and that's where our struggle is is to make sure that we adjust to what's coming and where we're going yeah so I mean maybe I'm not aware of all of them but most of the plats and and P&Z requests I think have been in sort of the yellow area northeast of the floodplain right that's more accessible to 2181 and that sort of thing so we're saying we haven't had a lot of infill in this area and then we are getting more and more applications in this area okay the nearer to 35 W okay thank you that helps I'll just say that to me this project risks using a an infrastructure project to modify the future land use map and that seems potentially the wrong order I understand that the coordination of those things is very difficult because on the one hand you you don't get to have the public input and debate over what is important for the city do we want to move away from the compact growth that we thought would make us fiscally stronger but on the other hand if growth happens and you don't come in in time to Todd's point you you end up not being able to make the connections because you can't get the right of way right so I I just have a hard time with the chicken and egg thing here because I I see the benefits certainly to this regional connection if this area were to develop at sort of a three units per acre or greater certainly it would be needed but the current plan as I read it says that's not what we want to do so you know I I would just pose to the rest of the committee members you know is it is it wise to propose a project like this when you know the the map not the map but the 2030 plan just five years ago citizens said that's that's not the way we want to grow yeah yeah I think a lot of what you're saying is it's all true it's in the plan I think the difference with the Texas plans or their aspirational many states they're legal and so it's a it's a very real difference you're absolutely right with what's in that plan the fact of the matter is and the reason this is being brought to you is even though we'd like you know that plan you know wanted to see more intense growth infill that sort of thing for all the reasons you articulated we are actually having planning and development meetings almost on a monthly basis we're watching the these smaller more dense are forward our six subdivisions wanting to come in an infill between 35 and 377 so really the question is this for the same dollars we can either solve a safety problem we've had people you know killed out there in the last few years and in terms of the guardrail that guardrail gets hit so often you know I live over that area and it's tore out constantly and I think the question really is is that the solution long term if the committee if the committee basically said it's gonna cost you the same money to either do the interconnection or just go to 2181 there's not really a right answer the only reason this project was brought forward is it there's no question in the next five to ten years those opportunities are gone for the regional connection because there's gonna be so many platted homes the city would never be able to afford to go in and condemn the right away again and we're having to provide answers to development community right now where that where that alignment might go so they know what to dedicate to us in terms of right away so your policy the policy issue is is it's a good analysis of the plan we're seeing we've seen dozens of dozens of properties come in directly contradicting the 2030 plan in my tenure here I've never once seen development turned down because it was out of compliance with that plan so that's interesting so that's one question I would like answered is that specific provision that you read do you know if that was in the revised 2030 or if that was dated predated back to the 1999 version so the way I read it it was not a revision but it was a new plan I mean it referred to the old plan in a couple of key areas actually on page 28 and 29 of the planet yeah it says how to use the plan and what the paragraph that I'm reading is on 20 page 29 says as many policies and actions are reoccurring and reinforced in many of the elements policies and actions that overlap or cross-referenced in parentheses so that implement implementation policies and actions that address multiple goals may be accomplished through a single measure the policies and actions that are being referenced as continuations of the 1999 Denton plan are noted parenthetically citing the page number of the previous Denton plan I or EG DP page 122 this is to reinforce that the Denton plan 2030 is an update of the 1999 Denton plan okay thank you so so it's which theoretically went to 2020 yeah and we're not there yet yeah and basically what what was going on because I was around at this time too and knowing what was going on in 99 it's always the aspiration as you pointed out these are what we'd like to see and then oh by the way people buy land and they put bring in companies and you know I got a whatever that I want to put in and then City Council and the planning department and everybody has to go is that really gonna be best for us because we don't know yet and then we just went through the City Council you just approved the whole new how we say these are what kinds of buildings can go into this neighborhood yeah and that was actually an outcropping of the 2030 right specifically asked for an update in the zoning code yeah and I think I think it's important that that you brought that up and it's important to know what's there for the 2030 plan but it's also important to know like what you said talk where do we want to go in the future because if we don't have any clue then we're gonna have really bad roads and hopscotch here there in the other place and I don't know and so that's why it's important to have these conversations certainly yeah I mean personally I just wanted to kind of get some feedback but personally I I understand the need to plan for the future so having these conversations with some of the landowners getting some easements or right-of-ways in place that makes complete sense to me right because 60 years from now we don't know right but within the near term it it seems to me like even for lanes assumes a density of growth that the current plan says we're not supposed to do yet I mean it basically says you know that another quote I didn't read said proposed developments or uses that clearly support implementation of the plan should be approved conversely rezonings for developments or uses that are inconsistent with the plan should not be granted approval until and unless the policies of the plan are amended based on the findings of fact that clearly demonstrate the need for modification so I understand your point that in practice that hasn't happened right but that's what I read is this is the community came together and said this is what we want back in 2014 2015 and everybody did choose more I forget which one they chose higher but I know that the business is usual it was the lowest in the 2014 2015 public input meetings I think there were at least two from it actually found a Facebook group where you can see like all the stuff they looked at there's like a whole album of picture and our point is there's not a right answer to this question there's just an opportunity to potentially plan that route to I 35 if the committee feels that it changes the character the community too much and go out there that's fine but you know Todd's job is to challenge your thinking and to say we might not have this opportunity again that doesn't mean it won't be here the next time there's a bond election that we're coming together but you certainly you know his point is trying to leverage the dollars if you want to take advantage of it today if not we're possibly still recommending straight down Hickory Creek and not have to deal with any more kids in the creek out there and we're continuing to still see infill in fact we've been in recent development meetings with more property owners that are bringing developments in south of Thistle Hill between Hickory Creek and Creedale so it's going to continue infilling there and that's the only point so I anytime I see an engineer being put on the spot with the planning question I want to go over and save him but anyway there really there really is no right answer it's only what you think is the right answer now so but but what I do hear you saying is that the right the right answer is to straighten out Hickory Creek definitely and that's a 34 million dollar project yes because because of the it's driven because of the floodplain and the and going over that railroad track okay well I thought I heard 34 million dollars includes design charges to take it on over to 35 w so the design money was already approved by counselor this year that's not in the 34 million that project that 34 million is the construction only yes to 1830 that yes if we don't get the other dollars and we're told not to then obviously it'll just go to 1830 it also includes any parcels that we do have to acquire the other parts of a project the design piece part of the reason we're planning all the way out to 1830 or to I 35 W is that when development comes in we do have the alignment that's already been settled upon these conversations boy have and and development doesn't get to choose where those roadways go they go there but once you have those dollars approved for a bond election you could change the the alignment that changed the direction move it a little here and there and so forth right it's not locked in with a large change would have to go back to council yeah to avoid a tree or to avoid a driveway yes I can do that but even if it went back to council it would still be within yes yeah because I didn't really realize that we all signed on to be cheerleaders for this until you said so but we have to have a project here that we believe in that we can sell and so so let me suggest that I think we've gotten a lot of information on this project and then we really want to move toward prioritization and we need to look at the list as we have it and then and then I think that's where we begin to talk about where does this fall on our list and it gives us the opportunity to talk specifically about about the order and and what the dollar figures are in that order David hey well this presentation will go over the results of the most recent prioritization survey this part this is the second survey that we've done obviously at the last meeting we presented the initial survey and the committee asked to afford another survey after some additional information and to see if there were any changes to the survey itself as I as I went over last time I want to emphasize the survey is only intended to contribute to the conversation you're about to have this is not any kind of staff recommendation but I hope that it does contribute to that conversation we also in a later slide you'll see we have tied these survey results to dot to aggregate dollar amounts to help facilitate that conversation of the scenarios we looked at earlier those different dollar amounts what projects could you fit in based on this summary obviously as we go through this process we can talk through different options if we moved other other projects under each of those thresholds what it would look like and I think ultimately from this conversation we get to that point where the committee gets comfortable with an ultimate recommendation we had 17 of the 19 members respond to the survey in total and you can see the unit their rankings here we have them on the next slide too if this is difficult to see for everyone but obviously a police station renovation number one fire station 8 and then the police substation those three public facility projects public safety facility projects for the top three in the street rehab program Bonnie Bray and Hickory Creek rounding out the top six from there there is somewhat of a depth to sidewalks street lighting and Ryan Road and later on we'll get to the there's also the additional question asked on Ryan Road so I'll go through these slides and touch on that Ryan Road piece and then lead into the conversation I hope you all have here's that chart showing the aggregate amount and where those lines those lines form on for the different dollar amounts and we have this in the next slide where you can see it broken out actually by dollar amount but just I think this graph does a good job of illustrating you know as you as you start increasing the projects here's what you could do at a hundred million dollars you get those first three projects and then some of the street rehab obviously street rehabs a large amount so it takes up a good chunk and then when 180 million dollar projects which we look we looked at the impacts of that previously and we can as you're having the conversation go back to those slides to highlight what those what those differences are with each of the projects you get up to that Hickory Creek project and then 210 million dollars right up to where street lighting fell at number eight which was right in front of Ryan Road Robinson in the firing range a 235 million dollar project gets you those additional it's your Ryan Road Robinson in the firing range here are those broken down you can see the the project funding I'll just point out a couple of those variables that are still out there that we just have plugged these in for planning purposes for your conversation we have an excel sheet we can get we can manipulate these as we go through the conversation have just thrown four million dollars in for Ryan Road 10 million for street lighting and 10 million for open space for this conversation I will note we have public art down here and I think this is a great time to have that conversation on public art we put it in the survey just for comparison state sakes and we've shown that 2% of the total funding obviously that increase as we increase the cost of public safety facilities I do think it's appropriate to think about that a little separately from the actual ranking it's good to see it there but to know that if we look at adjusting what we do with public art it could involve a change to the public art policy which we could go to council with but open that up for y'all's discussion I think the survey was set up such that you couldn't really give public art a number as such because it's tied into number one two and three and I think it pretty much goes there whether we pick it or not because that's our policy that's a city council policy unless you wanted to ask them to adjust no we already voted not to yeah well two things one is we have 300 almost $300,000 sitting in the public art fund right now from the 2012-2014 bond election that is unspent also there is a project in progress now by Paula Collins our nationally recognized brick artist who did the Quaker town brick mural in the Civic Center locally and other projects and it is it is carved it is completed it is waiting to be fired and it will go in at the police station on Hickory and I have can you show this David I didn't I don't have that page where you were saying about the prioritization survey might have seen 13 of 19 I don't see how well I mean not that we don't in general I'm just saying on this particular circumstance is the 2% in light of the fact that we already have money sitting unused right now and there is this and it's a significant project right going in at the police station it's 220 foot murals carved of the history of the Denton Police Department and the other buildings that the other vertical bills on this bond election are not buildings that the public is going to be using a lot it's not they're not rec centers they're not city halls they're not civic centers I I personally have a real problem with throwing 1.3 million at public art in this bond proposal can you clarify that David 300,000 sure I can pull up a the previous public art presentation we did kind of show the funding as it was I think it's $274,000 David could you just not sell the bonds the 1.3 so that means 1.3 won't go to something else I think policy I think the final bring it back back up obviously it was discussed previously was that the amount increased significantly so just wanted to make sure because we are gonna have that conversation of what's included in the total that at least everyone was aware of that that figure came out of the public art committee back up last week yes yeah we're originally looking at 900,000 because of the original amount we were discussing so that's why I can't see if it's 2012 62,000 65,000 unallocated there and then 40,000 unallocated so so the reality is there's really 65,000 that's on an allocator is that right did I do there and then also 74 and from the 2012 program so close to 200 now I will say some of these projects these are the allocation for these projects it doesn't mean these projects have been complete or are nearing completion so I just we just put the total here I don't have the status of all these projects I know some of them have money allocated toward them but they're not complete so and I believe that in the 2012 those were intended to be signage areas around overpasses some of which have been done but the other there's obviously still construction at 288 and and some of those areas where you might end up with those kinds of medallions or whatever you want to call yeah yeah 2012 was just on the street right and I think that's one of those pieces where the money has been allocated for that project but it has not been completed so it's unspent dollars but we've shown it here is just it has been allocated toward that project and I think the public art committee is having conversations on that project specifically so there was a vote taken by this committee 2% 2% right under option one right so so in order to have that conversation of whether or not to change that vote or have another vote we need to have a motion to say hey we'd like to have another proper our proper process on that would be a motion to reconsider and it can only come from someone who voted in favor of the 2% he voted against the 2% you can't make that motion well I wasn't here so I didn't vote so I can't do it it was also not a binding vote because it was not on the agenda for action it was effectively a straw poll I believe it's recorded in the minutes otherwise my fair is if you start making exceptions now then it impacts the future and all of a sudden we're without public art which is really critical and important to the city and to it is important but this isn't our last bond election that we will ever have no it's not and it's when you start making exceptions and after the 2012 we made an exception that it had to be vertical construction and then I think the argument would be now we want to make an exception that we're going to reduce the percentage so that's that would be the argument there and we're moving away from I have a question just I wanted to clarify the 1.3 million we're talking about is that required my understanding is it's required to be spent at those three locations no it is yeah I thought that was be spent for public safety buildings but not those three locations any public safety building any public safety building in the city what's considered a public safety building it's not restricted to these three Tony so Tony point the chief financial officer it's just to clarify so the calculation of that 2% 4% is based on vertical construction so if so obviously here it's based on public safety facilities and so if that's if that dollar amount that 1.3 million is all put in the public safety proposition then as long as that public guard is in any public safety facility doesn't have to be the ones that are being proposed it could be any fire station any public safety facility you're fine I just want to be very clear to that although the 2% is being calculated about vertical construction that's only in the public safety sector this committee could recommend to put all that 1.3 million in the street proposition or a portion of it and so I just want to again those are things that the committee needs to consider now once once public art is in a proposition and it gets passed then we're limited to only being able to spend those dollars in within that proposition in streets or in public safety now if it's a standalone proposition I know you guys already talked about and that's a whole different story so sorry that that helps clarify some confusion I had before I guess so you're saying that we could take the 2% of vertical construction and assign it to either one of the propositions that we choose yes because the calculation is off of vertical construction now where it gets allocated is purely up to the committee and then the proposition for clarification I think the the way that the non public safety proposition is written it includes parks and open space so if it were included in that resolution would it have the ability to be spent by a parks department in spaces so again it all depends on on what projects certainly if there is going to be an open space component to this program likely there will be a separate proposition right that's that's related to park improvements it wouldn't be necessarily part of the streets or public safety so there could be a component of public art that could go into that open space theoretical proposition well I guess it comes down to is lighting public art or not so if that 1.3 million goes into the street proposition then whatever public art needs to be their component or tied to some type of street infrastructure project it could be some of these calming art pieces it could be part of retreat a retaining wall there's a number of things that the public art committee could consider but again the tie is it has to be tied to a street or transportation infrastructure speaking of lights like in like in Waco when you go through Waco they built the bridge there by the McLean Stadium they're lit up with lights that they change colors for different times of year fourth of July was red white and blue it's green when they have games but is that considered public art when you have LED lights and I was saying wouldn't that then be something you could put into the street lighting so that you might might not be a street but it would be a bridge or whatever is your lighting I would just want to suggest I don't know that we need to be doing the public arts committee's job in this yeah determining what is and isn't public art I do think it gives us some options to be able to consider putting this in into the second proposition I I would like to see us not request the 2% I would like to see us request a variation in the policy and not have the 2% go to public art in this bond election because we have needs that are so much more critical right now I'm sorry the last thing in the world you do is tell art teacher that we don't want public art we live here in Denton we need to have a quality of life that's attached to whatever it is we do whether it's public safety or the beauty of our trees or whatever so I really appreciate what Tony said because I think that's a wonderful use of that money is to put it into you know our streets and by the way there are cities yes I research that do have contests for street lights I'd like to make a motion all right can can we move that that million free be divided proportionately between the police and public safety proposal and the streets and based on not just well it's computed based on vertical but that it be allocated to both the police and the street propositions based on their percentage dollars well hang on so you let's just clarify you're making a motion to spread the the 2% out over the two propositions that's correct and is there a second no because we're still this this motion is still at 2% okay okay so did I think Queen Queen's Queen got her hand up first as a as the second on this okay this is not a motion to reconsider this is a motion for how to spread the 2% out and so we have a motion and a second now discussion pay just what I said I think our streets I know it's only 2% but 2% can you know that's a million dollars effectively or more and that's real money and it can be put to better use in this particular bond election at this particular time in either streets or the vertical construction Patty would you have a suggestion for a compromise amount perhaps it seems like there's several members of the committee who are staunch advocates of public art money and others who think that this bond package is pretty large already I wonder what you would say to that well I think we have a motion on the floor right now so I think we have to deal with it first this motion does not change the 2% that's part of my problem again it is you know by being by being tied to streets it can be in lots of different places where there would be traffic that would see that it could be in multiple places around the city there's not it's not limiting to that to these construction projects so that people can see it it was proportionately based on the number of dollars in the in the proposition so it would not say so you got 40 60 million out of the 230 so sixty two hundred and thirties times 1.3 would go to the first pop to first proposition I just have to ask how many public safety buildings are buildings that the public generally goes to that happens to be the police station when you go to the court thinking of are you pretty much drive by it there's not really a lot of walking traffic so it's harder for people to really stop and appreciate it you're going too fast to really notice it so I just feel like there'd be maybe more enjoyment if it were you know closer to the street or because I know a lot of the safety facilities are little have a bit of a setback in a lot of cases let me tell you where I think we are on this I think that that we can continue to talk conceptually about it but I think we need to if you are if you have a speech you want to make against the motion or a speech you want to make in favor of it we need to we need to focus in on that area right now because we do have a motion on the floor so I would go to if there is a speech in favor if anybody would like to make that at this point or if there is a speech in opposition to the motion can I ask a clarifying question about rules of order okay what would be the proper procedural method to to seek an amendment of the public art policy at this point well that's currently not on the floor I understand and so to do that would require another motion a separate motion and could that motion be made at this time or does it have to wait we have to deal with this motion that's on the floor first question on the structure of the proposition so if if you had public art based upon vertical structures at 2% how would those be divided within the propositions just however the committee because I recall the vote we had before straw poll or we don't call it was was more about where where would public art be in a proposition should be a separate proposition or should it be within the in the public safety proposition and that's how we vote I don't I don't know that it was what could be what I'm saying is there was a vote whether we have it as a separate proposition and I know this is kind of getting off-subject tail but it has a little bit of bearing on how I'm looking at it it's a it's a much larger I'm all for public art but I don't it's a much larger number than we have ever looked at from a public art standpoint and so being that much it would be I'd be more comfortable if the voters decided that we wanted to have the public art so you're proposing it be a separate line yeah but that's that's that goes that has to we have to deal with the motions on the floor now basically we'd have to vote motion down and then make another motion right I would be okay withdraw yeah and then make another motion with this motion we don't have to ask the City Council to change the policy right and we can allocate it in other ways other than I have no problem with asking the City Council to change policy they can do is say no on the 27th David I think it was on the 27th so proportionally the what the motion you made is about 30% of this would be spent on public safety facilities and about 70% on the second proposition and I think on if we do 230 million that's what about 345,000 on public safety yeah go down yeah but I need to see what the recommendation was the paragraph Smith asked on the direction to include the following of potential recommendation funding and be included in public safety facilities so we'd have to we can't even have this conversation we can't have this vote without doing a revision to that one I think the way I'm not a minute I think the way this reads would be Pat made this motion but then Tim made a second motion that just said 2% but it says calculated from vertical structure construction has stipulated in the current policy and public safety facilities proposition without it being on the agenda as an action item it is not a binding vote and I think I call the point of order on this for that very reason I would recommend that take whatever whatever we need to do to preface it and just take a moat make a motion on whatever the committee desires at this time and we can just as you start the motion say superseding any previous motion this now takes effect okay we could go that route and that would require the maker of the motion to withdraw the motion the maker of the second to say okay I withdraw my motion and are you okay with that you know what y'all have to excuse me because this is my first time so yeah I second the motion to withdraw correct you're just agree to that motion oh okay okay now is there is there a new motion that someone would like to put on the floor I move that we ask the City Council to revise the policy or make an exception to the policy so that the 2% that has been previously applied to public art in vertical construction on bond elections not be applied to vertical construction but to go into the the bond to the vertical construction itself or be divided between that in streets I think your motion is a little vague right now let's let's see if we can if we can find a way to tighten that up a little bit let me see if I find well go ahead in this election we have too many streets that need too much repair okay so that is not what we had talked about having the motion to be so I think so if I may what I'm hearing is potentially there would be some compromise if the amount were reduced from 2% but that would require council action to make an exception or modify the policy and then the choice of whether we assign it to one or the other proposition or would be up to us but if we wanted to as sorry sorry just past you yes no not just past Janet okay Randy as Randy suggested potentially again reconsidering having it as a third proposition that would also require an amendment to the policy is that accurate okay so I would like to move that we I'd like to move that we ask council to amend the policy either temporarily or permanently so that we could consider a value down to 1% and that we would have the freedom to assign it to an individual bond item sorry proposal if that's what the committee decides we already have that freedom we can we can say we want it to be a standalone proposition okay then then just strike the last clause of that and just say that I move to ask council to make a an amendment to the to the proposal so that we could consider an amount down to 1% just the the change would be to the policy itself not to the establishing resolution of the committee yes so it's oh I think to do that you would need to have a percent because right now says two to four so yeah okay thank you so I move thank you for your patience I move that we ask council to change the policy so that an amount for public art can be considered from the range of one to four percent as opposed to two to four percent which is the current policy would you be willing to make that a standalone item so that the voters can decide that's an option that's before the committee already this yeah we're just asking that we're asking the the count the council to change a policy it where his motion is to change the policy to as low as 1% the standalone proposition is something that's still at our discretion just a very quick comment you know certainly the committee has a limited time so in order for do kind of what you're saying we can certainly do that I think the easiest way would be that if the committee is really wanting to consider 1% that part of your proposal back to the council along with amending that policy is that you've submitted to them a 1% of public art to go into one of these propositions or a standalone proposition and I think that that would cover you and it would avoid us having to go to the council next week have this conversation and that way it's all just packaged together so I think I think your your recommendation is a valid one I would just encourage you to if it's gonna be 1% where would you want that in which proposition or would it be a standalone that does that make sense yes it's a bit it sounds like your suggestion is that we don't need to ask for the policy to be amended we can just decide what we'd like to do and then make that as part of our final proposal certainly and if the council does not want to amend the public art proposition then either council just drops public art entirely or the council could come up with a different allocation okay okay so I think I think we needed we we need a motion that that addresses that and I think your motion is your motion would be that that we suggest that there were that you would move a 1% rather than 2% yes and and my primary reasoning for that is that I was more comfortable with 2% when the vertical construction total was around 40 million and now it's up to 60 million so so is there a second so I think the right I think the right way to start that off is that you're moving to include in our final recommendation insert whatever it is that you would like to have in final recommendation then we all vote on that okay so so so I'll move to include for public art a total of 1% for vertical construction but distribute that between the well I'm sorry I withdraw my motion I don't feel like we've finished the discussion about how we would want to allocate this I've heard several different ideas why don't we shift the focus of our conversation why don't we table public art for now because we're not making much progress on that let's get to some of the other not to say that they're more important but the more higher dollar value items on our plate at this moment so we can get through all this I think I think ultimately when we come back next week obviously we're gonna be trying to get to a decision so we're gonna come in with with three or four action items of let's decide public art let's decide the total amount dollar amount let's decide the projects and then make that ultimate recommendation so we could just roll that into that I think this is obviously a good conversation in advance of that and that way we don't have to do a motion that you've got to try to figure out what what what it is we mean we expect the best motion that any of us have seen an entire committee next time my hope was we were going to get to the prioritization list and how late do you all want to stay and I know for many others as well and it's yeah my day is not over yet can I actually make a motion yes and it's gonna be crazy y'all are gonna think I just want us in this thing but I'm gonna make a motion that this bond committee recommends to the City Council items 1 through 10 the police station the fire station the substation the street we have added the rehab program of 70 million Bonnie break Hickory Creek right at 34 million sidewalks at 12 mean street lights at 13.8 million actually and Ryan road right at he's making a motion yes Ryan road at 4 million and Robinson road at 12.3 that's exactly 235 million dollars with no funding for public art was that the bad one okay retractable no funding public art but if the public art has to be taken out of that number then it's still one through ten and it's still one through ten but maybe maybe the street lighting or the sidewalk problem has to be addressed all right there's a motion is there a second I think that motion is gonna die second I had to try I like the way you're thinking I would like to make a motion that we make a recommendation of items 1 through 6 1 through 6 exactly as presented and then we're gonna have to discuss about the rest of it I don't know how to put that into my motion though but I would like to have a at least that we can agree and not have to sit here and go a line by line by line by line so my motion is to first make a recommendation of 1 through 6 those be included that those definitely be included no discussion we're done let's go there's a second for that motion I'd like to offer a friendly amendment is it possible after the second you know according to Roberts rules there's no such thing as a friendly amendment so what do you want to do I think there's probably more disagreement on Hickory Creek than the other five projects so would you be willing to just say one through five for now and then then have that discussion for the conversation yes I will change my motion to one to five and I will agree to that to be included in our final recommendation all right there is a motion there is a second is there any further discussion so let me ask question if we if we approve this motion 1 through 5 is there any change that can be done on the first five not taking them out for reducing but increasing yeah it's like Tim said so the someone who originally votes on this in the future would have to come back and make a motion okay any any other discussion seeing none all in favor of the motion to make one through five part of this bond package would you please raise your right hand opposed did you get it or not what okay all right so that motion does pass the we can go on or we can take up the rest of it next week what's your preference can I just make one note about next week next week that I think the intent of next week will will be to just kind of jump straight into this conversation and the public conversation if you have questions on projects we can answer if we answer them but there won't be a formal presentation on on any other projects we're just kind of getting straight to this so that we can get that action because last next Thursday is really our firm deadline okay David when we come back can we also have it was on an early presentation I think it's in the first or second meeting of what the leverage factor is on the rest of these let me just suggest maybe that on the spreadsheet to sort of show that as a separate column that way we need to have a presentation or discussion about it just to see that yeah just put the visual up there is a motion to adjourn is there a second all in favor opposed that motion is carried