1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:07,160 Good evening my name is Rosa Rios and I am your city secretary the time right 2 00:00:07,160 --> 00:00:12,600 now is 531 and in the absence of the chair and the vice chair the city 3 00:00:12,600 --> 00:00:18,600 secretary will has called the meeting to order under Robert's Rules of Orders the 4 00:00:18,600 --> 00:00:23,720 the board does have the ability to appoint a temporary chair the appointment 5 00:00:23,720 --> 00:00:27,760 will be for the duration of the meeting and the responsibilities will cease 6 00:00:27,760 --> 00:00:33,700 once the meeting is adjourned I will now take nominations on the floor 7 00:00:33,700 --> 00:00:52,200 are there any other nominations any other nominations with no other 8 00:00:52,200 --> 00:00:58,840 nominations I will now take so we have a man make that a formal motion sir we 9 00:00:58,840 --> 00:01:06,880 have a motion and we have a second so there's the nomination for board member 10 00:01:06,880 --> 00:01:11,440 Tim Crouch to serve as your temporary chair for this meeting all in favor 11 00:01:11,440 --> 00:01:20,920 please raise your right hand all opposed the motion carries with the majority 12 00:01:20,920 --> 00:01:25,160 vote your meeting will continue and your next item on the agenda is public 13 00:01:25,160 --> 00:01:29,080 comments and individuals are allowed three minutes to speak I'll now turn the 14 00:01:29,080 --> 00:01:37,760 meeting over all right and do we have cards we have cards and and let me just 15 00:01:37,760 --> 00:01:42,240 remind the committee that that it's important to leave your microphone turned 16 00:01:42,240 --> 00:01:47,240 on so don't turn your microphone on and off but leave it turned on so that if 17 00:01:47,240 --> 00:01:52,640 you start speaking it gets picked up on the on the streaming and of the meeting 18 00:01:52,640 --> 00:02:05,160 here so our the the first person I'd like to call is Rick would Rick would if 19 00:02:05,160 --> 00:02:09,980 you would come to the microphone up here at the podium please you have three 20 00:02:09,980 --> 00:02:22,880 minutes yeah we'll need your name and address if you would Rick would 80 11 21 00:02:22,880 --> 00:02:28,000 Wood Creek Circle Argyle Texas seven six two two six within the Denton city 22 00:02:28,000 --> 00:02:34,240 limits and I just want to speak use my three minutes to address some concerns 23 00:02:34,240 --> 00:02:40,480 around the current proposal that would involve the widening of brush Creek Road 24 00:02:40,480 --> 00:02:50,320 near our neighborhood this will have a significant impact upon the residents of 25 00:02:50,320 --> 00:02:54,520 that section of town and we believe a large majority of us believe that it's 26 00:02:54,520 --> 00:03:01,880 largely unnecessary and maybe a better use of funds could be applied to fixing 27 00:03:01,880 --> 00:03:06,640 the current street conditions within the city according to the Denton record 28 00:03:06,640 --> 00:03:12,000 Chronicle in April of last year in an article didn't had a street score of 65 29 00:03:12,000 --> 00:03:19,040 compared with a flower mound which had an 81 and Frisco as an example had a 30 00:03:19,040 --> 00:03:27,000 score of 95 according to that same article 25% of the 1314 lane miles were 31 00:03:27,000 --> 00:03:34,760 in poor condition that's about 328 lane miles Cindy City engineer Todd Estes 32 00:03:34,760 --> 00:03:39,600 told the council that there were 200 street segments to rebuild the financing 33 00:03:39,600 --> 00:03:43,600 for that was approved through a 44 million dollar combined bond package into 34 00:03:43,600 --> 00:03:51,000 2012 and 2014 ultimately the city will need to budget more for maintenance to 35 00:03:51,000 --> 00:03:59,000 maintain what we have and the each year and according to mr. Krummer there was a 36 00:03:59,000 --> 00:04:05,480 next to an estimated 335 lane miles would cost about 193 million dollars to 37 00:04:05,480 --> 00:04:10,120 rebuild today previous bond packages that have gone to the voters were 38 00:04:10,120 --> 00:04:17,240 underestimated by 30 to 40 percent if this were to go to an election and to a 39 00:04:17,240 --> 00:04:22,800 bond approval we would be concerned that the money used to widen that 40 00:04:22,800 --> 00:04:28,160 particular section of road could be better applied against the current 41 00:04:28,160 --> 00:04:35,440 infrastructure improvements that are needed around the city today to quote 42 00:04:35,440 --> 00:04:41,240 mr. Heilman it's last year in April it's not going to matter how much maintenance 43 00:04:41,240 --> 00:04:45,560 funding there is if the roads aren't built right to begin with so instead of 44 00:04:45,560 --> 00:04:50,440 widening brush Creek and potentially displacing dozens of residents I would 45 00:04:50,440 --> 00:04:55,080 ask the committee to consider reinvesting that money into our current 46 00:04:55,080 --> 00:05:02,760 infrastructure and improving the roads we have thank you next Jennifer Lane 47 00:05:02,760 --> 00:05:12,720 Jennifer Lane I don't think there'll be an opportunity for public comment on 48 00:05:12,720 --> 00:05:18,980 items later if you want to speak you'll need to do that now okay next is Richard 49 00:05:18,980 --> 00:05:21,600 Shan house 50 00:05:21,600 --> 00:05:38,560 my name is Richard Shan house my address is eight zero zero one Wood Creek Circle 51 00:05:38,560 --> 00:05:48,280 in Argyle neighbor for mr. Woods and our interest is in the destruction of 52 00:05:48,280 --> 00:05:55,600 property that will happen if you're and I spoke last week as well my garage and 53 00:05:55,600 --> 00:06:00,640 my yard will be will be eliminated consequently my whole house will be 54 00:06:00,640 --> 00:06:09,400 rendered uninhabitable if a fork if a divided six lane highway with bike paths 55 00:06:09,400 --> 00:06:19,640 and and and sidewalks and easement come into come into being so I'm carrying the 56 00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:25,000 flag for a number of residents in our area that that are particularly and 57 00:06:25,000 --> 00:06:31,840 specifically involved because we would lose our homes and it seemed as though 58 00:06:31,840 --> 00:06:38,280 the last time I spoke here you guys at least some of you guys were unaware that 59 00:06:38,280 --> 00:06:44,280 that properties would be displaced and you know we put our heart and soul into 60 00:06:44,280 --> 00:06:48,040 our properties and it's kind of hard to see the city come along and and and 61 00:06:48,040 --> 00:06:57,240 propose a building a wide wide road through an area that is where the 62 00:06:57,240 --> 00:07:04,600 traffic is just not doesn't doesn't make sense I think you're the idea from the 63 00:07:04,600 --> 00:07:09,320 city from the head engineer was if we build it they will come the traffic and 64 00:07:09,320 --> 00:07:16,200 you know brush Creek dead ends into 377 and beyond where and West beyond that is 65 00:07:16,200 --> 00:07:23,840 nothing but farmland which would extend to highway 35w where there is no 66 00:07:23,840 --> 00:07:32,020 interchange so it's it seems as though that extension and all the displacement 67 00:07:32,020 --> 00:07:38,680 and the buying of properties and I would it wouldn't make as much sense as a 68 00:07:38,680 --> 00:07:44,560 proposal that we made to the council last week that was in the letter that 69 00:07:44,560 --> 00:07:53,640 was sent to the advisory board you guys to to Ryan Adams and others I've got a 70 00:07:53,640 --> 00:07:59,360 copy of it if anybody if I can leave it with somebody so that you know refresh 71 00:07:59,360 --> 00:08:07,840 your memory about it's very particular about a different proposal that you know 72 00:08:07,840 --> 00:08:15,880 seems to you know seems to us so much more meaningful when it comes to how it 73 00:08:15,880 --> 00:08:24,520 connects to 35 and how it hooks into joins the proposed loop 288 extension 74 00:08:24,520 --> 00:08:31,520 and in joining together with an already proposed widening of a road that up that 75 00:08:31,520 --> 00:08:45,520 way if I could leave this with somebody I would like to your time your time is 76 00:08:45,520 --> 00:08:54,560 up and again to use that money for roads that are and have been in dire need of 77 00:08:54,560 --> 00:09:12,840 denting in other areas thank you thank you next is Dennis Cox I want to begin 78 00:09:12,840 --> 00:09:17,880 by thanking all of y'all for that I know the time you put in you have you sit 79 00:09:17,880 --> 00:09:21,960 through the meetings everything you hear all the input everybody has their own 80 00:09:21,960 --> 00:09:27,600 concerns for whatever is being done to their roads just as we have concerns for 81 00:09:27,600 --> 00:09:32,400 ours and I appreciate the time that y'all put in and the consideration that 82 00:09:32,400 --> 00:09:38,760 you'll give on what you recommend to the council as far as the road repairs first 83 00:09:38,760 --> 00:09:44,600 of all my wife and I walk that Breast Creek Road frequently at different times 84 00:09:44,600 --> 00:09:50,000 of the day and I would say on the average in a week of us and we try to 85 00:09:50,000 --> 00:09:55,240 walk every day but sometimes it works out to about three days week depending on 86 00:09:55,240 --> 00:10:01,640 how hot it is eight to twenty vehicles you know at a maximum pass us when we're 87 00:10:01,640 --> 00:10:09,420 walking I don't know what studies have been committed to see what the future 88 00:10:09,420 --> 00:10:15,800 traffic would be if it was expanded I for some reason I can in my mind see 89 00:10:15,800 --> 00:10:22,340 where it would expand where it would need a six lane divided road so I would 90 00:10:22,340 --> 00:10:27,120 hope that somebody is doing all the research and all the calculations to make 91 00:10:27,120 --> 00:10:34,080 sure that it's needed and and I agree with with what Rick would said and that 92 00:10:34,080 --> 00:10:39,180 is you know there's a lot of city streets and everything that need a lot 93 00:10:39,180 --> 00:10:42,800 of attention for that money could be better spent at this time maybe in the 94 00:10:42,800 --> 00:10:51,040 future that might be a good idea second of all the two concerns if it does go 95 00:10:51,040 --> 00:10:56,640 through it's gonna wipe out the Apple's house and Dick's house and I'm the 96 00:10:56,640 --> 00:11:01,520 second house in on the on the cul-de-sac there and even if it doesn't wipe out 97 00:11:01,520 --> 00:11:07,000 their house I would be concerned about the the noise and I would wonder if if 98 00:11:07,000 --> 00:11:14,020 this bond proposal includes the sound barrier wall that runs down that road 99 00:11:14,020 --> 00:11:21,320 to to keep some of the sound away because I know on 2499 they have a nice 100 00:11:21,320 --> 00:11:25,400 sound barrier wall down through there so I would hope that something is being 101 00:11:25,400 --> 00:11:31,600 included in that another is the drainage I have on the backside of my pool about 102 00:11:31,600 --> 00:11:37,320 an 8-foot retaining wall and when they built that development behind us they 103 00:11:37,320 --> 00:11:44,800 put in the city put in three pipes that dump into that creek there we've had 104 00:11:44,800 --> 00:11:49,360 water come up almost over the top of that retaining wall and we've had a 105 00:11:49,360 --> 00:11:58,360 trampoline washed down the stream a brick seat that we sit on down there for 106 00:11:58,360 --> 00:12:02,480 little fireplaces washed down through there so I'll be concerned about how 107 00:12:02,480 --> 00:12:06,680 this is gonna affect the drainage whether it will or not I don't know I'm 108 00:12:06,680 --> 00:12:10,320 sure there's some engineers that would be able to answer that question for you 109 00:12:10,320 --> 00:12:14,720 and I would hope that you would inquire about that before making your decision 110 00:12:14,720 --> 00:12:18,680 Dennis your time is up would you give your address also please 111 00:12:18,680 --> 00:12:42,520 oh it's 8008 Wood Creek Circle thank you very much next up David Yoder my name is 112 00:12:42,520 --> 00:12:48,200 David Yoder I live at 940 and 950 brush Creek Road I am technically in the 113 00:12:48,200 --> 00:12:55,400 county but I am in Denton's ETJ we've lived there since 1986 and the ideal of 114 00:12:55,400 --> 00:13:00,200 six lanes coming down brush Creek Road takes away half my front yard in both 115 00:13:00,200 --> 00:13:05,640 pieces of my property and I think part of what we're trying to get clarification 116 00:13:05,640 --> 00:13:10,520 is is for for not knowing what y'all are calling it I call it Hicker Creek West 117 00:13:10,520 --> 00:13:18,320 and that is from River Pass to 1830 is that in this bond package the next one 118 00:13:18,320 --> 00:13:23,440 is from 1830 all the way down brush Creek Road to 377 and the third one is 119 00:13:23,440 --> 00:13:28,920 from 377 all the way up to 35 so at this point I'll even know I can't find 120 00:13:28,920 --> 00:13:33,240 anything that tells me what all's in the package that you all are proposing or is 121 00:13:33,240 --> 00:13:38,680 the piece from River Pass to three 1830 even in this package because if not 122 00:13:38,680 --> 00:13:41,000 we're probably talking to the wrong folks you probably need to go talk to 123 00:13:41,000 --> 00:13:46,600 the mobility people so I'd like clarification on that and if any of the 124 00:13:46,600 --> 00:13:51,640 three projects that are proposed why is it why is it coming in this package 125 00:13:51,640 --> 00:13:55,360 instead of waiting on till the mobility study is completed which I understand is 126 00:13:55,360 --> 00:14:00,600 supposed to be done in February of 2020 which means then it seems to be getting 127 00:14:00,600 --> 00:14:06,160 out ahead of what the city is proposing to do with the package the third one is 128 00:14:06,160 --> 00:14:11,200 is can any give us any information I mean basically we're going on state 129 00:14:11,200 --> 00:14:17,680 websites county websites city websites nothing shows me what's in the proposal 130 00:14:17,680 --> 00:14:23,880 so first thing I think for a lot of us it would be extremely helpful to just 131 00:14:23,880 --> 00:14:30,240 know what is being proposed but if if you're going to take 70 feet off the 132 00:14:30,240 --> 00:14:34,320 front of my property on two pieces of property you're taking almost a third of 133 00:14:34,320 --> 00:14:41,160 my property been there a long time I'm retired I went on found an old windmill 134 00:14:41,160 --> 00:14:46,080 restored it put it up make it work I don't want to see it go away thank you 135 00:14:46,080 --> 00:14:49,240 thank you 136 00:14:49,240 --> 00:14:56,480 next is Troy Fulkerson 137 00:15:04,880 --> 00:15:11,520 good afternoon my name is Troy Fulkerson I'm at 8204 Wickwood Court in Argyle and 138 00:15:11,520 --> 00:15:17,640 you know my question is is that y'all moved out to Argyle this area about 14 139 00:15:17,640 --> 00:15:22,500 years ago was a nice quiet you know Tulane Road been West Creek and I came 140 00:15:22,500 --> 00:15:25,920 from Colleyville where Colleyville had the same battle here about ten years ago 141 00:15:25,920 --> 00:15:29,640 where they wanted the widened glade road if you guys were familiar with that road 142 00:15:29,640 --> 00:15:34,280 from 121 all the way up a policing line it's wonderful several years I don't 143 00:15:34,280 --> 00:15:37,960 assure you the traffic on that road on the glade road is probably a hundred 144 00:15:37,960 --> 00:15:42,040 times more what it is in West Creek my misunderstanding or maybe not 145 00:15:42,040 --> 00:15:46,120 understanding why we want to widened West Creek what's the point we have a 146 00:15:46,120 --> 00:15:49,600 county road right down the road which is country club road which just spent you 147 00:15:49,600 --> 00:15:53,280 know hundreds of thousands of dollars to make that road that goes all the way 35 148 00:15:53,280 --> 00:15:58,320 how about that so why are we spending all these tax dollars on West Creek the 149 00:15:58,320 --> 00:16:02,000 county how we spent money on country club road what can't the seat of bitten 150 00:16:02,000 --> 00:16:05,240 in the county get together and have a great road is already in the in the 151 00:16:05,240 --> 00:16:10,400 infrastructures already there if we want to go any further off off of a country 152 00:16:10,400 --> 00:16:16,320 club road we can stand up that direction but my my question this is why that's 153 00:16:16,320 --> 00:16:19,960 the whole question why we will spend that kind of taxpayer dollars on a six 154 00:16:19,960 --> 00:16:24,560 lane road for a great little neighborhood for what purpose just to 155 00:16:24,560 --> 00:16:28,800 spend taxpayer money or can we take this money as the other gentleman said and 156 00:16:28,800 --> 00:16:32,520 use it for other purposes but I live in the hills at Argo it's not my properties 157 00:16:32,520 --> 00:16:36,360 being ripped out which is the ideal of taxpayer dollars and something that 158 00:16:36,360 --> 00:16:40,280 doesn't really need to seem to be done so that being said that's all I gotta 159 00:16:40,280 --> 00:16:45,160 say thank you thank you 160 00:16:45,160 --> 00:16:51,000 next Gary Davis 161 00:16:59,320 --> 00:17:06,880 my name is Gary Davis I live at 970 brush Creek Road in Argyle and what they 162 00:17:06,880 --> 00:17:11,680 said to be honest I worked for the city of Keller it took me forever to get here 163 00:17:11,680 --> 00:17:16,520 because you can't get here from there with the traffic really we just need I 164 00:17:16,520 --> 00:17:21,720 do this same thing for the city of Keller and I know that we're not going 165 00:17:21,720 --> 00:17:25,600 to change your mind on the route you're going to go that's already that horse is 166 00:17:25,600 --> 00:17:30,320 out of the barn but the thing that I don't know which is what David Yoder said 167 00:17:30,320 --> 00:17:35,800 is how many phases are there in this one how far does that take you when do the 168 00:17:35,800 --> 00:17:42,680 next phases kick in in a timeline type of format and I don't think that's asking 169 00:17:42,680 --> 00:17:50,280 too much and within that format some sort of a map that says you know here's 170 00:17:50,280 --> 00:17:55,480 the route it's exactly going to take and here's how much property is going to go 171 00:17:55,480 --> 00:17:59,440 from each side I would assume there's going to be some properties that you're 172 00:17:59,440 --> 00:18:07,520 going to have to buy out that's okay but none of us really know what that is now 173 00:18:07,520 --> 00:18:12,560 the question I have is when you go to the bond election in November I believe 174 00:18:12,560 --> 00:18:18,760 it is this if that bond passes is that more than just Denton is that also 175 00:18:18,760 --> 00:18:23,640 include County is that also include state whatever funding sources you have 176 00:18:23,640 --> 00:18:29,880 is that important does that give you all funding sources if not where the other 177 00:18:29,880 --> 00:18:35,520 funding sources kick in also what happens if it doesn't pass I'm sure it's 178 00:18:35,520 --> 00:18:40,480 not going to just die you've got to get cars from point A to point B what's plan 179 00:18:40,480 --> 00:18:46,600 B what happens when you do pass it what happens if you don't where the funding 180 00:18:46,600 --> 00:18:50,720 sources come in and what's the timeline for each one of those that's what I have 181 00:18:50,720 --> 00:18:56,800 to do with all of ours have to lay out straight maps aerials always help 182 00:18:56,800 --> 00:19:00,720 aerials with dotted lines that show where it's going to go that's what we 183 00:19:00,720 --> 00:19:08,320 know with a timeline thank you so much thank you and I have one of the card 184 00:19:08,320 --> 00:19:16,040 with but something written on it but I have no name okay 185 00:19:21,220 --> 00:19:30,760 good evening my name is Sam Slovak I live at 4905 Argyle Lane which is the 186 00:19:30,760 --> 00:19:37,520 corner of Argyle Lane and Brush Creek a six lane major highway cutting through a 187 00:19:37,520 --> 00:19:43,680 pristine area of Denton which many of us bought in that area for that very reason 188 00:19:43,680 --> 00:19:50,480 will completely change the character of those neighborhoods as you put in a road 189 00:19:50,480 --> 00:19:55,800 of this size and I look at the studies that have been issued you know they're 190 00:19:55,800 --> 00:20:03,120 still talking about rural culvert for drainage you take drainage off of a six 191 00:20:03,120 --> 00:20:09,440 lane highway and and that highway will be on the south side of all of these 192 00:20:09,440 --> 00:20:17,040 homes which backs up to a flood zone so you're going to exacerbate the flooding 193 00:20:17,040 --> 00:20:23,840 in all of those homes along the north side of that highway again it's been 194 00:20:23,840 --> 00:20:28,640 brought up tonight that you put a road in of this size you're going to 195 00:20:28,640 --> 00:20:34,720 significantly increase the noise traffic and there are no provisions in the plans 196 00:20:34,720 --> 00:20:42,560 that I've seen that address that issue as well so I for one find it absurd to 197 00:20:42,560 --> 00:20:50,360 think that you need a road of this size to be able to accommodate traffic out in 198 00:20:50,360 --> 00:20:55,920 2035 when you look at the growth of the industry and the growth of the housing 199 00:20:55,920 --> 00:21:02,320 is not not lined up with with the path that you propose to take you're taking 200 00:21:02,320 --> 00:21:09,120 an easy way out down a floodplain area to build a massive highway that's going 201 00:21:09,120 --> 00:21:17,320 to disrupt the lives and homes of some some very nice homes in the Denton area 202 00:21:17,320 --> 00:21:24,560 thank you and the last card that I have is Colleen Mitchell 203 00:21:35,440 --> 00:21:43,160 hello I'm Colleen Mitchell I live at 1300 Brush Creek Road in Argyle we've 204 00:21:43,160 --> 00:21:49,440 lived in on Brush Creek Road since 2002 our property is on 40 acres and the 205 00:21:49,440 --> 00:21:53,720 front of it would actually be taken out but it would not affect our home because 206 00:21:53,720 --> 00:21:57,640 our house is way at the back of the property but if any of you have driven 207 00:21:57,640 --> 00:22:02,160 down Brush Creek Road you'll see and I followed the men who were setting up the 208 00:22:02,160 --> 00:22:07,960 that we're doing the surveying and I said what what are you doing and how how 209 00:22:07,960 --> 00:22:14,680 are you going to you're marking these and and here's here's utilities right in 210 00:22:14,680 --> 00:22:17,520 front of that do you know how many utilities you're gonna have to take out 211 00:22:17,520 --> 00:22:23,440 to widen that road does anyone who realized that a six-lane highway is like 212 00:22:23,440 --> 00:22:30,120 1171 drive down 1171 and see six lanes there's no way you can do that to brush 213 00:22:30,120 --> 00:22:34,760 Creek Road without taking out so much land on this side and so much land on 214 00:22:34,760 --> 00:22:41,320 that side it seems insane maybe make it four lanes because I think going straight 215 00:22:41,320 --> 00:22:47,200 to 35w would be really a lot easier I mean it's a straight drop through but 216 00:22:47,200 --> 00:22:51,120 don't ruin our properties we've all cared about that property we've all 217 00:22:51,120 --> 00:22:56,120 taken care of that property for years and I ask for your attention to more 218 00:22:56,120 --> 00:23:02,360 detail on what you're going to do and let us know thank you thank you hi those 219 00:23:02,360 --> 00:23:08,760 are all the cards that I have what is your name 220 00:23:08,760 --> 00:23:18,800 Perry Dyer 221 00:23:23,320 --> 00:23:27,960 well good evening and thank you Perry Dyer 4,800 snowsills no show I don't 222 00:23:27,960 --> 00:23:32,640 know how we pronounce it but Argyle it's in the hills of Argyle moved out there 223 00:23:32,640 --> 00:23:35,760 just about two years ago I'm from a very small town out in Northern California 224 00:23:35,760 --> 00:23:40,760 and it has a lot of charm has a lot of loveliness about it I was living over in 225 00:23:40,760 --> 00:23:44,880 Corinth before I found this property with my wife and family and decided this 226 00:23:44,880 --> 00:23:51,160 is where we want to spend our time acre lots rural close to everything but not 227 00:23:51,160 --> 00:23:58,360 very far out if we decide that we need to create a draw to our area the small 228 00:23:58,360 --> 00:24:02,920 town of Argyle the rural area of Rush Creek and those areas in there we're 229 00:24:02,920 --> 00:24:07,040 gonna create a draw Roanoke is supposed to go insane in the next few years that 230 00:24:07,040 --> 00:24:10,560 draw will move all these people up to our area because they'll be looking to 231 00:24:10,560 --> 00:24:14,600 try to get out because we're in a unique situation where we have land for most of 232 00:24:14,600 --> 00:24:18,560 us we take that land away we've turned ourselves into every other little city 233 00:24:18,560 --> 00:24:24,040 around here and ruined all the charm of Denton South Denton in Argyle we don't 234 00:24:24,040 --> 00:24:27,840 want to do that we don't need to have that ultimate convenience it takes a 235 00:24:27,840 --> 00:24:33,480 good seven eight minutes to get to 35w from our house it takes 15 minutes if I 236 00:24:33,480 --> 00:24:39,240 go the other way to go 35e we live in these areas because we'd like to have a 237 00:24:39,240 --> 00:24:44,520 little bit of separation okay if I wanted to be five minutes from the 238 00:24:44,520 --> 00:24:48,640 grocery store or five minutes from the restaurant I would go move into any of 239 00:24:48,640 --> 00:24:52,720 these surrounding areas that are going gangbusters and are like that so I think 240 00:24:52,720 --> 00:24:57,480 we need to take a step back and realize that maybe growth isn't exactly what we 241 00:24:57,480 --> 00:25:02,120 need in all these areas and just step back and say let's let some rural areas 242 00:25:02,120 --> 00:25:06,240 stay rural and not drive a bunch of traffic into areas because frankly if 243 00:25:06,240 --> 00:25:10,640 that lane goes through on Brush Creek and it's six lanes I'm moving because I will 244 00:25:10,640 --> 00:25:15,600 not be having that kind of noise I'm a half a mile from that road and it will 245 00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:19,220 not have that kind of noise because I'd love to sit on my back patio and look at 246 00:25:19,220 --> 00:25:26,120 the stars and not hear traffic so thank you for your time okay thank you and I 247 00:25:26,120 --> 00:25:29,680 assume there are not any other cards 248 00:25:29,680 --> 00:25:35,040 Jesse Calvert I did see your card 249 00:25:39,640 --> 00:25:45,480 hello everybody we recently moved to brush Creek I live on 990 brush Creek 250 00:25:45,480 --> 00:25:49,160 road right on the corner of Hamilton and brush Creek I want to talk a little bit 251 00:25:49,160 --> 00:25:55,400 about the human element I'll walk my kids to the bus stop right there on the 252 00:25:55,400 --> 00:26:00,280 corner of brush Creek and Hamilton the bus stops is great you sit on the front 253 00:26:00,280 --> 00:26:05,000 porch sit on the back porch we moved from Dallas to get away from this type of 254 00:26:05,000 --> 00:26:09,920 thing I've got 50-foot pine trees in the front of my yard that have been there 255 00:26:09,920 --> 00:26:14,520 forever that this would take away and there's a lot more questions that other 256 00:26:14,520 --> 00:26:20,760 people have broached but it seems like a waste to me is as far as there's 257 00:26:20,760 --> 00:26:27,520 Country Club Road down that's wide enough to me anyway there's a golf course 258 00:26:27,520 --> 00:26:33,480 that in my opinion could suffer a bit more than the the residents of brush 259 00:26:33,480 --> 00:26:40,840 Creek personally my wife is suffering from three forms of cancer and this is 260 00:26:40,840 --> 00:26:48,040 a very large inconvenience to say the least for everybody on our street but it 261 00:26:48,040 --> 00:26:52,920 affects I feel like it affects our family horribly just getting the 262 00:26:52,920 --> 00:26:56,560 notifications in the mail and all these things have really sent her in a 263 00:26:56,560 --> 00:27:01,520 downward spiral with her health and just letting everyone know that there are 264 00:27:01,520 --> 00:27:06,080 people involved in all this and it's not just getting people from point 8 point 265 00:27:06,080 --> 00:27:11,600 B I understand progress but at what cost and that people have bought it brought 266 00:27:11,600 --> 00:27:15,080 up really good points about flooding and it does flood down brush Creek brush 267 00:27:15,080 --> 00:27:22,280 Creek a lot but please put in some thought to what we're dealing with and 268 00:27:22,280 --> 00:27:26,440 and the questions we have and what's gonna happen with us and with our 269 00:27:26,440 --> 00:27:32,280 property and to the the land it's I see this gentleman walk down the street all 270 00:27:32,280 --> 00:27:37,120 the time I'm in my yard every day with my family doing things so please 271 00:27:37,120 --> 00:27:42,560 consider all these things whenever this comes up thank you thank you did I miss 272 00:27:42,560 --> 00:27:48,880 any other cards all right thank you all very much for your comments next item on 273 00:27:48,880 --> 00:27:52,200 our agenda is to receive a report and hold a discussion regarding potential 274 00:27:52,200 --> 00:27:56,840 projects financial considerations and other requirements related to the 275 00:27:56,840 --> 00:28:02,120 proposed 2019 bond program and before David begins let me just sort of say I 276 00:28:02,120 --> 00:28:09,120 think that this is a critical meeting for us tonight I think that that we want 277 00:28:09,120 --> 00:28:15,700 to come out of this meeting with a sense of where our priorities are where we 278 00:28:15,700 --> 00:28:19,400 believe that we want to make some assumptions on the growth rate and 279 00:28:19,400 --> 00:28:25,600 therefore what the impact is on the tax rate so these this is this meeting is 280 00:28:25,600 --> 00:28:30,880 one tonight in which we need as the committee to begin to take ownership of 281 00:28:30,880 --> 00:28:35,680 this bond package we've had a lot of presentations from staff but over the 282 00:28:35,680 --> 00:28:41,400 course of this evening it's it's in our hands and and we need to own this 283 00:28:41,400 --> 00:28:47,440 package because ultimately when it comes time to go to the voters we're the ones 284 00:28:47,440 --> 00:28:52,160 who are going to have to make the case for this bond package city staff can't 285 00:28:52,160 --> 00:28:57,160 make the case and city the city council members cannot make the case it will be 286 00:28:57,160 --> 00:29:02,000 this committee that will become a political action committee to work 287 00:29:02,000 --> 00:29:08,640 toward the passage of this bond and in order to do that we have to own what 288 00:29:08,640 --> 00:29:12,600 this bond is about and that's what tonight is is taking ownership of this 289 00:29:12,600 --> 00:29:18,080 so with that I want to turn it over to David good evening committee David gains 290 00:29:18,080 --> 00:29:22,520 director of finance for this item we're going we're going to take a step back 291 00:29:22,520 --> 00:29:26,520 and look at the projects in total go through many of the financial 292 00:29:26,520 --> 00:29:29,760 financial considerations that we've talked through up to this point and some 293 00:29:29,760 --> 00:29:34,000 updated scenarios based on feedback from the committee and then after that we'll 294 00:29:34,000 --> 00:29:38,000 get into some more detail on the street rehab program to answer a few questions 295 00:29:38,000 --> 00:29:42,200 and on Ryan Road as well so that's the purpose of this presentation following 296 00:29:42,200 --> 00:29:45,360 this perfect presentation the next item on the agenda is the prioritization 297 00:29:45,360 --> 00:29:48,920 presentation which will go over the results of the most recent priority 298 00:29:48,920 --> 00:29:52,760 prioritization survey obviously these will go these will really work hand in 299 00:29:52,760 --> 00:29:59,000 hand with each other as you all start to make those make those decisions so to 300 00:29:59,000 --> 00:30:04,640 set the stage here's our current project cost that we went over last last meeting 301 00:30:04,640 --> 00:30:08,600 last week as we got those updates to the police renovation and police stuff 302 00:30:08,600 --> 00:30:13,280 six substation projects so you can see the potential bond cost here in the 303 00:30:13,280 --> 00:30:17,480 middle our total project costs that we've seen multiple times this total 304 00:30:17,480 --> 00:30:21,200 project cost obviously including the other funding sources that come in for 305 00:30:21,200 --> 00:30:26,720 those major roadway projects and then a funding option here I've highlighted a 306 00:30:26,720 --> 00:30:32,240 few of these projects on the funding option column just because I think these 307 00:30:32,240 --> 00:30:35,160 are some of those decision points for the committee to consider especially as 308 00:30:35,160 --> 00:30:40,280 we get to that prioritization piece of today's conversation of what funding 309 00:30:40,280 --> 00:30:44,720 level the committee wants on these projects Ryan Road is one have plugged 310 00:30:44,720 --> 00:30:47,920 four million here obviously we have that four million to 19 million dollar range 311 00:30:47,920 --> 00:30:51,360 at the end of this presentation we're gonna have a few slides that really get 312 00:30:51,360 --> 00:30:55,200 into the detail of what that means so that you have concrete examples of what 313 00:30:55,200 --> 00:30:59,040 is four million mean for that Ryan Road project from a city perspective what is 314 00:30:59,040 --> 00:31:05,680 19 million mean from a city perspective so we want to go over some of the 315 00:31:05,680 --> 00:31:10,740 financial assumptions that are built into all of our scenarios that we've 316 00:31:10,740 --> 00:31:14,200 shown this shown this previously and just go through how we got to the 317 00:31:14,200 --> 00:31:21,080 numbers of where we're at beginning with our debt issuance and next next year for 318 00:31:21,080 --> 00:31:26,880 FY 1920 we are we do it have in our model to issue the final fourteen point 319 00:31:26,880 --> 00:31:31,160 six million dollars of our 2014 bond program this will close that bond 320 00:31:31,160 --> 00:31:35,640 program out have no nothing left to issue for the bond program but it is 321 00:31:35,640 --> 00:31:39,240 included in all of our all of our models moving forward we also have five million 322 00:31:39,240 --> 00:31:43,680 dollars in certificates of obligation for vehicle replacements and facility 323 00:31:43,680 --> 00:31:48,640 improvements three moving forward in each of the years that's that's something 324 00:31:48,640 --> 00:31:53,040 that we budgeted for multiple years now for annual improvements for our 325 00:31:53,040 --> 00:31:56,120 facilities and for those replacements of vehicles and you can see the total 326 00:31:56,120 --> 00:32:00,200 there with our vehicle replacements we typically do five-year debt and for 327 00:32:00,200 --> 00:32:05,360 facility improvements we tenure down we are utilizing in the first few years of 328 00:32:05,360 --> 00:32:09,720 the bond of our bond schedule to draw down a fund balance that is built up in 329 00:32:09,720 --> 00:32:13,480 our debt service fund that fund balance really has just built up simply because 330 00:32:13,480 --> 00:32:18,440 our assessed values have come in higher than the certified values over the past 331 00:32:18,440 --> 00:32:22,240 few years it's built up a balance that's not necessary in our debt service fund 332 00:32:22,240 --> 00:32:26,360 so we're able to then use that balance to pay off debt service in the next few 333 00:32:26,360 --> 00:32:29,820 years which mitigates some of that increase that we would experience in 334 00:32:29,820 --> 00:32:35,920 the tax rate with increased debt service payments for next year we currently have 335 00:32:35,920 --> 00:32:41,560 a seven point three percent increase in our non frozen assessed values and we'll 336 00:32:41,560 --> 00:32:45,000 talk about a little bit on the next slide but that's up through our last 337 00:32:45,000 --> 00:32:50,360 preliminary values from the appraisal district we got those last Friday that'll 338 00:32:50,360 --> 00:32:53,640 be those are the last values we get up until next Thursday or Friday when we get 339 00:32:53,640 --> 00:32:57,200 our certified values and then we can really put some concrete numbers to what 340 00:32:57,200 --> 00:33:01,320 we're expecting next year this is our estimate based on the preliminary values 341 00:33:01,320 --> 00:33:05,560 we've received so far I will say the appraisal district has experienced 342 00:33:05,560 --> 00:33:09,200 greater number of protests than they've ever experienced so that number has 343 00:33:09,200 --> 00:33:13,560 fluctuate quite fluctuated quite a bit we've built in some room in this 344 00:33:13,560 --> 00:33:17,080 estimate to anticipate that dropping further next year so we feel comfortable 345 00:33:17,080 --> 00:33:21,360 right now at the seven point three percent number in non frozen values on 346 00:33:21,360 --> 00:33:27,200 assessed value assessed value increase we'll talk about this on the next slide 347 00:33:27,200 --> 00:33:30,680 as well but our assumptions that you'll see moving forward have a five percent 348 00:33:30,680 --> 00:33:37,800 growth estimate for assessed value in future years past 19 FY 19 20 and then 349 00:33:37,800 --> 00:33:41,840 for our interest rate we're currently assuming next year to have an interest 350 00:33:41,840 --> 00:33:45,880 rate of three point seven five percent which is still above we just issued debt 351 00:33:45,880 --> 00:33:49,440 this last week at three point seven five percent is above what we just issued 352 00:33:49,440 --> 00:33:53,760 because rates are as low as they've been in a long time right now but to be 353 00:33:53,760 --> 00:33:58,520 conservative we've kind of anticipated that to inch its way back up and then 354 00:33:58,520 --> 00:34:02,000 have four and a half percent as an interest rate in those out years past 355 00:34:02,000 --> 00:34:20,200 2020 and that's been an emphasis to it for the city especially over the past 356 00:34:20,200 --> 00:34:23,440 year we've really stepped back and take taking a look a hard look at all of our 357 00:34:23,440 --> 00:34:27,240 vehicles at our replacement policies we've been able to take some vehicles 358 00:34:27,240 --> 00:34:31,520 that were utilized in multiple departments but not utilized very often 359 00:34:31,520 --> 00:34:34,640 their utilization wasn't very high combine those and have some sharing 360 00:34:34,640 --> 00:34:38,640 across the city so we've been able to reduce that continually to reduce that 361 00:34:38,640 --> 00:34:42,360 this fiscal year and next fiscal year so it's possible that three don't need that 362 00:34:42,360 --> 00:34:45,880 three and a half every year that may be a conservative number but that's what we 363 00:34:45,880 --> 00:34:53,800 have built into the scenarios so obviously the assessed value is one of 364 00:34:53,800 --> 00:34:57,880 the the most important of the assumptions that we have whatever number 365 00:34:57,880 --> 00:35:01,720 we whatever percentage we pick for assessed value has a direct impact on 366 00:35:01,720 --> 00:35:05,920 what that tax rate is needed that the tax rate increase that would be needed 367 00:35:05,920 --> 00:35:10,240 on the debt service side to pay for our increased debt service payments so you 368 00:35:10,240 --> 00:35:15,680 can see the history of our tax rate since 2014 we have been 369 00:35:15,680 --> 00:35:21,000 experienced and really since 2011 2012 we started the growth but since 2014 370 00:35:21,000 --> 00:35:25,360 significant growth that our assessed value that's not surprising to anyone and 371 00:35:25,360 --> 00:35:31,320 here as you've seen your property values grow and the growth within the city up 372 00:35:31,320 --> 00:35:36,240 through for comparison stakes in 2018 and 2019 we've shown our total assessed 373 00:35:36,240 --> 00:35:40,520 value the growth of our total assessed value but we've also starting in 2018 had 374 00:35:40,520 --> 00:35:46,600 the first impact of our over 65 tax freeze so for comparison sake showed the 375 00:35:46,600 --> 00:35:50,640 total but really what what is important right now for our considerations and 376 00:35:50,640 --> 00:35:55,360 what the new revenue that's coming into us is a seven point three percent of growth 377 00:35:55,360 --> 00:36:00,040 in our non frozen values and David I think this might be a good point for the 378 00:36:00,040 --> 00:36:08,320 committee to have some discussion about the assessed value growth that that the 379 00:36:08,320 --> 00:36:13,760 task force is recommending but is also in the hands of this committee to decide 380 00:36:13,760 --> 00:36:19,720 what do we want what do we want to assume in terms of property growth for 381 00:36:19,720 --> 00:36:28,480 the coming years the committee looked at a number of different scenarios when 382 00:36:28,480 --> 00:36:31,440 you when you see the growth that's occurring around here there was this 383 00:36:31,440 --> 00:36:37,520 question of what's the right number there was some concern within the within 384 00:36:37,520 --> 00:36:43,560 the task force that that it's been a while since we've had a recession and 385 00:36:43,560 --> 00:36:50,840 what happens if we have a recession and we can look back in an 08 no 9 and 10 386 00:36:50,840 --> 00:36:57,080 and we can see the recession numbers that impacted our property values at 387 00:36:57,080 --> 00:37:03,120 that point in time so that was one consideration the fact that the we have 388 00:37:03,120 --> 00:37:08,680 this much lower increase because of the non frozen values became another 389 00:37:08,680 --> 00:37:15,400 consideration and so the the that the task force in looking at that felt that 390 00:37:15,400 --> 00:37:23,680 four percent was too low and we looked at six but settled on five and I think 391 00:37:23,680 --> 00:37:29,760 that the question that is really before the the bond committee at this point is 392 00:37:29,760 --> 00:37:34,120 what are we comfortable with are we comfortable with that five percent 393 00:37:34,120 --> 00:37:37,320 assumption do we want to be more aggressive or do we want to be more 394 00:37:37,320 --> 00:37:42,400 conservative and so with that I would just sort of turn it over for your 395 00:37:42,400 --> 00:37:47,120 comments and and thoughts on this this is one of those pieces we need to own 396 00:37:47,120 --> 00:37:54,160 because this will also impact what the what the tax rate increase might be 397 00:37:54,160 --> 00:38:04,840 David I know there's been some some bills passed recently state statewide or 398 00:38:04,840 --> 00:38:10,640 state level that have affected cities in multiple ways one being taxes I wonder I 399 00:38:10,640 --> 00:38:15,560 guess my question is that what is you know does any of that affect some of 400 00:38:15,560 --> 00:38:19,080 these values that affect us locally or should we take that into consideration 401 00:38:19,080 --> 00:38:23,240 sure it does as far as for the conversation just on the AV goes there's 402 00:38:23,240 --> 00:38:27,800 nothing that will affect affect the I think later on and I'll just I'll come 403 00:38:27,800 --> 00:38:31,160 back to this slide but just kind of give you a preview of some of the numbers 404 00:38:31,160 --> 00:38:34,800 there's a lot of numbers here but one of the pieces I will talk about is the 405 00:38:34,800 --> 00:38:38,040 the largest impact to cities right now as far as tax rate is a three and a half 406 00:38:38,040 --> 00:38:43,320 percent rollback rate that rollback rate really is focused specifically on for 407 00:38:43,320 --> 00:38:47,120 the most part the M&O the operations and maintenance rate so what we do on the 408 00:38:47,120 --> 00:38:50,520 debt service side doesn't have a direct is not directly impacted by the three 409 00:38:50,520 --> 00:38:54,120 and a half percent rollback so I'll talk about that a little bit later but that 410 00:38:54,120 --> 00:38:59,280 that's the biggest impact and it doesn't have a big consideration for what you do 411 00:38:59,280 --> 00:39:04,320 with the debt service tax rate thank you not to give you get you off track but 412 00:39:04,320 --> 00:39:08,400 I've been requesting some information for the last month a month and a half do 413 00:39:08,400 --> 00:39:18,720 we get it today time I got it we will get to that on slide 25 but we have can 414 00:39:18,720 --> 00:39:24,440 it can I suggest that we come to that a little bit later let's focus on our 415 00:39:24,440 --> 00:39:29,080 assessed value question and and what the assumption is that we want to make as a 416 00:39:29,080 --> 00:39:36,920 committee on on the assessed value growth so as more and more of our citizens 417 00:39:36,920 --> 00:39:44,680 become over 65 and properties continue to freeze we know we see the spread 418 00:39:44,680 --> 00:39:50,520 between seven point three and eight point oh what happens have we thought 419 00:39:50,520 --> 00:39:56,160 about that you know consideration it's definitely something it's still someone 420 00:39:56,160 --> 00:39:59,680 new for us to try to try to plan for that I think when we first were 421 00:39:59,680 --> 00:40:02,160 considering the freeze if you go back and look at some of our projections 422 00:40:02,160 --> 00:40:06,760 previously we're expecting more of a gradual hit from the freeze but we 423 00:40:06,760 --> 00:40:10,720 really kind of had that up front and now we've seen some gradual growth and what 424 00:40:10,720 --> 00:40:14,240 the frozen amounts are as far as more people getting on to the freeze so I 425 00:40:14,240 --> 00:40:18,240 think as we continue to see that if that trend plays out it'll allow us to eat 426 00:40:18,240 --> 00:40:23,680 more easily project that in the future I think in future years is the gap between 427 00:40:23,680 --> 00:40:28,200 those won't be as high because we're still having people add to the freeze 428 00:40:28,200 --> 00:40:32,360 right now which I think it makes that gap a little bit wider than it would be I 429 00:40:32,360 --> 00:40:36,440 think normally if we were looking at just non frozen versus non frozen and 430 00:40:36,440 --> 00:40:39,840 frozen versus frozen it should be about the same so I think it's just I think 431 00:40:39,840 --> 00:40:42,920 the majority of that is just because we're still at the beginning of the 432 00:40:42,920 --> 00:40:50,440 process okay I trust you okay go ahead Patty then 433 00:40:50,440 --> 00:40:57,000 Randy we talk about growth but I think within that growth we need to look at 434 00:40:57,000 --> 00:41:01,040 what kind of growth this is what percentage of it is commercial do we 435 00:41:01,040 --> 00:41:05,360 project will be business growth commercial industrial which has a very 436 00:41:05,360 --> 00:41:10,360 low cost of service compared to residential and especially multifamily so 437 00:41:10,360 --> 00:41:18,120 how has that factored into these projections have we considered that at 438 00:41:18,120 --> 00:41:23,440 all have we considered cost of service there the our projections have just been 439 00:41:23,440 --> 00:41:28,560 at a high level of here's the total AV as it grows as it's growing so we 440 00:41:28,560 --> 00:41:31,560 haven't got to the level of commercials growing in X amount residential is 441 00:41:31,560 --> 00:41:35,040 growing in X amount because traditionally as we dig into those 442 00:41:35,040 --> 00:41:39,280 numbers it all kind of comes back to the high level three four or five percent on 443 00:41:39,280 --> 00:41:44,600 the growth it's also difficult to to get to that level and have have validity in 444 00:41:44,600 --> 00:41:48,200 those numbers as we get down to that point the cost of service question is 445 00:41:48,200 --> 00:41:52,480 one that that we always that we have frequently and it's one that right now 446 00:41:52,480 --> 00:41:56,180 we're you know engaging with different consultants to try to understand what is 447 00:41:56,180 --> 00:41:59,400 that kind of break-even point but it's a little bit different than this 448 00:41:59,400 --> 00:42:03,240 conversation but it is a valid point 449 00:42:04,600 --> 00:42:15,680 Randy yeah just question about the so 2019 let's use 8.07 just for comparisons 450 00:42:15,680 --> 00:42:20,640 but that's eight billion dollars an increase in property base is that 451 00:42:20,640 --> 00:42:33,800 correct eight million you sorry yeah yeah that's the eight yeah eight this is 452 00:42:33,800 --> 00:42:38,300 the total amount of the increase that's correct you're right that's a total eight 453 00:42:38,300 --> 00:42:43,800 yes that's not a million dollar increase eight billion dollar increase 454 00:42:43,800 --> 00:42:59,120 should be about eight hundred eight hundred million dollars I know our total 455 00:42:59,120 --> 00:43:08,560 is around 11 to 13 billion so eight hundred million dollar increase so the 456 00:43:08,560 --> 00:43:15,320 eight hundred million dollars and I know we've asked we talked about this and the 457 00:43:15,320 --> 00:43:22,760 task force deal I just wanted for the committee to hear it but that how much 458 00:43:22,760 --> 00:43:29,800 of that growth is new properties that have come on the tax rolls versus an 459 00:43:29,800 --> 00:43:33,400 increase in existing properties so this year it's about four hundred and fifteen 460 00:43:33,400 --> 00:43:43,400 million of that is new growth of the eight hundred million so about half of 461 00:43:43,400 --> 00:43:47,900 strictly the increase yes okay so if we're talking about a five percent 462 00:43:47,900 --> 00:43:56,540 increase and I know everybody is seeing all the projections on development the 463 00:43:56,540 --> 00:44:06,200 on the around the loop and on the south southwest part of town is that we have 464 00:44:06,200 --> 00:44:14,120 any idea what what that would mean to that that increase number we haven't 465 00:44:14,120 --> 00:44:17,680 right now in our model essentially we're saying four percent growth and new 466 00:44:17,680 --> 00:44:24,120 value and regular and existing value we right now don't have number a different 467 00:44:24,120 --> 00:44:26,560 percentage for new growth in those different areas that's definitely 468 00:44:26,560 --> 00:44:31,200 something we could look at though okay yeah I just I just want to clarify that 469 00:44:31,200 --> 00:44:36,720 you know if there is if there are new properties coming on to the the tax 470 00:44:36,720 --> 00:44:42,480 rolls and if it becomes more than the more than 50% of the annual project or 471 00:44:42,480 --> 00:44:50,600 the projected increase I think that gives pretty good credence to five percent 472 00:44:50,600 --> 00:44:59,000 versus four I'm with I don't think we should get as high as six that's too 473 00:44:59,000 --> 00:45:04,720 close to seven point three in my opinion but you know my mind started at four 474 00:45:04,720 --> 00:45:11,600 percent in the very beginning so I'm that makes me feel more comfortable with 475 00:45:11,600 --> 00:45:17,040 five if we think there's a lot more development and properties that can be 476 00:45:17,040 --> 00:45:21,520 added to the tax rolls in the next five years which all indications are it's 477 00:45:21,520 --> 00:45:30,200 gonna it is gonna happen that I'm okay with five percent that's just other 478 00:45:30,200 --> 00:45:33,600 questions or comments 479 00:45:39,400 --> 00:45:50,000 the end of next week day after our next meeting right possibly the day Anna my 480 00:45:50,000 --> 00:45:57,000 law firm could run its entire practice on protest for taxes this year just very 481 00:45:57,000 --> 00:46:02,740 quick question if we're going to be honest with our citizens about raising 482 00:46:02,740 --> 00:46:10,880 taxes what does the five percent mean to them well what let's let's it's about 483 00:46:10,880 --> 00:46:20,480 25 about $25 a cent so thank you but I think there's as we'll go through the 484 00:46:20,480 --> 00:46:23,440 process is important caveats to them when we say five cents we're not saying 485 00:46:23,440 --> 00:46:27,680 five cents every year we say go up to a five cent tax it's in one year if these 486 00:46:27,680 --> 00:46:36,280 assumptions fill okay comment I just want to make sure I fully understand this so 487 00:46:36,280 --> 00:46:41,120 my understanding is that the growth rate assumption that we assume will then 488 00:46:41,120 --> 00:46:49,880 determine how many cents on the tax rate we tell people that this could cause and 489 00:46:49,880 --> 00:46:55,520 then it is the city's intention although they are not legally bound to ensure 490 00:46:55,520 --> 00:47:01,040 that the debt service rate does not rise above that increase over the period of 491 00:47:01,040 --> 00:47:06,760 the bond program is that a reasonable summary yes okay thank you okay Queen 492 00:47:06,760 --> 00:47:11,400 did you have something oh no I think somebody said $25 where did I get that 493 00:47:11,400 --> 00:47:17,760 from there's something about something you were saying and then for just yeah 494 00:47:17,760 --> 00:47:22,280 on average on for our average taxable value on a home it's about $25 per 495 00:47:22,280 --> 00:47:30,360 percent that increases okay the questions and comments on the assumptions 496 00:47:30,360 --> 00:47:32,760 for the growth rate 497 00:47:32,760 --> 00:47:50,480 yeah so would it be but I'll try again please feel free to jump in so sure 498 00:47:52,280 --> 00:47:59,880 the July 11 2019 on program financial presentation page five I think that 499 00:47:59,880 --> 00:48:06,620 might give a little bit more context so Eric while you're at while you're 500 00:48:06,620 --> 00:48:11,000 restating out of a thank you I will run the risk of not looking at paper while 501 00:48:11,000 --> 00:48:20,400 I speak so so my understanding is that the growth rate that we assume and also 502 00:48:20,400 --> 00:48:28,600 the size of the capital package we asked for determine the projections of the 503 00:48:28,600 --> 00:48:35,000 number of cents the tax rate the debt service tax rate may have to increase in 504 00:48:35,000 --> 00:48:41,840 order to fund the the bonds right and then it is the city's intention that if 505 00:48:41,840 --> 00:48:47,720 you can you go back to the chart with the sorry when it shows the the debt 506 00:48:47,720 --> 00:48:53,200 service and or maybe we haven't gotten there yet yeah just that shows the the 507 00:48:53,200 --> 00:49:01,280 combination of the debt service and the M&O rate the table sorry yeah yeah so so 508 00:49:01,280 --> 00:49:05,080 then it is the city's intention that the second column there the debt service 509 00:49:05,080 --> 00:49:12,240 rate would be held to whatever number of cents that is above the current rate of 510 00:49:12,240 --> 00:49:19,440 21.5 cents throughout the the term of the bond program and so if economic 511 00:49:19,440 --> 00:49:24,600 things change then they would change the issuance of the bonds the schedule or 512 00:49:24,600 --> 00:49:29,120 something like that in order to not exceed the number of cents that we told 513 00:49:29,120 --> 00:49:34,000 the voters that they might incur yeah isn't that when you when you put it 514 00:49:34,000 --> 00:49:39,120 before whoever you buy the bonds from this is what your guarantee is for X 515 00:49:39,120 --> 00:49:45,840 number of years of the bond unless it goes down that's a it's a little bit of 516 00:49:45,840 --> 00:49:49,440 a different question the target when we're talking about the debt service 517 00:49:49,440 --> 00:49:52,920 tax rate increase as Eric was saying that's really a number that we say 518 00:49:52,920 --> 00:49:57,680 here's what we anticipate the impact on the debt service tax rate which all the 519 00:49:57,680 --> 00:50:01,240 debt service tax rate does is pay our debt service payments so I mean it's 520 00:50:01,240 --> 00:50:04,320 involved with that our debt service payments will go up as we issue more 521 00:50:04,320 --> 00:50:09,840 bonds we anticipate that on this scenario it won't go up over five cents 522 00:50:09,840 --> 00:50:14,920 but as Eric mentioned that's not you know in official language if we there was a 523 00:50:14,920 --> 00:50:18,200 point and we had to make considerations we would obviously work through the 524 00:50:18,200 --> 00:50:21,880 oversight bond oversight committee and City Council but the intention would be 525 00:50:21,880 --> 00:50:26,960 to not cat go over that five cent debt service tax rate that was that was 526 00:50:26,960 --> 00:50:40,680 published with with the bond program and the point is if we if we assumed a 7% 527 00:50:40,680 --> 00:50:45,600 rate every year then we could say oh it's not gonna go up any more than three 528 00:50:45,600 --> 00:50:52,320 cents in the next five years but I think it's it's much better to have a have a 529 00:50:52,320 --> 00:51:03,360 somewhat conservative growth estimate and so that we know that this this five 530 00:51:03,360 --> 00:51:10,280 cents is gonna be the maximum because we did keep our growth estimate at 5% which 531 00:51:10,280 --> 00:51:16,600 hopefully is a conservative number are there are there any other questions or 532 00:51:16,600 --> 00:51:22,200 comments if if not I would entertain a motion about what we will use as our 533 00:51:22,200 --> 00:51:33,680 assumed property value growth rate assessed value property growth rate I'll 534 00:51:33,680 --> 00:51:44,080 make a motion that we assume 5% a B growth is there got a second 535 00:51:48,280 --> 00:51:55,720 anyone want to make a speech for or against that seeing none all the way I'm 536 00:51:55,720 --> 00:52:00,320 sorry so we can't hold it at four no it's not good it's not doable I'm trying 537 00:52:00,320 --> 00:52:11,440 to understand okay maybe I'll just try to add a little bit to what I was 538 00:52:11,440 --> 00:52:20,200 explaining before I'm sure I get to the 200% mark the risk that I see if we 539 00:52:20,200 --> 00:52:26,560 assume a higher AV growth than materializes is that or an aggressive 540 00:52:26,560 --> 00:52:31,480 goal in other words would be that it's more likely that the city would either 541 00:52:31,480 --> 00:52:39,640 have to change how quickly those bonds are issued to stay under the the 542 00:52:39,640 --> 00:52:45,640 projection of how many cents it rises or that the city would have to renege on 543 00:52:45,640 --> 00:52:51,520 that projection and raise it above that amount of sense is that accurate I say 544 00:52:51,520 --> 00:52:54,560 the third option would be to not do a project I mean obviously the leader 545 00:52:54,560 --> 00:52:58,600 laying the project or not doing okay but most likely would just be delaying the 546 00:52:58,600 --> 00:53:06,920 project and fitting it into our issue and schedule if we delay a project that 547 00:53:06,920 --> 00:53:14,600 gives more opportunity for inflation and and cost overruns when we finally are 548 00:53:14,600 --> 00:53:19,400 able to do that correct which is why the goal is to set a rate set a tax rate 549 00:53:19,400 --> 00:53:23,920 increase that we feel comfortable with that we don't end up in that situation I 550 00:53:23,920 --> 00:53:29,000 think you know we have this slide later where we talked through this was a 551 00:53:29,000 --> 00:53:34,580 question that was brought up last time of our last three bond programs did we go 552 00:53:34,580 --> 00:53:39,480 over that max rate and we did not we've stayed significantly under that rate so 553 00:53:39,480 --> 00:53:44,040 in 2005 bond program we said we were gonna have up to a four cent tax rate 554 00:53:44,040 --> 00:53:47,560 increase so I'll just kind of describe what these lines are here this black and 555 00:53:47,560 --> 00:53:53,400 black and blue line is our debt service tax rate since 20 2005 and the dotted 556 00:53:53,400 --> 00:53:58,280 blue line above it is our max tax rate so as we go forward if we say you want a 557 00:53:58,280 --> 00:54:01,720 four we go with a program that's a four or five cent that then becomes our max 558 00:54:01,720 --> 00:54:06,540 starting next year so you can see throughout the 2005 bond program we 559 00:54:06,540 --> 00:54:12,360 stayed well under our are the max four cents that we could have issued through 560 00:54:12,360 --> 00:54:16,480 that program in 2012 the only reason it comes down here is because in 2012 we 561 00:54:16,480 --> 00:54:20,560 went into a program that had had no anticipated no tax rate increase so 562 00:54:20,560 --> 00:54:24,560 those just essentially stayed the same in 2014 we said we would have a four 563 00:54:24,560 --> 00:54:28,160 cent tax rate increase and we're at a point now where we haven't used that 564 00:54:28,160 --> 00:54:32,540 force those four cents because assessed values came in higher than we projected 565 00:54:32,540 --> 00:54:36,240 so if we say we want five percent and that's equated to a four or five cent 566 00:54:36,240 --> 00:54:40,600 tax increase but we get we get rates like we just saw worth eight percent to 567 00:54:40,600 --> 00:54:45,080 ten percent over the six years of this program we're gonna stay you know well 568 00:54:45,080 --> 00:54:50,360 below or not even increase the debt service tax rate to get there what rate 569 00:54:50,360 --> 00:55:02,480 did we assume growth during five twelve and fourteen percent four percent so and 570 00:55:02,480 --> 00:55:06,640 I'm running numbers because I'm trying to think of having the commercial 571 00:55:06,640 --> 00:55:10,640 businesses residential and all these tax increases so I'm trying to get the 572 00:55:10,640 --> 00:55:26,720 numbers right I'm sorry guys but I do think it's good on four I do come I see 573 00:55:26,720 --> 00:55:31,280 where it is on five as well I don't know I'm just gonna get these numbers right 574 00:55:31,280 --> 00:55:34,480 so you want to go to a different side were you looking at could you please I 575 00:55:34,480 --> 00:55:38,960 think the one thing I would want to add at four we will have to assume a greater 576 00:55:38,960 --> 00:55:42,760 tax rate increase and that's what we would have to take to the voters and 577 00:55:42,760 --> 00:55:48,160 with the voters authorize a bigger tax rate increase and at five we kind of 578 00:55:48,160 --> 00:55:53,200 split the difference potential potential right but we have to tell them what it 579 00:55:53,200 --> 00:55:55,960 potentially could be 580 00:56:00,520 --> 00:56:09,680 we have to really guess based on this alive Mike yeah based on past experience 581 00:56:09,680 --> 00:56:16,000 and whatever brains in education we can bring to it because the AV is essentially 582 00:56:16,000 --> 00:56:36,800 set by the county it's not but it's not a city unit the city is not setting its 583 00:56:36,800 --> 00:56:43,000 own valuations so really what we have to do here is base a lot of our decisions 584 00:56:43,000 --> 00:56:59,160 on a guess so how comfortable does the city and the staff fill with the five 585 00:56:59,160 --> 00:57:05,640 percent right because we were initially given a four percent right we've used 586 00:57:05,640 --> 00:57:13,120 four percent of the past can we get your kind of feel I ultimately we felt we're 587 00:57:13,120 --> 00:57:16,480 comfortable with the five percent I think if if we weren't comfortable that 588 00:57:16,480 --> 00:57:20,600 we would definitely give us raise alarms and I think I mean I think if we started 589 00:57:20,600 --> 00:57:24,960 talking about six or seven percent we definitely want to have a detailed 590 00:57:24,960 --> 00:57:28,240 discussion on that but five percent is something and it comes back to the new 591 00:57:28,240 --> 00:57:34,600 growth and in the trends that we're seeing so we do have a motion and a 592 00:57:34,600 --> 00:57:39,720 second on the floor is there any other discussion seeing none all in favor of 593 00:57:39,720 --> 00:57:44,640 supporting the motion for a five percent assumption on the assessed value growth 594 00:57:44,640 --> 00:57:52,320 please say aye do you need a you need a you need a handbook okay all right raise 595 00:57:52,320 --> 00:58:05,000 your right hand or your left hand I don't care great all right so as we move 596 00:58:05,000 --> 00:58:09,440 forward now we'll work from the assumption of a five percent growth rate 597 00:58:09,440 --> 00:58:15,480 and what the impact would be with the various aspects of this and and David 598 00:58:15,480 --> 00:58:19,600 one of the things that I think that you indicated to me earlier today was that 599 00:58:19,600 --> 00:58:25,240 that you all have kind of rerun some numbers in terms of what five percent 600 00:58:25,240 --> 00:58:29,560 might mean at different levels and I think that's what this slide is about it 601 00:58:29,560 --> 00:58:32,720 is so this kind of leads into the forecast assumptions you know the other 602 00:58:32,720 --> 00:58:37,440 the other variable that that plays a part in the total tax rate and the whole 603 00:58:37,440 --> 00:58:41,080 plan itself is when do we issue the debt when do when do we need these when do 604 00:58:41,080 --> 00:58:44,320 we get dollars for the program so we step back with our financial advisors 605 00:58:44,320 --> 00:58:48,480 and looked at what how can we time the issue it says so we can get the projects 606 00:58:48,480 --> 00:58:53,640 done but also at a issuance rate that has the least impacts on the tax rate 607 00:58:53,640 --> 00:58:57,320 so that's what we're that's what we're presenting here you know obviously as we 608 00:58:57,320 --> 00:59:00,400 look forward on this program we're gonna have a lot of cost in those first couple 609 00:59:00,400 --> 00:59:03,600 years as you've seen the schedule for the police station the police for 610 00:59:03,600 --> 00:59:07,640 innovation and a couple of those major projects so there is a big impact in 611 00:59:07,640 --> 00:59:11,360 those first few years to our debt service that is where we're also helped 612 00:59:11,360 --> 00:59:14,240 by that having that debt service fund balance that we're able to utilize in 613 00:59:14,240 --> 00:59:18,360 those first few years to mitigate that impact from the debt service on the debt 614 00:59:18,360 --> 00:59:21,800 service tax rate from what we have to pay with debt service so all those are 615 00:59:21,800 --> 00:59:26,360 the factors that really play into it but we will by doing that and by taking that 616 00:59:26,360 --> 00:59:32,160 look we're able to come here and say we have a five cent increase right under a 617 00:59:32,160 --> 00:59:36,520 five cent increase on the two hundred thirty five million dollar project we 618 00:59:36,520 --> 00:59:42,280 this was discussed if you would would you update the committee on the action 619 00:59:42,280 --> 00:59:49,240 that the council took so obviously following last Thursday meeting last 620 00:59:49,240 --> 00:59:53,000 Thursday's committee meeting one of the action items was to go to the City 621 00:59:53,000 --> 00:59:57,000 Council and request that would they revise the resolution that that formed 622 00:59:57,000 --> 01:00:01,360 the committee which had a not to exceed amount of 210 million dollars that 623 01:00:01,360 --> 01:00:05,880 amount has now been increased to 235 million dollars there was some 624 01:00:05,880 --> 01:00:10,320 discussion during the work session we presented the item to City Council a lot 625 01:00:10,320 --> 01:00:13,920 of positive conversation from that from that meeting and they ultimately 626 01:00:13,920 --> 01:00:17,920 approved it on their agenda and I think the the intent from them to approve it 627 01:00:17,920 --> 01:00:21,480 was to just give the committee all the capacity they needed to have a full 628 01:00:21,480 --> 01:00:29,280 discussion of the projects as presented all right thank you any other questions 629 01:00:29,280 --> 01:00:43,320 in terms of this particular slide yes I was yeah I was agreeing with you were 630 01:00:43,320 --> 01:00:48,080 saying we were at four point four four percent and then if that change had 631 01:00:48,080 --> 01:00:54,080 happened today so I was just concerned you know hope you don't mind that yeah I 632 01:00:54,080 --> 01:00:59,400 was just really concerned because we did say four percent sounds like oh my 633 01:00:59,400 --> 01:01:04,480 goodness when we changed to five percent it rattled me a little bit because I was 634 01:01:04,480 --> 01:01:12,960 really stuck on that does that make sense I don't know okay all right let's 635 01:01:12,960 --> 01:01:19,040 move on to the next slide so this is a slide that was developed early from 636 01:01:19,040 --> 01:01:22,960 conversations with the committee of different pieces that everyone wanted to 637 01:01:22,960 --> 01:01:27,040 see with each of the scenarios so I'm gonna go through I'll go through fairly 638 01:01:27,040 --> 01:01:30,280 quickly because there's a lot of numbers here and I'll hit on some of the the 639 01:01:30,280 --> 01:01:33,440 numbers that I think we're of most interest but definitely can answer any 640 01:01:33,440 --> 01:01:39,960 questions as we go through but for the 235 million dollar program we anticipate 641 01:01:39,960 --> 01:01:44,680 a five cent increase in the debt service tax rate and you can see that on the 642 01:01:44,680 --> 01:01:48,880 debt service tax rate here the second column that's bolded of how it how it 643 01:01:48,880 --> 01:01:53,480 increases through the years where we really gradually come up to our largest 644 01:01:53,480 --> 01:01:59,280 increases in FY 23 and 24 and through 26 and then it'll start going down after 645 01:01:59,280 --> 01:02:03,800 that we also show our total tax rate which is a combination of our 646 01:02:03,800 --> 01:02:07,000 maintenance and operations rate with our debt service tax rate and this is our 647 01:02:07,000 --> 01:02:11,040 maintenance operations rate at the effective level for the entirety of the 648 01:02:11,040 --> 01:02:15,760 program and then have shown here the three and a half percent rollback rate 649 01:02:15,760 --> 01:02:21,000 and this again doesn't have a lot is not impacted very much by this bond program 650 01:02:21,000 --> 01:02:24,520 itself other than some maintenance costs associated with any of the projects as 651 01:02:24,520 --> 01:02:28,600 they move forward but wanted to show this here for context but three and a 652 01:02:28,600 --> 01:02:32,200 half percent rollback rate is a new is new in the legislation that was just 653 01:02:32,200 --> 01:02:36,280 passed by the Texas Legislature this year it'll go into effect next fiscal 654 01:02:36,280 --> 01:02:42,640 year for us in our budget considerations for FY 2021 and what it says is we can't 655 01:02:42,640 --> 01:02:48,680 go over three and a half percent of our maintenance and operations rate that's 656 01:02:48,680 --> 01:02:53,480 actually that's paid by existing values so of the values that have assessed 657 01:02:53,480 --> 01:02:59,160 value right now if they're if their assessed values increase what is the tax 658 01:02:59,160 --> 01:03:03,960 rate next year that would be that would be needed to pay the same amount of taxes 659 01:03:03,960 --> 01:03:07,720 they're paying yes this year and that's how that's that's based on three and a 660 01:03:07,720 --> 01:03:11,320 percent over that I know that can be a little bit complicated so I can 661 01:03:11,320 --> 01:03:15,200 definitely answer any more questions on that piece but I think it doesn't have a 662 01:03:15,200 --> 01:03:19,040 direct impact on us here but it is an important consideration for us as a city 663 01:03:19,040 --> 01:03:23,240 as we move forward over the next year six years of this program and after that 664 01:03:23,240 --> 01:03:27,960 of how we pay for our ongoing operations and maintenance costs that are increasing 665 01:03:27,960 --> 01:03:41,240 but also deal with the three and a half percent rollback rate yeah I did not the 666 01:03:41,240 --> 01:03:45,680 currently it's eight percent or currently the the eight percent is the 667 01:03:45,680 --> 01:03:49,280 rollback rate and the Texas the legislature has now moved that back to 668 01:03:49,280 --> 01:03:52,880 three and a half percent and it's based just on the maintenance and operations 669 01:03:52,880 --> 01:03:58,200 rate it's what existing homes the value that would be amount of property taxes 670 01:03:58,200 --> 01:04:02,160 we get for maintenance and operations from existing homes this year what 671 01:04:02,160 --> 01:04:07,520 would the rate be next year to get that same value and that becomes essentially 672 01:04:07,520 --> 01:04:11,520 an effective tax rate and then we can't go three and a half percent over that 673 01:04:11,520 --> 01:04:20,440 that rate without going to the voters to get approval for that new rate this is 674 01:04:20,440 --> 01:04:24,600 essentially saying in this year based on projections we have now we could only 675 01:04:24,600 --> 01:04:31,240 increase the maintenance in operations rate 1.3 cents before we'd have to go we 676 01:04:31,240 --> 01:04:35,040 be over that three now I these are based on a lot of projections the first year 677 01:04:35,040 --> 01:04:37,960 we're doing this so that I think that number is probably between one and two 678 01:04:37,960 --> 01:04:44,480 cents in some range but it's there for consideration all right you want to look 679 01:04:44,480 --> 01:04:50,440 at the next scenario we had another question and it may be one you can't 680 01:04:50,440 --> 01:04:55,080 answer because it's a future question does the city anticipate having any more 681 01:04:55,080 --> 01:05:01,320 bonds going forward in the next few years so I think that comes back to the 682 01:05:01,320 --> 01:05:07,120 assumptions question if we're a five percent assessed value growth and we say 683 01:05:07,120 --> 01:05:11,360 we get five percent every year of this program I don't think it would be 684 01:05:11,360 --> 01:05:16,680 difficult to go back out and ask the voters to do another increase but if we 685 01:05:16,680 --> 01:05:19,760 have a percent and ten percent and there's there's room there within the 686 01:05:19,760 --> 01:05:22,520 debt service tax rate I think that's when the considerations would happen I 687 01:05:22,520 --> 01:05:26,120 think it's also a very safe assumption if we're gonna grow the way we're 688 01:05:26,120 --> 01:05:30,560 growing we're gonna have more bond packages in the future 689 01:05:31,320 --> 01:05:40,160 so David I have a question for clarification it sounded like in your 690 01:05:40,160 --> 01:05:44,480 procedural description of the three and a half rollback rate that that only 691 01:05:44,480 --> 01:05:48,520 applies to the M in a row rate the way I see this table the three and a half 692 01:05:48,520 --> 01:05:55,480 rollback difference really looks like the difference between the your total 693 01:05:55,480 --> 01:06:01,160 tax rate that we're planning on and the three and a half percent rollback rate 694 01:06:01,160 --> 01:06:05,280 that's computed over the entire yes is that correct you're right I was trying 695 01:06:05,280 --> 01:06:09,520 not to confuse everyone no it's okay I just I just want to clarify so really 696 01:06:09,520 --> 01:06:14,120 what that means is that this is sort of a benchmark target that we're trying to 697 01:06:14,120 --> 01:06:18,440 hit to stay below that three and a half percent rollback rate for the entire tax 698 01:06:18,440 --> 01:06:26,480 rate however legally what is required by the recent legislation is that the city 699 01:06:26,480 --> 01:06:33,640 must go to the voters if just the first column of the M&O rate right so when you 700 01:06:33,640 --> 01:06:38,160 collect the roll when you when you calculate the rollback rate you take the 701 01:06:38,160 --> 01:06:41,560 maintenance and operate the effective maintenance operations rate you three 702 01:06:41,560 --> 01:06:44,560 and a half percent above that right and then you add in what your debt service 703 01:06:44,560 --> 01:06:49,320 tax rate is so the actual rollback rate is the total it's just only impacted by 704 01:06:49,320 --> 01:06:52,480 the maintenance and operations okay so I did not confuse so the number that's 705 01:06:52,480 --> 01:06:59,680 presented is is the complete amount okay so is that column that says three and a 706 01:06:59,680 --> 01:07:02,400 half rollback difference is that computed the way that you just described 707 01:07:02,400 --> 01:07:07,040 correct okay thank you so I think we're going to go through a couple other 708 01:07:07,040 --> 01:07:14,280 scenarios here this is that this is assuming this is at 235 million which is 709 01:07:14,280 --> 01:07:19,440 the cap of what we could do and it would be a five cent tax rate increase if we 710 01:07:19,440 --> 01:07:24,360 did a smaller package at 210 which was the original number I think that's our 711 01:07:24,360 --> 01:07:27,880 next slide it is I do want to point out as we look at all these scenarios and 712 01:07:27,880 --> 01:07:31,920 this was one of the emphasis is from City Council as we went into the program 713 01:07:31,920 --> 01:07:36,040 was to not have a program that would exceed our total our current total tax 714 01:07:36,040 --> 01:07:39,600 rate and obviously the 235 is going to be our largest program that we look at 715 01:07:39,600 --> 01:07:43,520 and it it does not exceed the total tax rate that we current have currently have 716 01:07:43,520 --> 01:07:49,400 and none of the scenarios moving forward do it either understanding those are 717 01:07:49,400 --> 01:07:53,400 all with our operations maintenance rate at our effective tax rate which is a 718 01:07:53,400 --> 01:08:00,240 different discussion with council each year on the operation side the 210 719 01:08:00,240 --> 01:08:04,080 million dollar program which has been the somewhat of the benchmark as we that 720 01:08:04,080 --> 01:08:08,920 we've looked at throughout this process you can see again the debt service tax 721 01:08:08,920 --> 01:08:13,520 rate here all the other numbers as we talked about previously that service 722 01:08:13,520 --> 01:08:18,020 tax rate going up a little bit under under four cents so we would say the 723 01:08:18,020 --> 01:08:22,680 max tax rate that we could see in this program at 210 million dollars would be 724 01:08:22,680 --> 01:08:28,920 a four cent tax rate increase but you can see the total tax rate here remaining 725 01:08:28,920 --> 01:08:33,400 under our current tax rate throughout the life of the program and so four cents 726 01:08:33,400 --> 01:08:38,080 would fall in line with what previous bond packages had as as the high high 727 01:08:38,080 --> 01:08:49,000 total of potential taxing 2005 and 2012 and 2014 5 and 2014 4 in 2014 2005 and 2014 728 01:08:49,000 --> 01:09:02,280 they Queen is just asking about we'll be addressing some of the some of the 729 01:09:02,280 --> 01:09:08,040 specific projects later after we get to get through the some of these important 730 01:09:08,040 --> 01:09:17,080 discussions so the next scenario to that the committee asked for last week was a 731 01:09:17,080 --> 01:09:20,880 hundred eighty million dollar scenario and really these scenarios worked out 732 01:09:20,880 --> 01:09:26,000 fairly cleanly where it kind of went a cent per scenario 180 million dollar 733 01:09:26,000 --> 01:09:30,640 scenario was equated to a three percent increase at some point in the debt 734 01:09:30,640 --> 01:09:35,760 service tax in in the six-year program and again it just to emphasize even when 735 01:09:35,760 --> 01:09:39,800 we say six cents here you're not really experiencing that until 2023 2024 it's 736 01:09:39,800 --> 01:09:44,920 not every year you're gonna be over that amount and so one of our selling points 737 01:09:44,920 --> 01:09:51,600 here and what the council gave us was that there's there would be no impact on 738 01:09:51,600 --> 01:09:56,680 the effective tax rate for homeowners on whatever scenario we work with is that 739 01:09:56,680 --> 01:10:04,200 right on the 100 million dollar scenario the goal the goal was to keep the 740 01:10:04,200 --> 01:10:08,400 effective rate where it is which is basically where we are in total when you 741 01:10:08,400 --> 01:10:11,080 look at the kind of the way that the hundred million dollar scenario works 742 01:10:11,080 --> 01:10:17,440 out on the because the effective rate on the the total effective rate is just the 743 01:10:17,440 --> 01:10:21,000 tax rate that effective rate will increase as we increase the debt service 744 01:10:21,000 --> 01:10:25,320 tax rate but on the maintenance operation side we've kept that rate at 745 01:10:25,320 --> 01:10:35,920 the okay thank you so 180 million three cents increase and then the hundred 746 01:10:35,920 --> 01:10:39,440 million dollars has no tax rate increase on the debt service tax rate and actually 747 01:10:39,440 --> 01:10:43,880 as you get to the the final years of this we are of this program we actually 748 01:10:43,880 --> 01:10:48,400 our tax rate then goes on the debt service side below our current tax rate 749 01:10:48,400 --> 01:10:52,440 I I think it's important to talk about the hundred million dollar scenario 750 01:10:52,440 --> 01:10:57,200 because obviously when we spread a hundred million dollars out for six 751 01:10:57,200 --> 01:11:02,000 years that's true we wanted apples to apples comparisons if we wanted to go 752 01:11:02,000 --> 01:11:05,760 forward with a hundred million dollars in program we would really need to step 753 01:11:05,760 --> 01:11:09,880 back and have a different discussion because to do the police station to the 754 01:11:09,880 --> 01:11:13,220 renovation the substation and some of these street projects where we need a 755 01:11:13,220 --> 01:11:17,440 lot of dollar dollars up front that may become a four-year program that does 756 01:11:17,440 --> 01:11:21,600 have a debt service tax rate increase so we've shown this here and obviously we 757 01:11:21,600 --> 01:11:25,880 could you know we would take a detailed look at how we would issue a hundred 758 01:11:25,880 --> 01:11:30,920 million dollars but it would not be the same way that we would issue the other 759 01:11:30,920 --> 01:11:38,600 scenarios okay we showed this chart previously just showing that gap between 760 01:11:38,600 --> 01:11:44,160 the max tax rate and our history on the debt service tax rate side and that's 761 01:11:44,160 --> 01:11:47,440 the chart that shows that we did four cents previous right so we have the four 762 01:11:47,440 --> 01:11:52,040 cents there in 2005 and the gap between that and in 2014 we had the four cent 763 01:11:52,040 --> 01:11:55,800 max that's that service tax rate increase and we stayed below that through 764 01:11:55,800 --> 01:12:04,680 the life of that program so over these not these next few slides of show some 765 01:12:04,680 --> 01:12:10,120 of the same information but just show the impact to our debt service tax rate 766 01:12:10,120 --> 01:12:14,880 our debt service payments for each year of the different scenarios this came up 767 01:12:14,880 --> 01:12:19,160 last week as we talked about the number of our total debt our total debt 768 01:12:19,160 --> 01:12:23,520 outstanding versus what the debt we would issue would be and how all that 769 01:12:23,520 --> 01:12:27,560 debt doesn't hit us at once that we have debt falling off as new debt arises so 770 01:12:27,560 --> 01:12:31,640 our debt service payments are that obviously the payments we make each year 771 01:12:31,640 --> 01:12:37,280 on our general government debt so this year about 25 million dollars in debt 772 01:12:37,280 --> 01:12:40,440 service payments in general government and you can see if we were not to issue 773 01:12:40,440 --> 01:12:46,560 anything going forward how it would drop off over the next 20 years and just 774 01:12:46,560 --> 01:12:50,720 similar to a home payment where you have your interest out front and then you're 775 01:12:50,720 --> 01:12:55,560 paying more principal later in the program so there are quite a few lines 776 01:12:55,560 --> 01:13:00,700 here but I think there I can explain them fairly easily to everyone the red 777 01:13:00,700 --> 01:13:03,720 line is all right what we just saw that's essentially our existing debt 778 01:13:03,720 --> 01:13:09,400 service over the 20 years and you can see how it falls off the greed that the 779 01:13:09,400 --> 01:13:17,000 blue line is that we just issued debt this this week with City Council to for 780 01:13:17,000 --> 01:13:21,680 some certificates of obligation and for our 2014 bond program so you can see 781 01:13:21,680 --> 01:13:27,200 that already increases that red line to our starting point the green air the 782 01:13:27,200 --> 01:13:32,160 green line is the deditions I mentioned earlier the 2014 the fourteen point six 783 01:13:32,160 --> 01:13:37,360 million dollars will be issuing and then the orange yellow line is are the 784 01:13:37,360 --> 01:13:40,840 certificates of obligations I mentioned that will be issuing each of those years 785 01:13:40,840 --> 01:13:46,080 for facility maintenance and and the vehicle replacement so essentially this 786 01:13:46,080 --> 01:13:51,200 this yellow line becomes if we were to do not do a program at all and not do a 787 01:13:51,200 --> 01:13:56,840 program any bond program over the life of you know the next 20-25 years what 788 01:13:56,840 --> 01:14:01,160 would the impact be so if we were to do no bond programs for 25 years here's how 789 01:14:01,160 --> 01:14:07,400 the debt service rate would decrease with the 235 million dollar number you 790 01:14:07,400 --> 01:14:10,520 235 billion dollar program you can see how that debt service tax rate does 791 01:14:10,520 --> 01:14:14,320 increase as we start as we issue those bonds and then starts decreasing as 792 01:14:14,320 --> 01:14:19,720 we're just paying those those bonds off but to kind of tie it back to the 793 01:14:19,720 --> 01:14:24,040 earlier conversations in this scenario essentially what we're saying is the 794 01:14:24,040 --> 01:14:31,860 additional five cents max could pay for the difference between this blue line 795 01:14:31,860 --> 01:14:38,400 and the purple line so that the tax rate increase does also pay for some of the 796 01:14:38,400 --> 01:14:42,440 other debt will be issuing in future years and can you remind the committee 797 01:14:42,440 --> 01:14:47,240 what the current total debt that the city has it's supported by property tax 798 01:14:47,240 --> 01:14:52,280 sure I mean I'll pull it up to be exact about 260 million dollars but I have it 799 01:14:52,280 --> 01:15:00,440 on this other presentation so 260 million dollars is our current outstanding debt 800 01:15:00,440 --> 01:15:04,600 and so this would be if we did a 210 million dollar program we showed last 801 01:15:04,600 --> 01:15:09,240 last week if you with the interest on that over the life of the debt we were 802 01:15:09,240 --> 01:15:13,480 anticipating that would be about a 316 million dollar program so when you look 803 01:15:13,480 --> 01:15:17,400 at those numbers side-by-side it looks like we're doubling our debt but because 804 01:15:17,400 --> 01:15:21,360 as we showed the debt service is falling off on that existing debt and then is 805 01:15:21,360 --> 01:15:25,520 getting to plan and obviously going above our current debt service amount but 806 01:15:25,520 --> 01:15:30,480 that's how that interplay works and I think you said last week about 98 807 01:15:30,480 --> 01:15:35,580 million would be retired over the life of this this current bond proposal yeah 808 01:15:35,580 --> 01:15:38,680 over the six years of the bond program about 98 million of our current debt 809 01:15:38,680 --> 01:15:41,720 would be retired 810 01:15:49,240 --> 01:15:53,440 so the remaining slides just kind of emphasize the point on the debt service 811 01:15:53,440 --> 01:15:57,880 tax rate as we have each scenario you can see that the jump there isn't quite 812 01:15:57,880 --> 01:16:03,280 as much as we as we come down but a similar story and for the 180 and I 813 01:16:03,280 --> 01:16:07,040 think it's I think just to point out even with this hundred million dollar 814 01:16:07,040 --> 01:16:11,920 hundred million dollar program which we've looked at for comparison and we're 815 01:16:11,920 --> 01:16:15,160 saying that would have no debt service tax or an increase and in fact a 816 01:16:15,160 --> 01:16:21,240 decrease in latter years you still have it going up but what this increase in 817 01:16:21,240 --> 01:16:25,040 assessed value that we're going to experience the debt service rate needed 818 01:16:25,040 --> 01:16:34,280 to pay off is doesn't increase any questions on any of that 819 01:16:40,840 --> 01:16:45,640 yeah so each so you can see it kind of as it goes up each year it's in 2020 820 01:16:45,640 --> 01:16:50,560 we're issuing issuing our first round of issuance for bonds for the for the 821 01:16:50,560 --> 01:16:55,280 program in 2021 we're issuing our next round and then all the way up to 2025 26 822 01:16:55,280 --> 01:16:59,160 where we've issued the all of our bonds for the program and then it starts 823 01:16:59,160 --> 01:17:02,560 decreasing because we're simply just paying the debt service down at that 824 01:17:02,560 --> 01:17:11,720 point so keep this all in mind as we move here shortly to what what the 825 01:17:11,720 --> 01:17:16,640 prioritization list is and where that running total is because that will be 826 01:17:16,640 --> 01:17:21,360 part of what we ultimately are going to take up here in just a little bit David 827 01:17:21,360 --> 01:17:27,960 you want to continue I I'll go through these slides but obviously Todd essence 828 01:17:27,960 --> 01:17:35,400 here as we go through it we wanted to touch on the street rehab program and 829 01:17:35,400 --> 01:17:38,840 the neighborhood streets and just make sure obviously this is a discussion 830 01:17:38,840 --> 01:17:43,100 we've had previously but just to make sure everyone understands how what the 831 01:17:43,100 --> 01:17:47,680 plan right now is just to spend that 70 million dollars and how it breaks down 832 01:17:47,680 --> 01:17:54,640 for district and in different areas of the city so our neighbor the neighbor 833 01:17:54,640 --> 01:17:58,920 one of the one of the opportunity the plans that we had as we move for look in 834 01:17:58,920 --> 01:18:02,880 our street rehab program was to focus on neighborhood streets like neighborhood 835 01:18:02,880 --> 01:18:07,640 street neighborhoods throughout the community and have that be the basis 836 01:18:07,640 --> 01:18:13,080 that we that we that we that we did our street rehab program this year as we had 837 01:18:13,080 --> 01:18:17,000 conversations with the committee and considered other alternatives we 838 01:18:17,000 --> 01:18:19,840 ultimately decided to do the hybrid approach where we said we're going to 839 01:18:19,840 --> 01:18:24,560 focus on these neighborhoods that we gain efficiencies on by having the roads 840 01:18:24,560 --> 01:18:27,760 near each other having those connector streets able to do water or wastewater 841 01:18:27,760 --> 01:18:32,320 improvements along with the street improvements along with the next slide 842 01:18:32,320 --> 01:18:35,880 which will show the focus with the other half of the street rehab dollars on 843 01:18:35,880 --> 01:18:43,400 those low OCI those the streets in the in the city with the lowest quality so 844 01:18:43,400 --> 01:18:47,480 I'll just touch on the financials here quickly and then turn it over to Todd on 845 01:18:47,480 --> 01:18:50,840 the neighborhoods on the neighborhood streets you can see with the 846 01:18:50,840 --> 01:18:55,040 recommendation right now street the neighborhoods one three and four are 847 01:18:55,040 --> 01:19:01,160 included in the 70 million dollars and I'll turn over to Todd to kind of go through those neighborhoods 848 01:19:01,160 --> 01:19:11,520 Todd Estes City Engineer we've been through this just briefly but hopefully 849 01:19:11,520 --> 01:19:15,080 just a little bit more detail and what the city staff has been working through 850 01:19:15,080 --> 01:19:19,840 as we try to prioritize what goes into these neighborhoods this neighborhood 851 01:19:19,840 --> 01:19:23,800 program as we would call it so we're looking at several different neighborhoods 852 01:19:23,800 --> 01:19:27,440 in the area there's no again no prioritization assigned to these numbers 853 01:19:27,440 --> 01:19:30,480 that was just when we numbered it we started at the top and we numbered going 854 01:19:30,480 --> 01:19:34,840 down to the bottom it was one two three four five six seven that circle back up 855 01:19:34,840 --> 01:19:38,720 to the middle there's no rhyme or reason to the numbers but we are going to roll 856 01:19:38,720 --> 01:19:42,520 through just what these neighborhoods look like that we're proposing as the 857 01:19:42,520 --> 01:19:45,960 top three neighborhoods that be included in this and and they do as we've talked 858 01:19:45,960 --> 01:19:51,480 about before realize the actual lowest average OCI throughout those 859 01:19:51,480 --> 01:19:56,520 neighborhoods of all those seven that we had considered these were the seven 860 01:19:56,520 --> 01:20:00,480 worst as a neighborhood considered average OCI so the top three are the 861 01:20:00,480 --> 01:20:05,440 ones that we were nominating to go forward in this program so as we look 862 01:20:05,440 --> 01:20:08,760 into these streets and these neighborhoods so neighborhood four was 863 01:20:08,760 --> 01:20:12,880 actually our lowest average OCI that is the southeast Denton there in 864 01:20:12,880 --> 01:20:17,080 neighborhood area so if you look at that area we talked about last week that's 865 01:20:17,080 --> 01:20:20,960 about twelve point eight lane miles of roadway that would be totally 866 01:20:20,960 --> 01:20:27,360 reconstructed combined with that would be water wastewater improvements a lot 867 01:20:27,360 --> 01:20:31,520 of aging infrastructure that needs to be improved all at the same time plus 868 01:20:31,520 --> 01:20:36,240 there's another seven to thirteen lane miles of maintenance that needs to be 869 01:20:36,240 --> 01:20:42,480 done with those roadways that are not in that 45 OCI and under they're over that 870 01:20:42,480 --> 01:20:46,880 45 benchmark so that's still in the area where we would be doing maintenance I 871 01:20:46,880 --> 01:20:49,840 don't care where you're on the city we'd be doing maintenance of different scales 872 01:20:49,840 --> 01:20:57,360 different amounts over time to prolong their life the next neighborhood this 873 01:20:57,360 --> 01:21:01,400 neighborhood once upon the north side of town through previous bond packages this 874 01:21:01,400 --> 01:21:05,240 is one of those neighborhoods that really fell into that shotgun approach 875 01:21:05,240 --> 01:21:09,680 we talked about in the past where we took the absolute lowest OCI we tackled 876 01:21:09,680 --> 01:21:15,200 those in the bond program and then in an effort to try to stem some of the 877 01:21:15,200 --> 01:21:19,240 frustration that the neighbors felt in those areas we came in with O&M money 878 01:21:19,240 --> 01:21:23,480 and tried to tie those segments together so there were roadway pieces in that 879 01:21:23,480 --> 01:21:27,280 neighborhood that were left out this closes the gap on that neighborhood so 880 01:21:27,280 --> 01:21:31,760 that we're not coming back in the next 20 25 years working on roadways that we 881 01:21:31,760 --> 01:21:35,400 did 30 years ago and then five years after that coming back and doing the 882 01:21:35,400 --> 01:21:39,720 roads we could have done again so this closes that neighborhood that neighborhood 883 01:21:39,720 --> 01:21:46,240 still on average has the lowest overall OCI up from the southeast Denton 884 01:21:46,240 --> 01:21:50,280 neighborhood area so this would be the same and that we would be tackling all 885 01:21:50,280 --> 01:21:54,160 of those infrastructure needs at one time the water wastewater drainage and 886 01:21:54,160 --> 01:22:02,240 streets at the same time and then the next is neighborhood three that's really 887 01:22:02,240 --> 01:22:08,120 over South University Drive more in that area around Denton High School just 888 01:22:08,120 --> 01:22:13,040 north of North Texas north of the Hickory and Oak area this area still has 889 01:22:13,040 --> 01:22:19,120 quite a few holes left in it from an overall OCI plus a lot of aging water 890 01:22:19,120 --> 01:22:22,680 wastewater infrastructure that just needs to be addressed so that was where 891 01:22:22,680 --> 01:22:30,360 number three came on staff's list as the top three projects those three round 892 01:22:30,360 --> 01:22:36,440 out to about 39 million dollars combined when it just in roadway improvements 893 01:22:36,440 --> 01:22:39,160 when you add in the water wastewater improvements it almost doubles that 894 01:22:39,160 --> 01:22:44,200 number it's a nearly 70 to 80 million dollars worth of investment in those 895 01:22:44,200 --> 01:22:48,840 neighborhoods that does not include the O&M costs that would also be associated 896 01:22:48,840 --> 01:22:55,680 over time for those roadways that don't fall into this category of needing to be 897 01:22:55,680 --> 01:23:03,160 totally reconstruction 45 or less so then the remainder of those roads were 898 01:23:03,160 --> 01:23:08,680 what we've looked at how do we get to a 70 million dollar somebody had mentioned 899 01:23:08,680 --> 01:23:12,240 as we got some savings out of Ryan Road somebody on this committee asked what if 900 01:23:12,240 --> 01:23:15,960 we took to get up 70 million dollars so that we can round out that number to 210 901 01:23:15,960 --> 01:23:20,080 again or some other things have happened for that numbers being considered to be 902 01:23:20,080 --> 01:23:25,240 larger so at 70 million dollars the cutoff point for if we kind of do this 903 01:23:25,240 --> 01:23:29,520 hybrid approach of we we tackle three neighborhoods that are in need 904 01:23:29,520 --> 01:23:35,120 holistically and then address all of the worst roadways left we could get up to 905 01:23:35,120 --> 01:23:40,160 about those roadways that are at 20 OCI and less so they're really on the lower 906 01:23:40,160 --> 01:23:44,960 end spectrum of the OCI scale again that OCI goes from 100 being the best zero 907 01:23:44,960 --> 01:23:49,480 being the worst 20 really becoming a safety problem as well as a maintenance 908 01:23:49,480 --> 01:23:54,960 problem for us just consistently going out and doing things when you add those 909 01:23:54,960 --> 01:23:59,760 elements back in that brings back up brings the total amount to roughly 70 910 01:23:59,760 --> 01:24:05,560 million dollars it's 69.8 so round it a little bit as engineers we love to get 911 01:24:05,560 --> 01:24:10,360 into significant figures and that's where we ended up at 69.8 but it's 70 912 01:24:10,360 --> 01:24:13,320 I can take into account some other things you can get there so this map 913 01:24:13,320 --> 01:24:19,000 shows one of the questions we had what does what does the 70 million dollars do 914 01:24:19,000 --> 01:24:23,840 from a council district perspective how many of those roadways how many lane 915 01:24:23,840 --> 01:24:28,160 miles how much money is going to each district so what this chart really shows 916 01:24:28,160 --> 01:24:33,040 you is that and I don't know why the average OCI is popping up here that was 917 01:24:33,040 --> 01:24:39,480 left over that has nothing to do with this up here my apologies for that these 918 01:24:39,480 --> 01:24:43,460 when you look at this we were broken into two groups so you've got the 919 01:24:43,460 --> 01:24:49,880 neighborhoods which are these lines in blue so they still contribute to how 920 01:24:49,880 --> 01:24:54,240 much money of that 70 million we would be putting into that into this bond 921 01:24:54,240 --> 01:24:59,000 package so we group them by district so if you see an N next to the number 922 01:24:59,000 --> 01:25:03,120 district one N is that neighborhood so that's that southeast Denton 923 01:25:03,120 --> 01:25:08,120 neighborhood for district one looking at roughly 11 million dollars in roadway 924 01:25:08,120 --> 01:25:14,120 cost of that 70 million and then there's another 6.3 miles lane miles of work to 925 01:25:14,120 --> 01:25:19,160 be done in the 20 and under OCI category that doesn't lie just within that 926 01:25:19,160 --> 01:25:24,080 neighborhood so that brings it total investment in that area to roughly 17 927 01:25:24,080 --> 01:25:28,620 million dollars so that's really how you read this chart the total comes up to 928 01:25:28,620 --> 01:25:33,160 70 million dollars but anytime you see that in it's that neighborhood and of 929 01:25:33,160 --> 01:25:37,640 course see in district for we're not proposing a neighborhood at this time to 930 01:25:37,640 --> 01:25:43,360 go into this program by and large most of those streets will be handled by the 931 01:25:43,360 --> 01:25:47,860 current ongoing maintenance program that we have and then at a later date there 932 01:25:47,860 --> 01:25:53,120 will be roadways that fall under a future bond package then you've also got 933 01:25:53,120 --> 01:25:59,080 3.9 million in low OCI roadways in district for so any questions about what 934 01:25:59,080 --> 01:26:03,840 this charts show and this map 935 01:26:03,840 --> 01:26:12,560 does this include streets that have OCI of 20 or less that will be reconstructed already with previous bond funding no it's 936 01:26:12,560 --> 01:26:20,920 correct and does this include streets of 20 or less that will be funded in this 937 01:26:20,920 --> 01:26:24,080 bond program but don't fit within one of those one two three or four 938 01:26:24,080 --> 01:26:28,400 neighborhoods yes that's why the separation between those two lines so 939 01:26:28,400 --> 01:26:33,600 there are streets that fall 20 unless 25 unless they're in that neighborhood so 940 01:26:33,600 --> 01:26:38,300 the two categories are separate from each other so yeah so I'm speaking like 941 01:26:38,300 --> 01:26:42,480 for instance if I just look at the map there's one street just south of Windsor 942 01:26:42,480 --> 01:26:49,040 on the west side of town next to I-35 way west oh back over here yes that's 943 01:26:49,040 --> 01:26:53,120 not in any one of the four neighborhoods that you've identified right now you can 944 01:26:53,120 --> 01:26:57,560 see the neighborhoods we've identified yeah they are the blue lines so here's 945 01:26:57,560 --> 01:27:01,800 this is number four neighborhood four this is neighborhood three and this is 946 01:27:01,800 --> 01:27:05,760 neighborhood one those are those blue lines okay so these kind of purpley pink 947 01:27:05,760 --> 01:27:10,800 lines those are all the other streets that are under a 20 OCI yes everywhere 948 01:27:10,800 --> 01:27:14,720 else in the city understood and are those pink lines it elsewhere in the 949 01:27:14,720 --> 01:27:18,800 city are those included in this table that's that's what this second line is 950 01:27:18,800 --> 01:27:24,360 right here those are all the OCI is these pink lines okay those are the low 951 01:27:24,360 --> 01:27:30,680 OCI streets 20 and under that are within district 1 and then here the same thing 952 01:27:30,680 --> 01:27:36,920 for district 2 okay I'll have to go back to a previous presentation because I in 953 01:27:36,920 --> 01:27:40,560 my notes I had that it was about a hundred and one or a hundred and two lane 954 01:27:40,560 --> 01:27:49,800 miles for the total reconstruction program I know there are segments 102 955 01:27:49,800 --> 01:27:55,320 segments maybe confusing segments and lane miles okay thank you very much 956 01:27:55,320 --> 01:28:01,160 what's the one what's one in where's that where are we handling so district one 957 01:28:01,160 --> 01:28:05,240 is here okay so one in is the neighborhood we're proposing as far as 958 01:28:05,240 --> 01:28:08,720 back in so that's that southeast end in the neighborhood that's all these lines 959 01:28:08,720 --> 01:28:13,600 in blue and then there are other roads within district one that are also under 960 01:28:13,600 --> 01:28:19,080 20 OCI and they are these pinkish purple lines within district one that's what 961 01:28:19,080 --> 01:28:21,920 the second line shows 962 01:28:21,920 --> 01:28:34,800 other questions or let's move on to the next slide so just reiterating how we 963 01:28:34,800 --> 01:28:38,960 kind of arrived at this program it really is a hybrid of what we've done in 964 01:28:38,960 --> 01:28:42,200 the past where we would like to go is more the neighborhood approach so we 965 01:28:42,200 --> 01:28:46,160 really impact a neighborhood one time and then not have to come back other 966 01:28:46,160 --> 01:28:50,760 than minor maintenance for a good 30 to 40 years longer if we get that lifespan 967 01:28:50,760 --> 01:28:54,320 how that roadway through the robust maintenance program that we have right 968 01:28:54,320 --> 01:28:58,520 now so that would be the goal but recognizing we still have a lot of 969 01:28:58,520 --> 01:29:03,040 streets that need that attention that are leftover from a lot of inattention 970 01:29:03,040 --> 01:29:08,960 over years we're combining that with the old shotgun approach which has been the 971 01:29:08,960 --> 01:29:13,760 the preferred preferred model from the previous bond packages so we're marrying 972 01:29:13,760 --> 01:29:16,560 the two together 973 01:29:16,560 --> 01:29:31,560 do we have so the neighborhood approach takes OCI 40 below do we have a map that 974 01:29:31,560 --> 01:29:37,960 shows every 40 below street in the city yeah we actually have every street 975 01:29:37,960 --> 01:29:42,240 within the city and it's current OCI mapped and then we'll be double 976 01:29:42,240 --> 01:29:48,600 checking that degradation model surveyed in 2015 we'll be doing that again this 977 01:29:48,600 --> 01:29:52,760 fall so that we can check our models to make sure they're accurate and what 978 01:29:52,760 --> 01:29:58,480 they're predicting is that I'm sure it's probably not available tonight but I 979 01:29:58,480 --> 01:30:09,400 would be curious to see that just just to see I like the neighborhood approach 980 01:30:09,400 --> 01:30:22,360 David will do the technical okay we do have that mapping and we did show it at 981 01:30:22,360 --> 01:30:26,800 a previous presentation where it showed all the streets within the city and we 982 01:30:26,800 --> 01:30:31,720 can break it down all the way down to a one-point difference it's hard to read 983 01:30:31,720 --> 01:30:35,480 the map what we had broken down was arranged very much like this where it's 984 01:30:35,480 --> 01:30:39,280 color-coded we can see all the streets that we we know of throughout the city 985 01:30:39,280 --> 01:30:43,480 of it now this does not include new developments that have been placed since 986 01:30:43,480 --> 01:30:47,000 2015 that's what the new survey will also capture is all those new 987 01:30:47,000 --> 01:30:52,840 developments as well right any any guess if we did the neighborhood approach and 988 01:30:52,840 --> 01:31:03,080 instead of 20 OCI we took it to 30 OCI I guess yes it's hard to get an idea of 989 01:31:03,080 --> 01:31:09,520 how bad an OCI 20 Street is so if you go to a third and agree I mean once you 990 01:31:09,520 --> 01:31:17,240 start getting below 40 it's difficult it's varying degrees of bad so a street 991 01:31:17,240 --> 01:31:21,860 that falls into a 20 OCI may have a variety of issues with it one what we 992 01:31:21,860 --> 01:31:26,240 would call base failure but you would see it as several segments of the road 993 01:31:26,240 --> 01:31:30,400 really dropping beyond another segment of road we might see some heave where 994 01:31:30,400 --> 01:31:33,800 one piece of the road elevates over the others you see a lot of large potholes 995 01:31:33,800 --> 01:31:38,040 you'd see a lot of what we would call alligator cracking it looks just like an 996 01:31:38,040 --> 01:31:43,480 alligator scales across the pavement as those get wider water infiltrates into 997 01:31:43,480 --> 01:31:47,320 them then you start running into issues or whether roadway tires on the roadways 998 01:31:47,320 --> 01:31:51,320 start pulling them up as they hit them if we go through any kind of freeze 999 01:31:51,320 --> 01:31:56,480 thaw cycle the once or twice in a year we get here if there's water in those 1000 01:31:56,480 --> 01:32:00,720 points they also get in there water expands pulls that stuff up and then you 1001 01:32:00,720 --> 01:32:04,800 get your next pothole so they may also be base failures there's a there's a 1002 01:32:04,800 --> 01:32:10,480 whole host of things that could happen once you get below that 30 OCI but it 1003 01:32:10,480 --> 01:32:15,520 from a number standpoint our estimate has been about 95 million just to 1004 01:32:15,520 --> 01:32:23,200 address 30 and less that doesn't include the neighborhood right right okay so if 1005 01:32:23,200 --> 01:32:29,440 I'm reading this correctly so zero to 20 is 35 so the neighborhood approach is 1006 01:32:29,440 --> 01:32:33,720 about 35 and we've refined that since since why these numbers are just a 1007 01:32:33,720 --> 01:32:37,080 little bit different now we continue to refine that number it's actually just a 1008 01:32:37,080 --> 01:32:44,400 little over so if we wanted to raise the standard to zero to 25 plus the 1009 01:32:44,400 --> 01:32:49,580 neighborhood it'd be another 25 million dollars yes okay that's that's where I 1010 01:32:49,580 --> 01:32:57,120 was trying okay I have a question about the roads and everything because this 1011 01:32:57,120 --> 01:33:01,880 afternoon actually this morning as I came back into my house there was a 1012 01:33:01,880 --> 01:33:07,320 water main break underneath the road on Locust anybody trying to go north on 1013 01:33:07,320 --> 01:33:14,160 Locust yeah sorry but so when you're looking at the OCI you're looking at the 1014 01:33:14,160 --> 01:33:18,840 top layer obviously yes and then the banks and are you looking at the water 1015 01:33:18,840 --> 01:33:23,960 mains underneath it and the age of those water mains so we were it doesn't fall 1016 01:33:23,960 --> 01:33:28,940 into the OCI because that strictly is a pavement assessment but the water 1017 01:33:28,940 --> 01:33:33,400 department the wastewater department has a similar so categories that they line 1018 01:33:33,400 --> 01:33:36,360 up all that grade all their infrastructure similarly and then we 1019 01:33:36,360 --> 01:33:41,040 work with them Danny is it quarterly monthly that y'all are talking about 1020 01:33:41,040 --> 01:33:47,120 your next 30 60 90 and then five-year outlook monthly they're working closely 1021 01:33:47,120 --> 01:33:54,520 together to make sure that water with it being under pressure when a pipe gets to 1022 01:33:54,520 --> 01:33:59,160 be 20 30 years old or there could be other things coming online if just a lot 1023 01:33:59,160 --> 01:34:04,880 of different things that could happen in the 1940s right yeah because that I mean 1024 01:34:04,880 --> 01:34:09,480 that affects those three neighborhoods too that we've looked at that's one of 1025 01:34:09,480 --> 01:34:14,880 many reasons why some of those roads are so bad is the underlying and that's 1026 01:34:14,880 --> 01:34:18,600 exactly why we want to go to this more holistic neighborhood approach is we 1027 01:34:18,600 --> 01:34:23,220 want to replace everything in that roadway so that it's not that problem 1028 01:34:23,220 --> 01:34:25,840 going forward 1029 01:34:39,480 --> 01:34:49,760 there is I mean from one standpoint we can actually contract a lot of this 1030 01:34:49,760 --> 01:34:54,840 work out to a general contractor and he handles we get a lot of economies of 1031 01:34:54,840 --> 01:34:59,520 scale so we can get the price points better we can get the work done faster 1032 01:34:59,520 --> 01:35:04,040 because the general contractor is in control of all of those facets the water 1033 01:35:04,040 --> 01:35:08,640 the wastewater the drainage the roadway he can schedule it it's his task to be 1034 01:35:08,640 --> 01:35:14,280 done city crews what typically happens for our crews is we get called from one 1035 01:35:14,280 --> 01:35:17,680 construction site to an emergency and then another emergency and then we 1036 01:35:17,680 --> 01:35:21,360 disappear from a construction site not because we don't want to be there but 1037 01:35:21,360 --> 01:35:25,120 because there's another emergency like a water main break on locust that we've 1038 01:35:25,120 --> 01:35:29,200 got to go and what people don't realize is as soon as the water department goes 1039 01:35:29,200 --> 01:35:33,680 then following right behind them is the street department is they've got to come 1040 01:35:33,680 --> 01:35:37,680 in they've got to fix that roadway piece now that had to be torn up just to get 1041 01:35:37,680 --> 01:35:43,240 to the waterline so you get better economies of scale just from a price 1042 01:35:43,240 --> 01:35:47,360 point and then how quickly we can get the work done because we're not so 1043 01:35:47,360 --> 01:35:51,160 distracted and distractions not because we're not focused on the work it's just 1044 01:35:51,160 --> 01:35:56,280 there's so much work to be done and very few crew members to actually go do the 1045 01:35:56,280 --> 01:36:01,360 work internally it's a better use of staff time and resources as well as 1046 01:36:01,360 --> 01:36:04,640 taxpayer dollars to let them do what they're really good at we can put them 1047 01:36:04,640 --> 01:36:07,960 where the emergency and the high priority is but not keep them focused for 1048 01:36:07,960 --> 01:36:14,520 months on end right there if I could suggest let's let's try to finish this 1049 01:36:14,520 --> 01:36:19,560 part of the presentation and then we'll be taking we'll take a short break but 1050 01:36:19,560 --> 01:36:24,500 let's get through the rest of the of the initial presentation and when we come 1051 01:36:24,500 --> 01:36:28,960 back we'll be moving into the prioritization list 1052 01:36:34,640 --> 01:36:46,040 okay so any more questions on the neighborhood streets okay so the next 1053 01:36:46,040 --> 01:36:51,200 next item that we took as a task this last week was give you an idea of what 1054 01:36:51,200 --> 01:36:56,320 does say a 10 million dollar Ryan Road look like versus a 25 million dollar 1055 01:36:56,320 --> 01:37:11,120 Ryan Road look like so really the difference between those two spectrums 1056 01:37:11,120 --> 01:37:17,760 was how much do we want to invest today into Ryan Road our current area study 1057 01:37:17,760 --> 01:37:24,200 for that area shows that the demand for Ryan while still the roadway needs to be 1058 01:37:24,200 --> 01:37:28,020 improved it doesn't need to be improved to a four lane divided roadway which 1059 01:37:28,020 --> 01:37:33,280 also helps us on some of the cost it shows that long term up to 2040 our 1060 01:37:33,280 --> 01:37:37,080 current projections are you really don't need more than a three lane roadway and 1061 01:37:37,080 --> 01:37:40,520 that's to help with the vast majority of these neighborhoods that are come have 1062 01:37:40,520 --> 01:37:44,960 come in over time where the roadways don't line up as intersections which 1063 01:37:44,960 --> 01:37:49,240 allows us to put in a four lane divided roadway or a two lane divided if you 1064 01:37:49,240 --> 01:37:53,240 ever had a chance to need one where I can put in a left turn bay and get 1065 01:37:53,240 --> 01:37:58,580 people off the travel lane to make their left turn when you have so many left 1066 01:37:58,580 --> 01:38:02,840 turns all the way throughout a corridor then the best thing to do is to put in 1067 01:38:02,840 --> 01:38:06,680 that middle lane to where you can allow people to get out of the travel lanes 1068 01:38:06,680 --> 01:38:10,920 and get in the middle you see the similar effect when you build a four 1069 01:38:10,920 --> 01:38:16,280 lane roadway with no median a four lane roadway works almost exactly like a 1070 01:38:16,280 --> 01:38:20,560 three lane roadway because what happens is as you develop you get the same thing 1071 01:38:20,560 --> 01:38:24,520 the inside lanes become left turn lanes that's where people sit and wait to turn 1072 01:38:24,520 --> 01:38:29,760 and now you've only got the outside lanes left so where we've pushed is as 1073 01:38:29,760 --> 01:38:35,960 we start looking at more of a truly contact sensitive roadway where I'm gonna 1074 01:38:35,960 --> 01:38:40,440 put in all modes of transportation is how much roadway do I really need for a 1075 01:38:40,440 --> 01:38:44,920 vehicle for the motorist and how much room do I could I also use not to build 1076 01:38:44,920 --> 01:38:48,880 a very big road and a lot of expense going into the road but also put in 1077 01:38:48,880 --> 01:38:52,420 pedestrian infrastructure bicycle infrastructure take care of the 1078 01:38:52,420 --> 01:38:57,880 drainage issues and floodplain issues that exist so one option would be if we 1079 01:38:57,880 --> 01:39:03,080 went with the ten million dollar option would be that we would go to the state 1080 01:39:03,080 --> 01:39:06,880 for the intersection improvements on both ends of Ryan so they they have a 1081 01:39:06,880 --> 01:39:12,700 policy of within 600 feet of an intersection that the state engages in 1082 01:39:12,700 --> 01:39:17,880 intersection improvements so that is an a hurdle that we are working with the 1083 01:39:17,880 --> 01:39:23,360 state on just to get that piece done as they work 2181 and 1830 they have 1084 01:39:23,360 --> 01:39:27,220 dollars for both we know that exactly for 2181 because everybody's seen the 1085 01:39:27,220 --> 01:39:32,440 cone still sitting out there and then 1830 they are we're working with them 1086 01:39:32,440 --> 01:39:36,960 currently on what is 1830 look like as they have dollars coming to the table 1087 01:39:36,960 --> 01:39:42,560 over the next two years to spend on that roadway so those two projects and where 1088 01:39:42,560 --> 01:39:47,320 we're pulling about six million dollars off of the overall budget whether you're 1089 01:39:47,320 --> 01:39:50,960 doing the 10 million or 25 million dollar option that's intersection 1090 01:39:50,960 --> 01:39:57,280 improvements purely so the remainder is how far would you like to go to put some 1091 01:39:57,280 --> 01:40:01,040 improvement into Ryan Road so that 4 million would allow us to basically 1092 01:40:01,040 --> 01:40:06,240 construct three lanes but really not a whole lot else out there so we could put 1093 01:40:06,240 --> 01:40:12,280 the three-lane roadway in but the other amenities the side paths bicycle paths 1094 01:40:12,280 --> 01:40:17,040 walking paths a lot of the street lights and you'll see that on the next slide 1095 01:40:17,040 --> 01:40:23,200 you know street lights the street trees kind of give it a much more accessible 1096 01:40:23,200 --> 01:40:29,320 feel a more aesthetic feel that scenario would be more of the 20 million or the 1097 01:40:29,320 --> 01:40:32,920 19 million dollar investment on our side because it does address a lot of other 1098 01:40:32,920 --> 01:40:37,760 issues one of the other driving factors here is your drainage of improvements 1099 01:40:37,760 --> 01:40:42,040 you really I know this graphic shows curb and gutter on both sides it would 1100 01:40:42,040 --> 01:40:47,320 not be curb and gutter is one of the largest pieces from a cost perspective 1101 01:40:47,320 --> 01:40:51,760 in any one of these roadway projects is drainage and if I'm only having to focus 1102 01:40:51,760 --> 01:40:55,860 on the low spots on the road improve that culvert and build it up so that it 1103 01:40:55,860 --> 01:40:59,760 does handle the hundred-year storm but I don't have to put in curb and gutter 1104 01:40:59,760 --> 01:41:06,080 storm inlets storm drain pipes down the entire length of the roadway my cost goes 1105 01:41:06,080 --> 01:41:10,780 down substantially so I'm relying on bar ditches at that point and it still has 1106 01:41:10,780 --> 01:41:15,480 much more of that rural feel to it similar to what's out there today so 1107 01:41:15,480 --> 01:41:20,040 that's the biggest jump in cost when we start going down that pathway this would 1108 01:41:20,040 --> 01:41:24,680 also the this 10 million dollar option would also not be three lanes the entire 1109 01:41:24,680 --> 01:41:28,960 length it would be through segments where it made the most sense so it'd be like 1110 01:41:28,960 --> 01:41:32,400 segments in front of the school to make sure that there was plenty of room for 1111 01:41:32,400 --> 01:41:36,040 queuing of vehicles for pedestrians and students to get where they need to go 1112 01:41:36,040 --> 01:41:40,840 and then some of the other places along that area which we were still in the 1113 01:41:40,840 --> 01:41:45,460 process of figuring out where exactly would those locations be the overall 25 1114 01:41:45,460 --> 01:41:48,760 million dollar project would get you the three lanes the entire length with all 1115 01:41:48,760 --> 01:41:55,360 the other amenities so that just gives you a snapshot of what is really the 1116 01:41:55,360 --> 01:42:02,080 difference between these two projects any questions yes ma'am two questions one 1117 01:42:02,080 --> 01:42:07,520 sidewalks in front of the school not an option right there have to have sidewalks 1118 01:42:07,520 --> 01:42:10,880 in front of this we don't disagree with you on that one and that's not where we 1119 01:42:10,880 --> 01:42:14,840 would be talking about not doing that that would absolutely be part of our 1120 01:42:14,840 --> 01:42:20,040 safe rest the school program as well so that would be a yeah yeah yeah aren't 1121 01:42:20,040 --> 01:42:23,760 they already there I think are in front of that school I think so 1122 01:42:23,760 --> 01:42:36,200 Ryan they're only on Ryan but they're not from the neighborhood so it would be 1123 01:42:36,200 --> 01:42:41,640 nice if we could complete that but my other my other question is Teasley which 1124 01:42:41,640 --> 01:42:48,920 part of Teasley is kind of constructed like God help us it is the segment from 1125 01:42:48,920 --> 01:42:53,720 Teasley and Teasley where Lillian Miller then takes off north and then go and it's 1126 01:42:53,720 --> 01:42:59,120 all the way south to right around the corner of Geier high school so all of 1127 01:42:59,120 --> 01:43:04,640 Teasley yes and I know it's going to be two to three years before pretty much 1128 01:43:04,640 --> 01:43:10,040 before that's before it's completed so that project is has a challenge right 1129 01:43:10,040 --> 01:43:14,240 now from the standpoint that the contractor that text on had contractor 1130 01:43:14,240 --> 01:43:18,800 with went bankrupt right so they terminated that contract we do understand 1131 01:43:18,800 --> 01:43:22,140 from text out that they have a new contractor coming on board through their 1132 01:43:22,140 --> 01:43:26,320 bonding company and they're negotiating terms with that as far as a timeline of 1133 01:43:26,320 --> 01:43:31,960 when they get started I don't know okay because how would that impact the 1134 01:43:31,960 --> 01:43:38,280 construction of Ryan Road it wouldn't miss well I mean any construction has an 1135 01:43:38,280 --> 01:43:42,840 impact but as far as timing it wouldn't necessarily impact the Ryan Road 1136 01:43:42,840 --> 01:43:48,040 construction even in the intersections on both ends is typically when we're 1137 01:43:48,040 --> 01:43:50,680 working with the state there's always the fundamental question if their state 1138 01:43:50,680 --> 01:43:54,840 funds tied to it of are you building it or am I building it and then we enter 1139 01:43:54,840 --> 01:43:58,360 into what's called a local project advanced funding agreement and we 1140 01:43:58,360 --> 01:44:03,360 determine who's building who's doing what and that would go to council as far 1141 01:44:03,360 --> 01:44:07,680 as would we build that piece I would say we probably would that would be our 1142 01:44:07,680 --> 01:44:11,600 posture at the point but until we really negotiate the terms of that agreement I 1143 01:44:11,600 --> 01:44:19,880 wouldn't tell you where it landed I had a question about the sidewalks and things 1144 01:44:19,880 --> 01:44:24,920 on Ryan Road and I understand on both sides you would need to do the drainage 1145 01:44:24,920 --> 01:44:28,680 and you would do sidewalks on both sides and that's what's bringing it up to that 1146 01:44:28,680 --> 01:44:34,840 cost of 19 million right because the neighborhoods the housing primarily is 1147 01:44:34,840 --> 01:44:41,400 on the one side and then the school is on the other side so you kind of need 1148 01:44:41,400 --> 01:44:47,200 that the sidewalks getting from the neighborhoods and everything so you'd 1149 01:44:47,200 --> 01:44:52,160 want to have sidewalks on both sides right if you wouldn't just do sidewalks 1150 01:44:52,160 --> 01:44:57,080 on one side of Ryan for the 25 million we wouldn't that would be sidewalks on 1151 01:44:57,080 --> 01:45:16,280 both sides yes it wouldn't be anywhere near that price I mean sidewalks is not 1152 01:45:16,280 --> 01:45:20,480 a cost differentiator and it could be something that would be rolled into the 1153 01:45:20,480 --> 01:45:26,800 sidewalk program in general just because of the elementary school because of the 1154 01:45:26,800 --> 01:45:30,480 neighborhoods because that's where the retirement village is that's where 1155 01:45:30,480 --> 01:45:48,200 Wrigley Park is I mean there's a lot of walking that's done on yes and I believe 1156 01:45:48,200 --> 01:45:52,560 the sidewalk actually exists from Forest Ridge all the way over to the school so 1157 01:45:52,560 --> 01:46:02,880 that is in place right it's continuing and the challenge here is you've also 1158 01:46:02,880 --> 01:46:08,560 got a division in the school district here so when you follow El Paseo these 1159 01:46:08,560 --> 01:46:14,120 homes all filter to Ryan everything to the north of it all goes to Sam Houston 1160 01:46:14,120 --> 01:46:17,080 and they're in the same boat there's really not a sidewalk network over on 1161 01:46:17,080 --> 01:46:24,200 that side for children to walk over that way so there are several ways to get 1162 01:46:24,200 --> 01:46:28,080 there our first focus would be looking at safe routes to the school program and 1163 01:46:28,080 --> 01:46:33,000 that tends to be where we get the biggest bang for our buck 1164 01:46:33,000 --> 01:46:45,760 so a question in the past it had come up as to how much money had been spent the 1165 01:46:45,760 --> 01:46:51,040 southeast Denton neighborhood area and this just gives you an idea of the 1166 01:46:51,040 --> 01:46:57,600 funding from the 2014 bond segments that was actually put in to the southeast 1167 01:46:57,600 --> 01:47:01,520 Denton area one of the areas that I know is under construction currently this 1168 01:47:01,520 --> 01:47:07,760 curling right water and wastewater and then the roadway comes after that so 1169 01:47:07,760 --> 01:47:13,800 that's currently under construction right now and then you've got a list of 1170 01:47:13,800 --> 01:47:19,280 the different streets here where we've done some work within that area over the 1171 01:47:19,280 --> 01:47:24,360 in the previous bonds the question was asked that where it is we're absolutely 1172 01:47:24,360 --> 01:47:29,560 looking forward in 2019 to be able to put a vast majority of resources into 1173 01:47:29,560 --> 01:47:33,320 that area and bring it up to where it should be so do we plan on having these 1174 01:47:33,320 --> 01:47:39,880 streets that are remaining completed by 2019 I'm sorry can you tell me that 1175 01:47:39,880 --> 01:47:44,320 again I'm some of the streets in southeast Denton that are on those 2014 1176 01:47:44,320 --> 01:47:48,440 that are left remaining to be fixed are we planning on having them complete it 1177 01:47:48,440 --> 01:47:53,200 this year next year it'd be 2020 I believe it's what the last on that 1178 01:47:53,200 --> 01:47:56,600 streets segments would be from the last time we looked at that prioritization it 1179 01:47:56,600 --> 01:48:00,040 would just it'd be 2020 we have a whole host of roadway segments that will last 1180 01:48:00,040 --> 01:48:06,840 linger into 2020 to complete the 2014 bond so this is the amount that's 1181 01:48:06,840 --> 01:48:12,760 actually been spent on repairing southeast didn't on it from the 2014 1182 01:48:12,760 --> 01:48:20,280 bond right 2012 and 2014 right did you have the maintenance numbers overall 1183 01:48:20,280 --> 01:48:23,320 man is that what this is okay so that's the street maintenance we put in you 1184 01:48:23,320 --> 01:48:27,920 remember how many lane miles that was so maintenance dollars typically go a lot 1185 01:48:27,920 --> 01:48:34,760 further then total reconstruct dollars so from a maintenance standpoint we can 1186 01:48:34,760 --> 01:48:38,200 tell you of the actual distances but that is the amount of money understood 1187 01:48:38,200 --> 01:48:41,560 that was a question before and we can get more detail if you would like that 1188 01:48:41,560 --> 01:48:46,520 the actual dollar spent that is where it is okay yes I would now I do have a 1189 01:48:46,520 --> 01:48:53,400 question um with southeast didn't we have a lot of streets that need to be 1190 01:48:53,400 --> 01:48:59,520 repaired but we're trying to do an area over here by Argyle where the residents 1191 01:48:59,520 --> 01:49:04,560 haven't even agreed to it yet when we can either cut it down go a different 1192 01:49:04,560 --> 01:49:09,400 direction and spend this in southeast didn't or central didn't to where we 1193 01:49:09,400 --> 01:49:13,640 don't take them out for their property or cutting to their property or we can 1194 01:49:13,640 --> 01:49:20,200 push it for further back I mean push it back to where we can wait and do it 1195 01:49:20,200 --> 01:49:23,880 another time like in April of 2020 instead of right now because these are 1196 01:49:23,880 --> 01:49:27,240 other areas that need to be fixed why haven't we done why aren't we 1197 01:49:27,240 --> 01:49:31,320 considering that that is the purview of this committee this was our starting 1198 01:49:31,320 --> 01:49:36,320 point this is the purview that committee to have that conversation when we come 1199 01:49:36,320 --> 01:49:40,080 back after the break we're going to go into those specific projects and that'll 1200 01:49:40,080 --> 01:49:48,080 be the appropriate time to really dig into that okay that's fine okay so with 1201 01:49:48,080 --> 01:49:52,480 the bond that we have now we're looking at ten point eight million for southeast 1202 01:49:52,480 --> 01:50:01,880 in yes ma'am right I know in the bond reconstruction dollars right for streets 1203 01:50:01,880 --> 01:50:05,880 that's just for streets the water wastewater dollars approach almost 13 1204 01:50:05,880 --> 01:50:08,720 million dollars and then overall maintenance for the other roadways that 1205 01:50:08,720 --> 01:50:12,760 don't fall into the 45 and under category that's another two million 1206 01:50:12,760 --> 01:50:16,360 dollars two and a half million dollars that gets put into southeast Denton as 1207 01:50:16,360 --> 01:50:26,400 well there was a street that was just fixed bushy bushy Street in southeast 1208 01:50:26,400 --> 01:50:29,920 didn't there was nothing wrong with it can we tell can you tell me why was it 1209 01:50:29,920 --> 01:50:36,920 redone I'd have to look into the particulars I don't know and I'm asking 1210 01:50:36,920 --> 01:50:39,760 about this tree because it's a block away from me and I drive down this 1211 01:50:39,760 --> 01:50:46,720 street everyday I couldn't tell you what was actually the impetus there it could 1212 01:50:46,720 --> 01:50:51,520 have been a host of reasons and I don't know a lot of times reconstruction also 1213 01:50:51,520 --> 01:50:56,280 gets confused with I know my wife did this with one project where on our 1214 01:50:56,280 --> 01:50:59,680 street they blocked off the entire street after having rebuilt the entire 1215 01:50:59,680 --> 01:51:02,680 roadway about a year and a half before and they came out blocked off the whole 1216 01:51:02,680 --> 01:51:06,120 street and then they were gone by the end of the day but not after five phone 1217 01:51:06,120 --> 01:51:09,120 calls from her telling me you're out here building the roadway again and what 1218 01:51:09,120 --> 01:51:12,760 they were doing was maintenance on that roadway so that's why I stopped and 1219 01:51:12,760 --> 01:51:21,080 talked to the guys and I asked them was there any water leakage or anything or 1220 01:51:21,080 --> 01:51:25,120 the pipes or why they were actually fixing that stream they told me no we 1221 01:51:25,120 --> 01:51:30,000 just wanted we just came out to fix it really I have his name written down so 1222 01:51:30,000 --> 01:51:33,360 that would be good if you let me know how it is but I'd have to look into that 1223 01:51:33,360 --> 01:51:41,760 okay anything else that we need to address with Tom before we take a break 1224 01:51:41,760 --> 01:51:50,640 here yeah yeah and it says five minutes so let's take a break five minutes we 1225 01:51:50,640 --> 01:51:54,480 do have quite a bit of work still to do and we'll come back and we'll get into 1226 01:51:54,480 --> 01:52:04,280 the prioritization way as return as we return to our meeting of the bond 1227 01:52:04,280 --> 01:52:10,080 committee we're going to move into prioritization questions and to start 1228 01:52:10,080 --> 01:52:15,680 off this part of our meeting we'll turn back to Todd we've had obviously a lot 1229 01:52:15,680 --> 01:52:20,240 of questions about Hickory Creek Road and and let's try to address those 1230 01:52:20,240 --> 01:52:29,200 questions all right so Hickory Creek Road it was a hot button earlier this year 1231 01:52:29,200 --> 01:52:36,160 and it still continues to be that so one of the issues that I've heard raised so 1232 01:52:36,160 --> 01:52:40,840 far is why the six lane facility well six lane facility was on the 2015 1233 01:52:40,840 --> 01:52:46,240 mobility plan the traffic demand model used to develop that had shown Brush 1234 01:52:46,240 --> 01:52:52,840 Creek Hickory Creek going all the way over to 35 W you have it up so this is 1235 01:52:52,840 --> 01:52:58,960 the 2015 mobility plan this is what was approved in 2015 these red lines are 1236 01:52:58,960 --> 01:53:02,880 primary roadways they're arterial roadways they would be up to a six lane 1237 01:53:02,880 --> 01:53:07,520 roadway it was contemplated in 15 that these roadways with this is Brush Creek 1238 01:53:07,520 --> 01:53:12,440 here all red continuing over and then ultimately as development progressed on 1239 01:53:12,440 --> 01:53:16,480 the west side of 35 W there would be an interchange in frontage roads and you are 1240 01:53:16,480 --> 01:53:20,600 seeing that today with text dot now bringing the project forward to build 1241 01:53:20,600 --> 01:53:26,920 frontage roads on I 35 W that's the next step in this 35 W improvement so as the 1242 01:53:26,920 --> 01:53:30,040 frontage roads come they will build that piece and then the main lanes get 1243 01:53:30,040 --> 01:53:33,680 improved along with all of these improvements to the interchange is so 1244 01:53:33,680 --> 01:53:41,280 that long term already does become an interchange now one of the concerns I've 1245 01:53:41,280 --> 01:53:48,000 heard raised it has been why a four lane or a six lane roadway could we squeeze 1246 01:53:48,000 --> 01:53:51,920 it down to a four lane absolutely that is absolutely where our study tells us 1247 01:53:51,920 --> 01:53:59,120 we did an area study because we didn't know exactly where the 2015 model came 1248 01:53:59,120 --> 01:54:02,440 from when it was really looking at its connectivity points where these points 1249 01:54:02,440 --> 01:54:08,100 were ties into the highway it the models only as good as those tying points so as 1250 01:54:08,100 --> 01:54:13,520 we start looking at alternatives this 2015 mobility plan is one alternative the 1251 01:54:13,520 --> 01:54:17,600 other alternative would be bringing a Hickory Creek over the floodplain 1252 01:54:17,600 --> 01:54:22,920 straightening out this roadway bringing it all the way across at 35 which does I 1253 01:54:22,920 --> 01:54:28,320 know it sounds a little reverse and the logic but yes a lot of people travel 1254 01:54:28,320 --> 01:54:34,720 1830 and 377 and 2181 today because they have no other option north they could 1255 01:54:34,720 --> 01:54:38,600 travel those two lane roadways but where they're trying to get to takes them 1256 01:54:38,600 --> 01:54:42,360 north which is also causing some of the increased traffic we see on roads like 1257 01:54:42,360 --> 01:54:47,200 Hobson Road and Ryan there's people trying to get north to ultimately go 1258 01:54:47,200 --> 01:54:53,440 south whether it's 377 or 35 W or 35 E as Hickory Creek becomes a true 1259 01:54:53,440 --> 01:54:57,720 connection and not just a jump to a roadway and then skip to another roadway 1260 01:54:57,720 --> 01:55:01,880 if it's a true connection that would ends up happening at that point is the 1261 01:55:01,880 --> 01:55:08,400 demand to the north comes south as people try to get to 35 W or 35 E so 1262 01:55:08,400 --> 01:55:12,840 that's where our projections came from as we were looking through where does 1263 01:55:12,840 --> 01:55:18,760 this roadway go again it still follows the 2015 mobility plan now all that 1264 01:55:18,760 --> 01:55:24,320 being said we are not designing this in a vacuum we were given design dollars 1265 01:55:24,320 --> 01:55:30,160 earlier this year after the fatality accident that occurred on Hickory Creek 1266 01:55:30,160 --> 01:55:35,020 Road down in this area city council gave us three million dollars to look at 1267 01:55:35,020 --> 01:55:40,240 alternatives and one of the keys that we went to is as we start talking to our 1268 01:55:40,240 --> 01:55:47,720 local partners whether it's the county the state city of Argyle also the 1269 01:55:47,720 --> 01:55:51,520 Council of Governments we're looking for alternative funding sort of sources so 1270 01:55:51,520 --> 01:55:56,600 that we can start planning this roadway and putting it in place so the 30 is a 1271 01:55:56,600 --> 01:56:02,760 34 35 34 million dollars that we are talking about as part of our bond 1272 01:56:02,760 --> 01:56:07,120 program leverages it's our match so to get those other dollars the city has to 1273 01:56:07,120 --> 01:56:12,320 put in some amount of money to leverage those dollars further so that 34 million 1274 01:56:12,320 --> 01:56:19,480 is our piece of that ultimate 160 million dollar project so what 36 million 1275 01:56:19,480 --> 01:56:24,360 say those things don't pan out say we don't get the funding for some reason 1276 01:56:24,360 --> 01:56:29,320 then what that does do with that 36 million dollars is it builds one bridge 1277 01:56:29,320 --> 01:56:34,480 of ultimately two bridges so there would be two three lane bridges that would go 1278 01:56:34,480 --> 01:56:39,080 over the floodplain that builds one of them so instead of having two parallel I 1279 01:56:39,080 --> 01:56:43,960 would just build one and then we'd put a three lane roadway in that covers the 1280 01:56:43,960 --> 01:56:49,120 cost of a three lane roadway with no help that's a right away that's the 1281 01:56:49,120 --> 01:56:53,240 infrastructure to support it that takes care of everything to get us over to 1282 01:56:53,240 --> 01:56:57,680 1830 from River Pass it also goes over the railroad tracks so you don't have 1283 01:56:57,680 --> 01:57:03,720 the concern of vehicles pedestrians cars intersecting a train as it goes through 1284 01:57:03,720 --> 01:57:07,640 it separates the two and takes us up over the railroad tracks and then 1285 01:57:07,640 --> 01:57:13,100 continues across the floodplain over to 1830 so it takes those fatality chances 1286 01:57:13,100 --> 01:57:20,240 almost to a negligible point then as we continue to go west what we're cognizant 1287 01:57:20,240 --> 01:57:23,840 of is one of the things we talked about earlier is development is coming in this 1288 01:57:23,840 --> 01:57:27,440 area so there's a significant amount of development that has submitted for 1289 01:57:27,440 --> 01:57:31,360 application is currently under construction or we've already had 1290 01:57:31,360 --> 01:57:36,320 multiple conversations with developers who own parcels or properties out that 1291 01:57:36,320 --> 01:57:41,920 way that are building that does not mean that we're just gonna go put in a six 1292 01:57:41,920 --> 01:57:47,040 lane roadway for the fun of putting a six lane roadway in our charge has been 1293 01:57:47,040 --> 01:57:51,640 to dot design this in the most context-sensitive way as possible we do 1294 01:57:51,640 --> 01:57:54,800 that with every street we're doing and that means we take into account what is 1295 01:57:54,800 --> 01:58:00,680 the setting is it more rural in nature is it more residential in nature is it 1296 01:58:00,680 --> 01:58:05,120 more of a commercial industrial district each of those has a very different feel 1297 01:58:05,120 --> 01:58:08,760 a very different amount of transportation in different modes so a 1298 01:58:08,760 --> 01:58:14,200 lot of pedestrians cyclists vehicles in a much more neighborhood type setting 1299 01:58:14,200 --> 01:58:17,600 versus an industrial sector where I have a lot of public transit that brings 1300 01:58:17,600 --> 01:58:21,880 workers to work so my sidewalks are there just to get you from the bus stop 1301 01:58:21,880 --> 01:58:26,360 essentially to get you to where you're working and then a lot of room for big 1302 01:58:26,360 --> 01:58:30,320 trucks to drive through so a heavier duty pavement wider areas so that a truck 1303 01:58:30,320 --> 01:58:34,120 can move back and forth as it needs to be so as we look at Hickory Creek Road 1304 01:58:34,120 --> 01:58:39,000 and we look at its ultimate design going forward we are going to be very 1305 01:58:39,000 --> 01:58:44,120 interested in what areas of this roadway might need to be a little narrower 1306 01:58:44,120 --> 01:58:48,360 because they are in that rural area they're in an area that the potential 1307 01:58:48,360 --> 01:58:51,800 for growth may be less than in other areas where we've got a lot of homes 1308 01:58:51,800 --> 01:58:56,840 coming in right on top of each other so those areas there's absolutely room for 1309 01:58:56,840 --> 01:59:03,240 a narrower roadway for not having to have as much right-of-way taken and I'm 1310 01:59:03,240 --> 01:59:09,040 thinking exactly of the Brush Creek area when you start getting into that 1311 01:59:09,040 --> 01:59:14,680 area there is room for both to coexist our current traffic demand model for 1312 01:59:14,680 --> 01:59:19,180 this area the revised model when we looked at Hickory Creek and would be 1313 01:59:19,180 --> 01:59:26,440 incorporated into the ultimate mobility plan update looks at this area as being 1314 01:59:26,440 --> 01:59:31,680 my you can help me out where I start to falter with words there pretend because 1315 01:59:31,680 --> 01:59:37,760 he's the traffic guru we're looking at that area as it's rural I don't know 1316 01:59:37,760 --> 01:59:40,880 you've got one acre homes there established homes you're absolutely 1317 01:59:40,880 --> 01:59:45,320 right we don't want to come through that area and just cut a wide swath of right 1318 01:59:45,320 --> 01:59:50,000 away through there that we're not going to need for 40 years our study goes out 1319 01:59:50,000 --> 01:59:54,960 to 2040 and even at 2040 we're not seeing a projected need for anything 1320 01:59:54,960 --> 02:00:00,260 beyond four lanes so much further into the distant future that might be an 1321 02:00:00,260 --> 02:00:04,840 occurrence where you'd need six so what we would typically do on roadways where 1322 02:00:04,840 --> 02:00:08,580 we've already said at some point you will need the six lanes maybe it's 40 1323 02:00:08,580 --> 02:00:13,200 years 50 years out we would get the right away width for six lanes 1324 02:00:13,200 --> 02:00:17,040 especially if we have a lot of commercial development a lot of heavy 1325 02:00:17,040 --> 02:00:20,400 small residential coming in the area where you're gonna have a lot of traffic 1326 02:00:20,400 --> 02:00:24,640 I mean in these six lanes a lot faster so what I might do is build the roadway 1327 02:00:24,640 --> 02:00:29,200 where I've built my two outside lanes and that very wide median so I could 1328 02:00:29,200 --> 02:00:34,960 impact traffic less when I do have to build those into inside two lanes what I 1329 02:00:34,960 --> 02:00:39,280 may be able to do in other areas and this is why a lot of letters have been 1330 02:00:39,280 --> 02:00:43,320 have gone out about the city wanting to come and talk to property owners about 1331 02:00:43,320 --> 02:00:47,920 property and where the roadway would align is we haven't nailed down to the 1332 02:00:47,920 --> 02:00:52,920 nth degree where's the center line of that road going to go over the next year 1333 02:00:52,920 --> 02:00:58,040 there is a lot of conversation we had with property owners about the impacts 1334 02:00:58,040 --> 02:01:01,720 to them the impacts to where that right away would go where the road would go 1335 02:01:01,720 --> 02:01:05,240 we're doing an environmental analysis on the entire stretch of the roadway 1336 02:01:05,240 --> 02:01:10,120 including the warrants of a sound wall so we're looking at all those impacts and 1337 02:01:10,120 --> 02:01:16,840 how that would impact the overall design this is an evolving process and when 1338 02:01:16,840 --> 02:01:21,440 we've gone out and done the survey work today what we've done is just simply 1339 02:01:21,440 --> 02:01:25,280 gathered the upfront information so we can start having the conversation with 1340 02:01:25,280 --> 02:01:33,360 folks about where we go what challenges are ahead of us long term even in 2015 1341 02:01:33,360 --> 02:01:36,920 but going forward we still see the need for that roadway to be a prime 1342 02:01:36,920 --> 02:01:42,480 connection to 35w if we miss too many more chances like we've missed on East 1343 02:01:42,480 --> 02:01:46,080 Denton on the east side of Denton where Mayhills going in where loop 28 is a 1344 02:01:46,080 --> 02:01:52,400 bottleneck if we miss too many more chances anywhere then we will have a 1345 02:01:52,400 --> 02:01:56,580 locked-up navigate a transportation system across the board and we'll be 1346 02:01:56,580 --> 02:02:02,800 fighting the same scenario of gridlock and places where it's very difficult to 1347 02:02:02,800 --> 02:02:06,160 get around you got a lot of signals where you're just stopped at so you know 1348 02:02:06,160 --> 02:02:10,920 I'm not a traffic engineer by trade I've learned a lot over the last 10 years of 1349 02:02:10,920 --> 02:02:14,360 how to become a traffic engineer I'm a stormwater engineer so I hear the 1350 02:02:14,360 --> 02:02:18,480 concerns about floodplain and I immediately go there every time we start 1351 02:02:18,480 --> 02:02:24,400 one of these projects but what I do know is that when I look at these projects 1352 02:02:24,400 --> 02:02:27,880 we've got to start planning for the future we have to draw that line 1353 02:02:27,880 --> 02:02:33,360 somewhere from staffs recommendation this is the alignment that makes sense 1354 02:02:33,360 --> 02:02:39,480 it doesn't mean that we bolted it down that it's not going to vary we absolutely 1355 02:02:39,480 --> 02:02:42,840 are sensitive to the context of where we're going to be in this area so there 1356 02:02:42,840 --> 02:02:46,040 is a lot of conversation to be had between now and when this project were 1357 02:02:46,040 --> 02:02:50,280 to actually go forward if this group chooses to keep this project on the bond 1358 02:02:50,280 --> 02:03:02,680 list how much of that Hickory Creek are you asking us to recommend in this bond 1359 02:03:02,680 --> 02:03:09,960 package all the way over to 377 the 34 million dollars would if no other 1360 02:03:09,960 --> 02:03:14,840 financial partner came in would construct from River Pass to 1830 it 1361 02:03:14,840 --> 02:03:22,920 would also get the design all the way over to 35 W now if our partners agree 1362 02:03:22,920 --> 02:03:27,040 to continue down this pathway with us we could go to construction much faster than 1363 02:03:27,040 --> 02:03:35,920 the entire length could you put up a map and show us where the outer loop is 1364 02:03:35,920 --> 02:03:44,440 projected to come out or loop 288 huh outer loop or loop 288 well loop to it 1365 02:03:44,440 --> 02:03:57,920 okay alright it's taking a minute to reset but loop 288 on the west side 1366 02:03:57,920 --> 02:04:05,840 comes down into 24 9 24 49 and then over to 35 W here at vintage and then it 1367 02:04:05,840 --> 02:04:12,240 would have said four cents of direct connect that basically peel off the six 1368 02:04:12,240 --> 02:04:15,480 lanes that would be out here to just four lanes coming across the bridge to 1369 02:04:15,480 --> 02:04:19,080 vintage and those we call them direct next their flyovers or you've seen a 1370 02:04:19,080 --> 02:04:23,960 word on I 35 and dollars for worth we get in a lane and you fly over a ramp 1371 02:04:23,960 --> 02:04:28,360 and down tie directly into the intersection or to the interstate okay I 1372 02:04:28,360 --> 02:04:35,240 have we've been told and heard for some years that vintage was projected to be 1373 02:04:35,240 --> 02:04:42,560 six lanes in the 20 I'd have to go back and look at the mobility plan shows for 1374 02:04:42,560 --> 02:04:46,080 2015 I know that our current area study shows nothing more than four lanes 1375 02:04:46,080 --> 02:04:52,760 divided and I think the 2015 shows that it's a four lane divided roadway that's 1376 02:04:52,760 --> 02:04:57,200 what the funding was set up for actually look at different propositions and 1377 02:04:57,200 --> 02:05:02,360 agreements it was all for a four lane divided roadway which it is great well 1378 02:05:02,360 --> 02:05:06,360 it's it's a three it's a two lane divided roadway and then we're going to 1379 02:05:06,360 --> 02:05:12,600 build here later this year the outside two lanes so if 288 is going to come 1380 02:05:12,600 --> 02:05:20,080 around and hook up with vintage doesn't it make sense for that to continue all 1381 02:05:20,080 --> 02:05:30,080 the way over to Taysley the either Ryan or Hickory Cree you have a lot of 1382 02:05:30,080 --> 02:05:35,920 disadvantages and one would just be could you do it sure there anything is 1383 02:05:35,920 --> 02:05:42,600 possible 100% the reality is as soon as you bring vintage over to tie into Ryan 1384 02:05:42,600 --> 02:05:48,080 you have the intersection of two rail crossings so at this rail crossing we 1385 02:05:48,080 --> 02:05:52,760 would have to go over one and leave one at grade so there's a potential safety 1386 02:05:52,760 --> 02:05:58,040 issue there I would not want to have a signalized intersection right next to 1387 02:05:58,040 --> 02:06:01,560 two railways because you have to do what we call preemption which is I got to 1388 02:06:01,560 --> 02:06:05,720 allow some cars to pass when the trains come in now I've got two legs that have 1389 02:06:05,720 --> 02:06:10,280 to do that the exact same time opposing each other and that's a scary scenario 1390 02:06:10,280 --> 02:06:14,200 anyway you look at it so one would have to go over the other so we would either 1391 02:06:14,200 --> 02:06:18,520 need to pull Ryan further to the north and get it away from that intersection 1392 02:06:18,520 --> 02:06:22,840 so they had plenty of room so we'd be cutting through this area and then going 1393 02:06:22,840 --> 02:06:27,800 across to Ryan or we'd need to elevate which would mean we'd have to drop 1394 02:06:27,800 --> 02:06:32,680 lanes on both sides probably starting right back over in this area maybe even 1395 02:06:32,680 --> 02:06:35,680 a little closer to the school you got to start and drop a lane on both sides 1396 02:06:35,680 --> 02:06:38,800 essentially a frontage road to the bridge it would ultimately go over and 1397 02:06:38,800 --> 02:06:41,840 then depending on how wide you make it you would have to make it four lanes 1398 02:06:41,840 --> 02:06:47,640 divided all the way down Ryan because of the incoming traffic over to 2181 so 1399 02:06:47,640 --> 02:06:51,520 Hickory Creek does a couple of things for us that Ryan doesn't do Ryan's 1400 02:06:51,520 --> 02:06:58,320 disjointed when it gets over to 2181 so it stops at 2181 it causes another 1401 02:06:58,320 --> 02:07:03,320 problem so if you add additional traffic onto Ryan by bringing them off the 1402 02:07:03,320 --> 02:07:07,800 interstate then now I've got additional potential traffic over here all the way 1403 02:07:07,800 --> 02:07:12,240 on to 2181 that's trying to get to Robinson or wherever else they're trying 1404 02:07:12,240 --> 02:07:16,240 to go they're making a lot of decisions at that point Hickory Creek does allow 1405 02:07:16,240 --> 02:07:22,240 you to get all the way over to 2499 at one time all from 35 W all the way 1406 02:07:22,240 --> 02:07:28,480 across so from a traffic perspective from a transportation perspective it 1407 02:07:28,480 --> 02:07:33,460 makes the most sense for getting people around from my perspective but again 1408 02:07:33,460 --> 02:07:37,120 that's just the purview of this committee is to make that choice in that 1409 02:07:37,120 --> 02:07:42,840 recommendation of where this goes of course if you went to Ryan even though 1410 02:07:42,840 --> 02:07:51,280 it didn't wouldn't go on over to 24 to 2181 you would have fewer lane miles to 1411 02:07:51,280 --> 02:07:57,760 have to build with that offset some cost of elevation it could potentially I'd 1412 02:07:57,760 --> 02:08:01,640 have to run further numbers on that one but you have a longer bridge crossing to 1413 02:08:01,640 --> 02:08:05,880 get over the floodplain plus we would have to go back and re-evaluate the 1414 02:08:05,880 --> 02:08:10,240 ultimate configuration of vintage back to that six lane and it has cost 1415 02:08:10,240 --> 02:08:14,960 implications at that point as well so as far as the actual number I can get you a 1416 02:08:14,960 --> 02:08:18,040 budget number on that to let you know what that would look like cost from a 1417 02:08:18,040 --> 02:08:22,600 cost difference standpoint another proposal was to take Hickory Creek over 1418 02:08:22,600 --> 02:08:27,600 to 1830 and then skirt the floodplain a lot of that floodplain is in a floodway 1419 02:08:27,600 --> 02:08:31,160 so the Stark area is in the floodway I cannot get into that area unless I'm 1420 02:08:31,160 --> 02:08:36,760 going to go over it then in the floodplain to make it a true regional 1421 02:08:36,760 --> 02:08:39,880 connector I've got to elevate the whole roadway out of the hundred-year floodplain 1422 02:08:39,880 --> 02:08:43,240 so I'm going to be bringing a lot of dirt there's a lot of potential impacts 1423 02:08:43,240 --> 02:08:48,080 to the floodplain upstream and downstream that could result in further construction 1424 02:08:48,080 --> 02:08:52,640 just to bring that roadway over another reason why Hickory Creek we were 1425 02:08:52,640 --> 02:08:57,920 looking to just span the floodplain one time and then we would still need to 1426 02:08:57,920 --> 02:09:01,440 build the drainage infrastructure to handle the hundred-year flood all the 1427 02:09:01,440 --> 02:09:05,120 way down brush Creek and all red which would be done with that project and as 1428 02:09:05,120 --> 02:09:09,560 part of the current design but those are some of the things that can be addressed 1429 02:09:09,560 --> 02:09:15,160 much more quickly and cost-effectively than trying to skirt the floodplain well 1430 02:09:15,160 --> 02:09:20,680 it seems like we're not going to solve this today but and there's still going 1431 02:09:20,680 --> 02:09:26,360 to be a lot of conversation about it yes and of course I would like to see us 1432 02:09:26,360 --> 02:09:36,360 not impact homes impossible so there's there's but let's let's speak for a 1433 02:09:36,360 --> 02:09:42,080 moment about the public safety question and the desk that occurred there that's 1434 02:09:42,080 --> 02:09:48,760 what could be addressed by building the bridge is that right yes and and that 1435 02:09:48,760 --> 02:09:52,640 was one of the drivers are going straight there was its cost it gets us 1436 02:09:52,640 --> 02:09:56,800 over the floodplain quicker but it eliminates the potential for those types 1437 02:09:56,800 --> 02:10:01,080 of fatalities and accidents that have occurred over the last 20 to 30 years at 1438 02:10:01,080 --> 02:10:06,600 a minimum so we know well we haven't we haven't tried out the guardrail which is 1439 02:10:06,600 --> 02:10:13,240 now up and I would hope nobody wouldn't that be a factor to help deter it 1440 02:10:13,240 --> 02:10:17,720 definitely helps kinds of accidents that have been fatality accidents so we're 1441 02:10:17,720 --> 02:10:22,240 talking about switching the focus to Ryan off of Hickory Creek in terms of 1442 02:10:22,240 --> 02:10:27,760 matching dollars that we could get from outside sources what type of an impact 1443 02:10:27,760 --> 02:10:32,200 would it have on you know Ryan versus Hickory I mean are we able to leverage 1444 02:10:32,200 --> 02:10:37,160 Hickory Creek more so than we are Ryan yes you do get much more leverage 1445 02:10:37,160 --> 02:10:40,880 capacity out of it because this roadways we've already identified in the mobility 1446 02:10:40,880 --> 02:10:45,520 plan that are now eligible for that help in funding long term whereas with Ryan 1447 02:10:45,520 --> 02:10:49,520 we're basically fitting the bill for the vast majority of it but this area through 1448 02:10:49,520 --> 02:11:00,400 here yes ma'am I know currently there are no streetlights all along Hickory Creek 1449 02:11:00,400 --> 02:11:06,840 would lighting be part of yes this package this would be bicycle lanes 1450 02:11:06,840 --> 02:11:10,560 would be bicycle trail it wouldn't be on the lanes it'd be separated from the 1451 02:11:10,560 --> 02:11:14,760 roadway bicycle trail on both sides would be sidewalks tied into the parks 1452 02:11:14,760 --> 02:11:20,160 network trail system it'd be streetlights and then it'd be of course 1453 02:11:20,160 --> 02:11:23,680 signals or whatever other intersection controls might be needed throughout the 1454 02:11:23,680 --> 02:11:35,560 entire corridor could you show us where Brush Creek ties into so Brush Creek 1455 02:11:35,560 --> 02:11:41,000 ties in right here so if you look at where we're going currently we're 1456 02:11:41,000 --> 02:11:44,640 talking about taking Hickory Creek over so the current Hickory Creek alignment 1457 02:11:44,640 --> 02:11:50,280 if you've driven it has a very sharp incline it's also a place where we have 1458 02:11:50,280 --> 02:11:55,200 other accidents occur at that intersection because it's hard to get up 1459 02:11:55,200 --> 02:11:58,840 it's difficult to get up that incline and you've got a lot of commuter traffic 1460 02:11:58,840 --> 02:12:03,680 that's going north and south on 1830 as people are commuting back and forth so 1461 02:12:03,680 --> 02:12:07,200 this would take it straight across the floodplain over the railroad tracks 1462 02:12:07,200 --> 02:12:12,000 eliminate multiple safety concerns and then bring it across now what we're 1463 02:12:12,000 --> 02:12:17,240 working with TxDOT on is if this is the alignment that stays then we would be 1464 02:12:17,240 --> 02:12:21,880 working with them on where does 1830 tie into this so they have money available 1465 02:12:21,880 --> 02:12:27,760 right now to improve 1830 all the way down to 407 what they're what they're 1466 02:12:27,760 --> 02:12:30,760 looking to do right now just because Argyle is really not interested in 1467 02:12:30,760 --> 02:12:34,920 utilizing those dollars they are very interested in what do we want to do with 1468 02:12:34,920 --> 02:12:40,920 1830 from Hickory Creek North so it's that four lane divided roadway six lane 1469 02:12:40,920 --> 02:12:43,840 divided where are we going with that roadway and that's the conversation 1470 02:12:43,840 --> 02:12:47,020 we're having with them that absolutely impacts this intersection the other 1471 02:12:47,020 --> 02:12:52,160 concern at this intersection even when Country Club Road was redone there is a 1472 02:12:52,160 --> 02:12:56,000 steep curve as you go around almost looks like a NASCAR racetrack right and 1473 02:12:56,000 --> 02:13:01,960 that's to keep those 55 mile an hour traffic on the road the problem is is 1474 02:13:01,960 --> 02:13:06,000 that's not a good transition to Country Club if you're trying to get to 35 W 1475 02:13:06,000 --> 02:13:09,620 unless you really slow down now they have tried to put a right turn lane to 1476 02:13:09,620 --> 02:13:13,340 pull off and that does help because you got to slow down and get out of traffic 1477 02:13:13,340 --> 02:13:16,720 and get over but you're still going up and over and then if you're coming up 1478 02:13:16,720 --> 02:13:22,640 Crawford so you're coming this way up Country Club Road from Crawford then 1479 02:13:22,640 --> 02:13:27,000 you've got to go up and over the crest of that embankment to get left or right 1480 02:13:27,000 --> 02:13:30,440 makes it very difficult to see who's coming and going because there are 1481 02:13:30,440 --> 02:13:36,480 significant declines in the roadway going both directions so one of the 1482 02:13:36,480 --> 02:13:39,880 things that we have been talking about is with this alignment we've been 1483 02:13:39,880 --> 02:13:45,480 working with the city of Argyle and the I guess town of Argyle and the county 1484 02:13:45,480 --> 02:13:50,040 along with Gog is potentially realigning Country Club Road to where it would tee 1485 02:13:50,040 --> 02:13:57,280 into the Hickory Creek Road when we push this and make it a much safer scenario 1486 02:13:57,280 --> 02:14:01,640 so you've got a lot of drivers here that we're also trying to resolve some 1487 02:14:01,640 --> 02:14:11,840 current existing issues with this one project okay so repeat your answer what 1488 02:14:11,840 --> 02:14:19,720 you're asking the rest to do is recommend the extension of Hickory 1489 02:14:19,720 --> 02:14:30,240 Creek across straightening it out to 1830 and then the rest of that would be a 1490 02:14:30,240 --> 02:14:37,360 steady if our if our partners our funding partners for whatever reason 1491 02:14:37,360 --> 02:14:40,980 didn't and that's not the inclination we've heard from any of them as we go 1492 02:14:40,980 --> 02:14:47,040 forward to the election we would be getting that noted and documented 1493 02:14:47,040 --> 02:14:51,360 in a way that people understand that is a reality if that were to just not 1494 02:14:51,360 --> 02:14:57,200 happen then yes the project would carry three lanes of roadway over to 1830 and 1495 02:14:57,200 --> 02:15:01,180 build two three-lane bridges one three-lane bridge over the railroad 1496 02:15:01,180 --> 02:15:05,480 tracks and one over over the floodplain and then the other bridges would have to 1497 02:15:05,480 --> 02:15:12,400 come in at a later date when it gets expanded I believe one of the gentleman 1498 02:15:12,400 --> 02:15:18,920 asked about phases and when the timing and anticipated completion can you dress 1499 02:15:18,920 --> 02:15:24,640 that so the phases so much depend on when those funding partners come to the 1500 02:15:24,640 --> 02:15:31,520 table so if we continue down this path and our partners do commit what they're 1501 02:15:31,520 --> 02:15:35,760 just in verbal discussion and in meetings there they seem like they're 1502 02:15:35,760 --> 02:15:40,840 going to commit to if they commit to that then we could begin phasing this 1503 02:15:40,840 --> 02:15:47,720 entire project in a five to six year span all the way over to 35 W it could 1504 02:15:47,720 --> 02:15:53,440 be accomplished in that time frame now if they don't come forward for whatever 1505 02:15:53,440 --> 02:16:00,200 reason then we still would be able to get to 1830 over the next three years 1506 02:16:00,200 --> 02:16:10,720 we as a city do not are not committed to six lines on Bruce Creek Road no right 1507 02:16:10,720 --> 02:16:16,160 no the only part that we're building provision for a six lane facility is on 1508 02:16:16,160 --> 02:16:20,600 the bridges knowing that at some point in the distant future six lanes most 1509 02:16:20,600 --> 02:16:25,160 likely is required it's beyond 2040 timeframe which is why we're not 1510 02:16:25,160 --> 02:16:29,880 recommending that they get built the entire length but the bridges absolutely 1511 02:16:29,880 --> 02:16:33,880 need to be built to six lanes there is a very small piece between the two bridges 1512 02:16:33,880 --> 02:16:37,440 between the railroad crossing and the floodplain crossing where it touches 1513 02:16:37,440 --> 02:16:42,040 down just briefly and that area it's actually right in here that area right 1514 02:16:42,040 --> 02:16:46,880 there we would build six lanes a roadway which stripe it for four but we built 1515 02:16:46,880 --> 02:16:50,120 six lanes because it ties into both bridges that make any sense to make you 1516 02:16:50,120 --> 02:16:58,360 whip over and then went back where the city limits in terms of Brush Creek so 1517 02:16:58,360 --> 02:17:03,480 it's not all in Denton no not currently so it follows along the center line of 1518 02:17:03,480 --> 02:17:07,520 Brush Creek Road all the way to just past the hills of Argyle and then comes 1519 02:17:07,520 --> 02:17:14,160 up to the north and down and then back over so the gray is Argyle and the 1520 02:17:14,160 --> 02:17:19,360 yellowish is Denton unnecessarily most of the time the gray is it's 1521 02:17:19,360 --> 02:17:27,160 unincorporated so it's in our EJJ technically it's still in the county 1522 02:17:27,160 --> 02:17:38,080 guess I'm gonna advocate for the people that live on Bushy or so when are you 1523 02:17:38,080 --> 02:17:44,200 guys gonna help out with the flooding too because there's issues now I'm sure 1524 02:17:44,200 --> 02:17:48,240 you've gotten complaints already when are you guys gonna start addressing those 1525 02:17:48,240 --> 02:17:52,160 issues that this project would address those issues because those all get 1526 02:17:52,160 --> 02:17:56,480 resolved with draft with the actual roadway project so that's part of the 1527 02:17:56,480 --> 02:18:00,080 hundred sixty million dollar project is we'd be resolving all the floodplain 1528 02:18:00,080 --> 02:18:04,040 issues that we would come across out there as well without that we don't 1529 02:18:04,040 --> 02:18:08,440 currently have a time frame because the funding is not there at the moment for 1530 02:18:08,440 --> 02:18:13,840 those drainage scenarios so that would be the proposition that we want voters 1531 02:18:13,840 --> 02:18:22,520 to vote on okay this is what they would be voting towards I'm sorry do we as a 1532 02:18:22,520 --> 02:18:27,360 city if we're gonna lobby for that hundred and sixty million dollars and 1533 02:18:27,360 --> 02:18:35,560 get it do we have a say so in how wide the street is or the road is on brush 1534 02:18:35,560 --> 02:18:40,120 creek yes absolutely and that's part of now we're getting most of the money from 1535 02:18:40,120 --> 02:18:47,160 I mean but it's it's the city's decision and so the funding sources we're going 1536 02:18:47,160 --> 02:18:50,840 to it's not like what happened in Fort Worth about five years ago you saw it on 1537 02:18:50,840 --> 02:18:56,400 the news Rosedale was built to six lanes it was federally funded the federal 1538 02:18:56,400 --> 02:18:59,600 government said if we're gonna build it and we're gonna fund it it's gonna be 1539 02:18:59,600 --> 02:19:07,240 six lanes city of Fort Worth said okay but then right afterwards their traffic 1540 02:19:07,240 --> 02:19:10,760 model showed they didn't need six lanes they could not convince the state or 1541 02:19:10,760 --> 02:19:14,120 federal government that they didn't need six lanes so to get the money for the 1542 02:19:14,120 --> 02:19:18,200 taxpayers they built six lanes and then they immediately put the roadway on a 1543 02:19:18,200 --> 02:19:23,080 road diet so they built a lot of parking on street they put landscape islands 1544 02:19:23,080 --> 02:19:27,160 once it was turned over to the city so that is not this scenario we haven't 1545 02:19:27,160 --> 02:19:31,480 gone into this discussion with anybody in in that similar vein it has been 1546 02:19:31,480 --> 02:19:36,120 purely what the results of our traffic study has shown the entire we looked at 1547 02:19:36,120 --> 02:19:42,080 the entire area and that area study shows that we for the next 20 years plus 1548 02:19:42,080 --> 02:19:48,360 we don't need anything more than four lanes now you get beyond that that's why 1549 02:19:48,360 --> 02:19:52,680 we redo these studies they do them redo the mobility plan and updated every four 1550 02:19:52,680 --> 02:19:58,200 to five years is development and traffic patterns change over time so every four 1551 02:19:58,200 --> 02:20:01,880 to five years we revisit these studies so that we can see what's really happening 1552 02:20:01,880 --> 02:20:05,800 it could be that five years from now we need to add the other two lanes because 1553 02:20:05,800 --> 02:20:09,920 there's that much traffic demand out there I don't know right now our current 1554 02:20:09,920 --> 02:20:15,480 projections is that we only need four for the question specifically about this 1555 02:20:15,480 --> 02:20:24,040 project yeah I have some thoughts I I have no doubt in our city staff that 1556 02:20:24,040 --> 02:20:29,320 they're able to figure out where and how best to plan a regional connector in this 1557 02:20:29,320 --> 02:20:33,880 region and work through all the floodplain issues I think they do an 1558 02:20:33,880 --> 02:20:39,680 astounding job most of my concerns are more just whether or not the the 1559 02:20:39,680 --> 02:20:45,280 residents of our town actually want a regional connector in this region would 1560 02:20:45,280 --> 02:20:52,080 I don't know if you can pull up the current future land use map I don't know 1561 02:20:52,080 --> 02:20:59,080 if it's on the public GIS or not but it it's on the website if it's not there 1562 02:21:00,040 --> 02:21:07,240 as you look for that I'll just start to say some things so so first of all thank 1563 02:21:07,240 --> 02:21:10,680 you for bringing up the the recent safety issues I think that that's 1564 02:21:10,680 --> 02:21:17,640 important to keep in mind you know with recent community comments and I think 1565 02:21:17,640 --> 02:21:21,440 one person on the committee last week mentioned the Denton 2030 plan so I 1566 02:21:21,440 --> 02:21:27,600 actually went home and read it it's it's only 415 pages so but I won't read the 1567 02:21:27,600 --> 02:21:33,520 whole thing to you but I have pulled up several quotes from it that I think are 1568 02:21:33,520 --> 02:21:39,760 help for people who maybe weren't present through that process orient them 1569 02:21:39,760 --> 02:21:48,040 to what the current long-range plan of the city says so I'll summarize some of 1570 02:21:48,040 --> 02:21:51,320 this and then I'll get into some of the details but basically the plan went 1571 02:21:51,320 --> 02:21:57,920 through a variety of different thank you so so I think right here you can kind of 1572 02:21:57,920 --> 02:22:02,880 see the the city limits down there where we were talking at the sort of the 1573 02:22:02,880 --> 02:22:10,600 intersection between the ETJ green area and the city limits so my understanding 1574 02:22:10,600 --> 02:22:17,020 is that that entire green section is earmarked as a rural area right which 1575 02:22:17,020 --> 02:22:22,760 with our zoning would typically be agricultural use or homes on five acre 1576 02:22:22,760 --> 02:22:31,560 or larger lots so anyway so the the the 2030 plan they presented several 1577 02:22:31,560 --> 02:22:38,840 different growth scenarios so I said the starting point for the development of 1578 02:22:38,840 --> 02:22:43,320 land use concepts was the depiction of the growth trend scenario the likely 1579 02:22:43,320 --> 02:22:48,240 pattern of growth and development in 15 to 20 years if there were no changes in 1580 02:22:48,240 --> 02:22:52,920 policy to alter present trends the preferred growth concept was developed 1581 02:22:52,920 --> 02:22:58,160 to present a conceptual vision for the form character and general location of 1582 02:22:58,160 --> 02:23:02,800 development for Denton that reflected the input and expressed preferences of 1583 02:23:02,800 --> 02:23:07,240 the community the general location of the new development and areas for 1584 02:23:07,240 --> 02:23:11,400 intensification was the basis for the development of the future land use map 1585 02:23:11,400 --> 02:23:17,280 and then through that process the the growth trend scenario which was sort of 1586 02:23:17,280 --> 02:23:22,680 the business as usual more stuff got about twelve percent of the community 1587 02:23:22,680 --> 02:23:31,360 votes it was the lowest one and then so then on land use policy it goes on it 1588 02:23:31,360 --> 02:23:37,960 says the availability of rural that's getting tongue twisters here rural raw 1589 02:23:37,960 --> 02:23:42,480 land coupled with an incumbent an accommodating development approval 1590 02:23:42,480 --> 02:23:48,720 process has facilitated development in Denton that outwardly expanded the 1591 02:23:48,720 --> 02:23:53,360 suburban fringe at a relatively low density and intensity this trend has 1592 02:23:53,360 --> 02:23:58,240 resulted in a land use pattern that has tended to further extend distances 1593 02:23:58,240 --> 02:24:04,600 between people between where people live work and shop resulting in a rate of land 1594 02:24:04,600 --> 02:24:09,880 consumption and spreading out which is faster than the underlying growth of the 1595 02:24:09,880 --> 02:24:15,240 population producing an unsustainable trend that is costly for the city and 1596 02:24:15,240 --> 02:24:19,560 taxpayers alike the consequences of this spreading out trend has been 1597 02:24:19,560 --> 02:24:24,880 experienced in longer auto trip lengths greater levels of congestion strained 1598 02:24:24,880 --> 02:24:29,160 environmental and fiscal resources and challenges for public services and 1599 02:24:29,160 --> 02:24:34,120 facilities to keep up with the demands of this rapidly enlarging development 1600 02:24:34,120 --> 02:24:40,360 footprint it goes on to talk about some suggested changes and tempering of the 1601 02:24:40,360 --> 02:24:45,920 current city's annexation plan in light of that then it has some things to say 1602 02:24:45,920 --> 02:24:51,820 about infrastructure infrastructure planning says another important citywide 1603 02:24:51,820 --> 02:24:55,920 land use consideration is to foster greater coordination between land use 1604 02:24:55,920 --> 02:25:01,120 policies and policies for mobility and infrastructure Denton plan 2030 should 1605 02:25:01,120 --> 02:25:05,920 become the key policy document to which future revisions of all plans and 1606 02:25:05,920 --> 02:25:12,000 programs like a bond among all city department plans and policies should be 1607 02:25:12,000 --> 02:25:16,760 revised for consistency to ensure coordination of land use mobility and 1608 02:25:16,760 --> 02:25:27,960 infrastructure planning so and then it goes on says the preferred growth 1609 02:25:27,960 --> 02:25:32,400 concept seeks to use areas of Denton with the infrastructure capacity to 1610 02:25:32,400 --> 02:25:36,480 absorb additional development to support increased density potentially creating a 1611 02:25:36,480 --> 02:25:41,320 more fiscally balanced or profitable land use mixture given the revenue 1612 02:25:41,320 --> 02:25:46,160 structure and capital demands of land uses in the city the best means to 1613 02:25:46,160 --> 02:25:50,680 maintain fiscal sustainability is to diversify and intensify the developed 1614 02:25:50,680 --> 02:25:58,000 core and at the end it gives some information about how this plan should 1615 02:25:58,000 --> 02:26:08,640 be looked at in the future and amended if necessary says basically plan 1616 02:26:08,640 --> 02:26:16,520 amendments are periodic substantive changes to the Denton 2030 plan and its 1617 02:26:16,520 --> 02:26:20,560 associated goals policies and actions as well as changes to the future land use 1618 02:26:20,560 --> 02:26:26,040 map which are necessary to accommodate changes for unforeseen circumstances in 1619 02:26:26,040 --> 02:26:30,320 a manner consistent with the public interest the planning and zoning 1620 02:26:30,320 --> 02:26:34,120 commission and City Council will accept applications for plan amendments in a 1621 02:26:34,120 --> 02:26:40,200 biannual basis via staff requests so so that's kind of just some some snippets 1622 02:26:40,200 --> 02:26:50,840 out of the 2030 plan that I found I think as I look at this the the traffic 1623 02:26:50,840 --> 02:26:57,320 studies in the regional area as I understand them assume a density of 1624 02:26:57,320 --> 02:27:01,000 development in this area that is much higher than the current future land use 1625 02:27:01,000 --> 02:27:06,040 map would that be an accurate statement Todd I'd have to go back and take a look 1626 02:27:06,040 --> 02:27:10,760 at what we actually went into that off top of my head I don't know what it was 1627 02:27:10,760 --> 02:27:15,340 referenced in the task of that model was to look at what's currently going in so 1628 02:27:15,340 --> 02:27:19,000 there have been a lot of zoning cases over several years last several years in 1629 02:27:19,000 --> 02:27:24,240 applications where density is different so that is the reality of what we as 1630 02:27:24,240 --> 02:27:27,880 traffic engineers and as transportation engineers are trying to adjust for is 1631 02:27:27,880 --> 02:27:32,760 that what we may have set out one way in 2015 at both the time the mobility plan 1632 02:27:32,760 --> 02:27:40,680 and the 2030 vision plan was things change and evolve over time and that's 1633 02:27:40,680 --> 02:27:45,480 where our struggle is is to make sure that we adjust to what's coming and where 1634 02:27:45,480 --> 02:27:50,040 we're going yeah so I mean maybe I'm not aware of all of them but most of the 1635 02:27:50,040 --> 02:27:56,840 plats and and P&Z requests I think have been in sort of the yellow area northeast 1636 02:27:56,840 --> 02:28:01,640 of the floodplain right that's more accessible to 2181 and that sort of thing 1637 02:28:01,640 --> 02:28:06,560 so we're saying we haven't had a lot of infill in this area and then we are 1638 02:28:06,560 --> 02:28:12,600 getting more and more applications in this area okay the nearer to 35 W okay 1639 02:28:12,600 --> 02:28:22,920 thank you that helps I'll just say that to me this project risks using a an 1640 02:28:22,920 --> 02:28:28,840 infrastructure project to modify the future land use map and that seems 1641 02:28:28,840 --> 02:28:34,120 potentially the wrong order I understand that the coordination of those things is 1642 02:28:34,120 --> 02:28:39,520 very difficult because on the one hand you you don't get to have the public 1643 02:28:39,520 --> 02:28:43,880 input and debate over what is important for the city do we want to move away 1644 02:28:43,880 --> 02:28:49,000 from the compact growth that we thought would make us fiscally stronger but on 1645 02:28:49,000 --> 02:28:53,400 the other hand if growth happens and you don't come in in time to Todd's point 1646 02:28:53,400 --> 02:28:59,840 you you end up not being able to make the connections because you can't get 1647 02:28:59,840 --> 02:29:07,040 the right of way right so I I just have a hard time with the chicken and egg 1648 02:29:07,040 --> 02:29:13,400 thing here because I I see the benefits certainly to this regional connection if 1649 02:29:13,400 --> 02:29:19,020 this area were to develop at sort of a three units per acre or greater certainly 1650 02:29:19,020 --> 02:29:23,440 it would be needed but the current plan as I read it says that's not what we 1651 02:29:23,440 --> 02:29:29,840 want to do so you know I I would just pose to the rest of the committee 1652 02:29:29,840 --> 02:29:36,440 members you know is it is it wise to propose a project like this when you 1653 02:29:36,440 --> 02:29:42,880 know the the map not the map but the 2030 plan just five years ago citizens 1654 02:29:42,880 --> 02:29:52,440 said that's that's not the way we want to grow yeah yeah I think a lot of what 1655 02:29:52,440 --> 02:29:56,440 you're saying is it's all true it's in the plan I think the difference with the 1656 02:29:56,440 --> 02:30:02,960 Texas plans or their aspirational many states they're legal and so it's a it's 1657 02:30:02,960 --> 02:30:06,240 a very real difference you're absolutely right with what's in that plan the fact 1658 02:30:06,240 --> 02:30:10,000 of the matter is and the reason this is being brought to you is even though we'd 1659 02:30:10,000 --> 02:30:14,520 like you know that plan you know wanted to see more intense growth infill that 1660 02:30:14,520 --> 02:30:18,800 sort of thing for all the reasons you articulated we are actually having 1661 02:30:18,800 --> 02:30:23,520 planning and development meetings almost on a monthly basis we're watching the 1662 02:30:23,520 --> 02:30:29,800 these smaller more dense are forward our six subdivisions wanting to come in an 1663 02:30:29,800 --> 02:30:37,100 infill between 35 and 377 so really the question is this for the same dollars we 1664 02:30:37,100 --> 02:30:40,640 can either solve a safety problem we've had people you know killed out there in 1665 02:30:40,640 --> 02:30:44,720 the last few years and in terms of the guardrail that guardrail gets hit so 1666 02:30:44,720 --> 02:30:50,600 often you know I live over that area and it's tore out constantly and I think the 1667 02:30:50,600 --> 02:30:55,520 question really is is that the solution long term if the committee if the 1668 02:30:55,520 --> 02:30:58,480 committee basically said it's gonna cost you the same money to either do the 1669 02:30:58,480 --> 02:31:03,600 interconnection or just go to 2181 there's not really a right answer the 1670 02:31:03,600 --> 02:31:08,640 only reason this project was brought forward is it there's no question in the 1671 02:31:08,640 --> 02:31:11,940 next five to ten years those opportunities are gone for the 1672 02:31:11,940 --> 02:31:15,400 regional connection because there's gonna be so many platted homes the city 1673 02:31:15,400 --> 02:31:18,640 would never be able to afford to go in and condemn the right away again and 1674 02:31:18,640 --> 02:31:23,240 we're having to provide answers to development community right now where 1675 02:31:23,240 --> 02:31:26,620 that where that alignment might go so they know what to dedicate to us in 1676 02:31:26,620 --> 02:31:32,520 terms of right away so your policy the policy issue is is it's a good analysis 1677 02:31:32,520 --> 02:31:38,280 of the plan we're seeing we've seen dozens of dozens of properties come in 1678 02:31:38,280 --> 02:31:43,480 directly contradicting the 2030 plan in my tenure here I've never once seen 1679 02:31:43,480 --> 02:31:47,320 development turned down because it was out of compliance with that plan so 1680 02:31:47,320 --> 02:32:04,600 that's interesting so that's one question I would like answered is that 1681 02:32:04,600 --> 02:32:10,860 specific provision that you read do you know if that was in the revised 2030 or 1682 02:32:10,860 --> 02:32:15,600 if that was dated predated back to the 1999 version so the way I read it it was 1683 02:32:15,600 --> 02:32:20,760 not a revision but it was a new plan I mean it referred to the old plan in a 1684 02:32:20,760 --> 02:32:28,240 couple of key areas actually on page 28 and 29 of the planet yeah it says how to 1685 02:32:28,240 --> 02:32:34,400 use the plan and what the paragraph that I'm reading is on 20 page 29 says as 1686 02:32:34,400 --> 02:32:37,800 many policies and actions are reoccurring and reinforced in many of 1687 02:32:37,800 --> 02:32:42,120 the elements policies and actions that overlap or cross-referenced in parentheses 1688 02:32:42,120 --> 02:32:46,440 so that implement implementation policies and actions that address 1689 02:32:46,440 --> 02:32:50,920 multiple goals may be accomplished through a single measure the policies 1690 02:32:50,920 --> 02:32:55,520 and actions that are being referenced as continuations of the 1999 Denton plan 1691 02:32:55,520 --> 02:33:00,160 are noted parenthetically citing the page number of the previous Denton plan 1692 02:33:00,160 --> 02:33:09,400 I or EG DP page 122 this is to reinforce that the Denton plan 2030 is an update 1693 02:33:09,400 --> 02:33:16,480 of the 1999 Denton plan okay thank you so so it's which theoretically went to 1694 02:33:16,480 --> 02:33:22,320 2020 yeah and we're not there yet yeah and basically what what was going on 1695 02:33:22,320 --> 02:33:28,760 because I was around at this time too and knowing what was going on in 99 it's 1696 02:33:28,760 --> 02:33:34,640 always the aspiration as you pointed out these are what we'd like to see and then 1697 02:33:34,640 --> 02:33:38,840 oh by the way people buy land and they put bring in companies and you know I 1698 02:33:38,840 --> 02:33:44,080 got a whatever that I want to put in and then City Council and the planning 1699 02:33:44,080 --> 02:33:49,200 department and everybody has to go is that really gonna be best for us because 1700 02:33:49,200 --> 02:33:54,520 we don't know yet and then we just went through the City Council you just 1701 02:33:54,520 --> 02:33:59,720 approved the whole new how we say these are what kinds of buildings can go into 1702 02:33:59,720 --> 02:34:04,240 this neighborhood yeah and that was actually an outcropping of the 2030 1703 02:34:04,240 --> 02:34:10,800 right specifically asked for an update in the zoning code yeah and I think I 1704 02:34:10,800 --> 02:34:14,880 think it's important that that you brought that up and it's important to 1705 02:34:14,880 --> 02:34:19,200 know what's there for the 2030 plan but it's also important to know like what 1706 02:34:19,200 --> 02:34:25,120 you said talk where do we want to go in the future because if we don't have any 1707 02:34:25,120 --> 02:34:29,680 clue then we're gonna have really bad roads and hopscotch here there in the 1708 02:34:29,680 --> 02:34:33,560 other place and I don't know and so that's why it's important to have these 1709 02:34:33,560 --> 02:34:37,160 conversations certainly yeah I mean personally I just wanted to kind of get 1710 02:34:37,160 --> 02:34:40,520 some feedback but personally I I understand the need to plan for the 1711 02:34:40,520 --> 02:34:45,720 future so having these conversations with some of the landowners getting some 1712 02:34:45,720 --> 02:34:49,520 easements or right-of-ways in place that makes complete sense to me right 1713 02:34:49,520 --> 02:34:56,360 because 60 years from now we don't know right but within the near term it it 1714 02:34:56,360 --> 02:35:04,280 seems to me like even for lanes assumes a density of growth that the current plan 1715 02:35:04,280 --> 02:35:08,880 says we're not supposed to do yet I mean it basically says you know that another 1716 02:35:08,880 --> 02:35:13,240 quote I didn't read said proposed developments or uses that clearly 1717 02:35:13,240 --> 02:35:17,400 support implementation of the plan should be approved conversely rezonings 1718 02:35:17,400 --> 02:35:21,120 for developments or uses that are inconsistent with the plan should not be 1719 02:35:21,120 --> 02:35:25,640 granted approval until and unless the policies of the plan are amended based 1720 02:35:25,640 --> 02:35:29,480 on the findings of fact that clearly demonstrate the need for modification so 1721 02:35:29,480 --> 02:35:33,680 I understand your point that in practice that hasn't happened right but that's 1722 02:35:33,680 --> 02:35:38,360 what I read is this is the community came together and said this is what we 1723 02:35:38,360 --> 02:36:00,880 want back in 2014 2015 and everybody did choose more I forget which one they 1724 02:36:00,880 --> 02:36:04,040 chose higher but I know that the business is usual it was the lowest in 1725 02:36:04,040 --> 02:36:08,800 the 2014 2015 public input meetings I think there were at least two from it 1726 02:36:08,800 --> 02:36:11,600 actually found a Facebook group where you can see like all the stuff they 1727 02:36:11,600 --> 02:36:19,720 looked at there's like a whole album of picture and our point is there's not a 1728 02:36:19,720 --> 02:36:23,600 right answer to this question there's just an opportunity to potentially plan 1729 02:36:23,600 --> 02:36:29,320 that route to I 35 if the committee feels that it changes the character the 1730 02:36:29,320 --> 02:36:34,480 community too much and go out there that's fine but you know Todd's job is 1731 02:36:34,480 --> 02:36:38,120 to challenge your thinking and to say we might not have this opportunity again 1732 02:36:38,120 --> 02:36:41,520 that doesn't mean it won't be here the next time there's a bond election that 1733 02:36:41,520 --> 02:36:45,760 we're coming together but you certainly you know his point is trying to 1734 02:36:45,760 --> 02:36:49,760 leverage the dollars if you want to take advantage of it today if not we're 1735 02:36:49,760 --> 02:36:53,600 possibly still recommending straight down Hickory Creek and not have to deal 1736 02:36:53,600 --> 02:36:58,800 with any more kids in the creek out there and we're continuing to still see 1737 02:36:58,800 --> 02:37:04,640 infill in fact we've been in recent development meetings with more property 1738 02:37:04,640 --> 02:37:08,220 owners that are bringing developments in south of Thistle Hill between Hickory 1739 02:37:08,220 --> 02:37:13,000 Creek and Creedale so it's going to continue infilling there and that's the 1740 02:37:13,000 --> 02:37:16,800 only point so I anytime I see an engineer being put on the spot with the 1741 02:37:16,800 --> 02:37:21,320 planning question I want to go over and save him but anyway there really there 1742 02:37:21,320 --> 02:37:25,680 really is no right answer it's only what you think is the right answer now so but 1743 02:37:25,680 --> 02:37:29,640 but what I do hear you saying is that the right the right answer is to 1744 02:37:29,640 --> 02:37:33,480 straighten out Hickory Creek definitely and that's a 34 million dollar project 1745 02:37:33,480 --> 02:37:37,560 yes because because of the it's driven because of the floodplain and the and 1746 02:37:37,560 --> 02:37:43,160 going over that railroad track okay well I thought I heard 34 million dollars 1747 02:37:43,160 --> 02:37:51,040 includes design charges to take it on over to 35 w so the design money was 1748 02:37:51,040 --> 02:37:55,240 already approved by counselor this year that's not in the 34 million that 1749 02:37:55,240 --> 02:38:01,480 project that 34 million is the construction only yes to 1830 that yes 1750 02:38:01,480 --> 02:38:06,480 if we don't get the other dollars and we're told not to then obviously it'll 1751 02:38:06,480 --> 02:38:11,560 just go to 1830 it also includes any parcels that we do have to acquire the 1752 02:38:11,560 --> 02:38:16,160 other parts of a project the design piece part of the reason we're planning 1753 02:38:16,160 --> 02:38:22,360 all the way out to 1830 or to I 35 W is that when development comes in we do 1754 02:38:22,360 --> 02:38:26,440 have the alignment that's already been settled upon these conversations boy 1755 02:38:26,440 --> 02:38:31,360 have and and development doesn't get to choose where those roadways go they go 1756 02:38:31,360 --> 02:38:37,520 there but once you have those dollars approved for a bond election you could 1757 02:38:37,520 --> 02:38:44,480 change the the alignment that changed the direction move it a little here and 1758 02:38:44,480 --> 02:38:50,680 there and so forth right it's not locked in with a large change would have to go 1759 02:38:50,680 --> 02:38:57,400 back to council yeah to avoid a tree or to avoid a driveway yes I can do that 1760 02:38:57,400 --> 02:39:05,400 but even if it went back to council it would still be within yes yeah because I 1761 02:39:05,400 --> 02:39:10,040 didn't really realize that we all signed on to be cheerleaders for this until you 1762 02:39:10,040 --> 02:39:17,640 said so but we have to have a project here that we believe in that we can sell 1763 02:39:17,640 --> 02:39:22,140 and so so let me suggest that I think we've gotten a lot of information on 1764 02:39:22,140 --> 02:39:27,520 this project and then we really want to move toward prioritization and we need 1765 02:39:27,520 --> 02:39:32,220 to look at the list as we have it and then and then I think that's where we 1766 02:39:32,220 --> 02:39:37,000 begin to talk about where does this fall on our list and it gives us the 1767 02:39:37,000 --> 02:39:43,360 opportunity to talk specifically about about the order and and what the dollar 1768 02:39:43,360 --> 02:39:50,160 figures are in that order David 1769 02:40:09,680 --> 02:40:13,720 hey well this presentation will go over the results of the most recent 1770 02:40:13,720 --> 02:40:17,960 prioritization survey this part this is the second survey that we've done 1771 02:40:17,960 --> 02:40:21,880 obviously at the last meeting we presented the initial survey and the 1772 02:40:21,880 --> 02:40:25,920 committee asked to afford another survey after some additional information and to 1773 02:40:25,920 --> 02:40:30,280 see if there were any changes to the survey itself as I as I went over last 1774 02:40:30,280 --> 02:40:35,240 time I want to emphasize the survey is only intended to contribute to the 1775 02:40:35,240 --> 02:40:39,160 conversation you're about to have this is not any kind of staff recommendation 1776 02:40:39,160 --> 02:40:44,160 but I hope that it does contribute to that conversation we also in a later 1777 02:40:44,160 --> 02:40:49,420 slide you'll see we have tied these survey results to dot to aggregate 1778 02:40:49,420 --> 02:40:53,760 dollar amounts to help facilitate that conversation of the scenarios we looked 1779 02:40:53,760 --> 02:40:57,480 at earlier those different dollar amounts what projects could you fit in 1780 02:40:57,480 --> 02:41:01,960 based on this summary obviously as we go through this process we can talk through 1781 02:41:01,960 --> 02:41:05,920 different options if we moved other other projects under each of those 1782 02:41:05,920 --> 02:41:11,120 thresholds what it would look like and I think ultimately from this conversation 1783 02:41:11,120 --> 02:41:14,520 we get to that point where the committee gets comfortable with an ultimate 1784 02:41:14,520 --> 02:41:22,120 recommendation we had 17 of the 19 members respond to the survey in total 1785 02:41:22,120 --> 02:41:26,080 and you can see the unit their rankings here we have them on the next slide too 1786 02:41:26,080 --> 02:41:30,960 if this is difficult to see for everyone but obviously a police station renovation 1787 02:41:30,960 --> 02:41:35,040 number one fire station 8 and then the police substation those three public 1788 02:41:35,040 --> 02:41:40,480 facility projects public safety facility projects for the top three in the street 1789 02:41:40,480 --> 02:41:45,840 rehab program Bonnie Bray and Hickory Creek rounding out the top six from 1790 02:41:45,840 --> 02:41:51,040 there there is somewhat of a depth to sidewalks street lighting and Ryan Road 1791 02:41:51,040 --> 02:41:56,080 and later on we'll get to the there's also the additional question asked on 1792 02:41:56,080 --> 02:41:59,840 Ryan Road so I'll go through these slides and touch on that Ryan Road piece 1793 02:41:59,840 --> 02:42:09,440 and then lead into the conversation I hope you all have here's that chart 1794 02:42:09,440 --> 02:42:14,880 showing the aggregate amount and where those lines those lines form on for the 1795 02:42:14,880 --> 02:42:18,200 different dollar amounts and we have this in the next slide where you can see it 1796 02:42:18,200 --> 02:42:22,800 broken out actually by dollar amount but just I think this graph does a good job 1797 02:42:22,800 --> 02:42:27,320 of illustrating you know as you as you start increasing the projects here's 1798 02:42:27,320 --> 02:42:30,280 what you could do at a hundred million dollars you get those first three 1799 02:42:30,280 --> 02:42:35,080 projects and then some of the street rehab obviously street rehabs a large 1800 02:42:35,080 --> 02:42:40,400 amount so it takes up a good chunk and then when 180 million dollar projects 1801 02:42:40,400 --> 02:42:43,560 which we look we looked at the impacts of that previously and we can as you're 1802 02:42:43,560 --> 02:42:47,840 having the conversation go back to those slides to highlight what those what 1803 02:42:47,840 --> 02:42:51,680 those differences are with each of the projects you get up to that Hickory Creek 1804 02:42:51,680 --> 02:42:56,080 project and then 210 million dollars right up to where street lighting fell 1805 02:42:56,080 --> 02:43:00,960 at number eight which was right in front of Ryan Road Robinson in the firing 1806 02:43:00,960 --> 02:43:07,500 range a 235 million dollar project gets you those additional it's your Ryan Road 1807 02:43:07,500 --> 02:43:15,920 Robinson in the firing range here are those broken down you can see the the 1808 02:43:15,920 --> 02:43:19,600 project funding I'll just point out a couple of those variables that are still 1809 02:43:19,600 --> 02:43:22,440 out there that we just have plugged these in for planning purposes for your 1810 02:43:22,440 --> 02:43:26,720 conversation we have an excel sheet we can get we can manipulate these as we go 1811 02:43:26,720 --> 02:43:29,760 through the conversation have just thrown four million dollars in for Ryan 1812 02:43:29,760 --> 02:43:33,400 Road 10 million for street lighting and 10 million for open space for this 1813 02:43:33,400 --> 02:43:37,800 conversation I will note we have public art down here and I think this is a 1814 02:43:37,800 --> 02:43:41,840 great time to have that conversation on public art we put it in the survey just 1815 02:43:41,840 --> 02:43:45,600 for comparison state sakes and we've shown that 2% of the total funding 1816 02:43:45,600 --> 02:43:49,040 obviously that increase as we increase the cost of public safety facilities I 1817 02:43:49,040 --> 02:43:52,920 do think it's appropriate to think about that a little separately from the actual 1818 02:43:52,920 --> 02:43:59,400 ranking it's good to see it there but to know that if we look at adjusting what 1819 02:43:59,400 --> 02:44:03,920 we do with public art it could involve a change to the public art policy which we 1820 02:44:03,920 --> 02:44:11,520 could go to council with but open that up for y'all's discussion I think the 1821 02:44:11,520 --> 02:44:21,940 survey was set up such that you couldn't really give public art a number as such 1822 02:44:21,940 --> 02:44:27,280 because it's tied into number one two and three and I think it pretty much 1823 02:44:27,280 --> 02:44:32,440 goes there whether we pick it or not because that's our policy that's a city 1824 02:44:32,440 --> 02:44:38,640 council policy unless you wanted to ask them to adjust no we already voted not 1825 02:44:38,640 --> 02:44:48,960 to yeah well two things one is we have 300 almost $300,000 sitting in the 1826 02:44:48,960 --> 02:44:56,280 public art fund right now from the 2012-2014 bond election that is unspent 1827 02:44:56,280 --> 02:45:02,680 also there is a project in progress now by Paula Collins our nationally 1828 02:45:02,680 --> 02:45:07,140 recognized brick artist who did the Quaker town brick mural in the Civic 1829 02:45:07,140 --> 02:45:16,480 Center locally and other projects and it is it is carved it is completed it is 1830 02:45:16,480 --> 02:45:22,560 waiting to be fired and it will go in at the police station on Hickory and I have 1831 02:45:22,560 --> 02:45:26,960 can you show this 1832 02:45:26,960 --> 02:45:35,400 David I didn't I don't have that page where you were saying about the 1833 02:45:35,400 --> 02:46:01,360 prioritization survey might have seen 13 of 19 I don't see how well I mean not 1834 02:46:01,360 --> 02:46:05,200 that we don't in general I'm just saying on this particular circumstance 1835 02:46:05,200 --> 02:46:12,000 is the 2% in light of the fact that we already have money sitting unused right 1836 02:46:12,000 --> 02:46:18,480 now and there is this and it's a significant project right going in at 1837 02:46:18,480 --> 02:46:24,680 the police station it's 220 foot murals carved of the history of the Denton 1838 02:46:24,680 --> 02:46:32,440 Police Department and the other buildings that the other vertical bills on this 1839 02:46:32,440 --> 02:46:37,520 bond election are not buildings that the public is going to be using a lot it's 1840 02:46:37,520 --> 02:46:44,440 not they're not rec centers they're not city halls they're not civic centers I 1841 02:46:44,440 --> 02:46:50,880 I personally have a real problem with throwing 1.3 million at public art in 1842 02:46:50,880 --> 02:47:05,160 this bond proposal can you clarify that David 300,000 sure I can pull up a the 1843 02:47:05,160 --> 02:47:09,760 previous public art presentation we did kind of show the funding as it was I 1844 02:47:09,760 --> 02:47:23,480 think it's $274,000 David could you just not sell the bonds the 1.3 so that means 1845 02:47:23,480 --> 02:47:44,400 1.3 won't go to something else I think policy I think the final bring it back 1846 02:47:44,400 --> 02:47:47,880 back up obviously it was discussed previously was that the amount increased 1847 02:47:47,880 --> 02:47:51,080 significantly so just wanted to make sure because we are gonna have that 1848 02:47:51,080 --> 02:47:55,640 conversation of what's included in the total that at least everyone was aware of 1849 02:47:55,640 --> 02:48:06,240 that that figure came out of the public art committee back up last week yes yeah 1850 02:48:06,240 --> 02:48:13,440 we're originally looking at 900,000 because of the original amount we were 1851 02:48:13,440 --> 02:48:25,360 discussing so that's why I can't see if it's 2012 62,000 65,000 unallocated 1852 02:48:25,360 --> 02:48:34,720 there and then 40,000 unallocated so so the reality is there's really 65,000 1853 02:48:34,720 --> 02:48:43,560 that's on an allocator is that right did I do there and then also 74 and from the 1854 02:48:43,560 --> 02:48:52,320 2012 program so close to 200 now I will say some of these projects these are the 1855 02:48:52,320 --> 02:48:56,240 allocation for these projects it doesn't mean these projects have been complete 1856 02:48:56,240 --> 02:49:00,840 or are nearing completion so I just we just put the total here I don't have the 1857 02:49:00,840 --> 02:49:04,520 status of all these projects I know some of them have money allocated toward them 1858 02:49:04,520 --> 02:49:09,680 but they're not complete so and I believe that in the 2012 those were 1859 02:49:09,680 --> 02:49:14,240 intended to be signage areas around overpasses some of which have been done 1860 02:49:14,240 --> 02:49:20,800 but the other there's obviously still construction at 288 and and some of 1861 02:49:20,800 --> 02:49:25,120 those areas where you might end up with those kinds of medallions or whatever 1862 02:49:25,120 --> 02:49:39,200 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 1863 02:49:39,200 --> 02:49:42,800 unspent dollars but we've shown it here is just it has been allocated toward that 1864 02:49:42,800 --> 02:49:46,760 project and I think the public art committee is having conversations on that 1865 02:49:46,760 --> 02:49:55,440 project specifically so there was a vote taken by this committee 2% 2% right under 1866 02:49:55,440 --> 02:50:02,760 option one right so so in order to have that conversation of whether or not to 1867 02:50:02,760 --> 02:50:07,040 change that vote or have another vote we need to have a motion to say hey we'd 1868 02:50:07,040 --> 02:50:12,360 like to have another proper our proper process on that would be a motion to 1869 02:50:12,360 --> 02:50:20,000 reconsider and it can only come from someone who voted in favor of the 2% he 1870 02:50:20,000 --> 02:50:24,640 voted against the 2% you can't make that motion well I wasn't here so I didn't 1871 02:50:24,640 --> 02:50:29,120 vote so I can't do it it was also not a binding vote because it was not on the 1872 02:50:29,120 --> 02:50:36,440 agenda for action it was effectively a straw poll I believe it's recorded in 1873 02:50:36,440 --> 02:50:57,120 the minutes otherwise my fair is if you start making exceptions now then it 1874 02:50:57,120 --> 02:51:02,560 impacts the future and all of a sudden we're without public art which is really 1875 02:51:02,560 --> 02:51:09,400 critical and important to the city and to it is important but this isn't our 1876 02:51:09,400 --> 02:51:14,640 last bond election that we will ever have no it's not and it's when you start 1877 02:51:14,640 --> 02:51:18,720 making exceptions and after the 2012 we made an exception that it had to be 1878 02:51:18,720 --> 02:51:23,120 vertical construction and then I think the argument would be now we want to make 1879 02:51:23,120 --> 02:51:27,120 an exception that we're going to reduce the percentage so that's that would be 1880 02:51:27,120 --> 02:51:32,480 the argument there and we're moving away from I have a question just I wanted to 1881 02:51:32,480 --> 02:51:37,840 clarify the 1.3 million we're talking about is that required my understanding 1882 02:51:37,840 --> 02:51:42,680 is it's required to be spent at those three locations no it is yeah I thought 1883 02:51:42,680 --> 02:51:47,480 that was be spent for public safety buildings but not those three locations 1884 02:51:47,480 --> 02:51:52,440 any public safety building any public safety building in the city what's 1885 02:51:52,440 --> 02:52:00,440 considered a public safety building it's not restricted to these three Tony so 1886 02:52:00,440 --> 02:52:05,580 Tony point the chief financial officer it's just to clarify so the calculation 1887 02:52:05,580 --> 02:52:10,880 of that 2% 4% is based on vertical construction so if so obviously here 1888 02:52:10,880 --> 02:52:14,840 it's based on public safety facilities and so if that's if that dollar amount 1889 02:52:14,840 --> 02:52:20,560 that 1.3 million is all put in the public safety proposition then as long 1890 02:52:20,560 --> 02:52:24,360 as that public guard is in any public safety facility doesn't have to be the 1891 02:52:24,360 --> 02:52:28,000 ones that are being proposed it could be any fire station any public safety 1892 02:52:28,000 --> 02:52:34,040 facility you're fine I just want to be very clear to that although the 2% is 1893 02:52:34,040 --> 02:52:38,360 being calculated about vertical construction that's only in the public 1894 02:52:38,360 --> 02:52:43,040 safety sector this committee could recommend to put all that 1.3 million 1895 02:52:43,040 --> 02:52:47,560 in the street proposition or a portion of it and so I just want to again those 1896 02:52:47,560 --> 02:52:51,920 are things that the committee needs to consider now once once public art is in 1897 02:52:51,920 --> 02:52:55,520 a proposition and it gets passed then we're limited to only being able to 1898 02:52:55,520 --> 02:53:00,440 spend those dollars in within that proposition in streets or in public 1899 02:53:00,440 --> 02:53:04,000 safety now if it's a standalone proposition I know you guys already 1900 02:53:04,000 --> 02:53:10,200 talked about and that's a whole different story so sorry that that helps 1901 02:53:10,200 --> 02:53:13,440 clarify some confusion I had before I guess so you're saying that we could 1902 02:53:13,440 --> 02:53:18,780 take the 2% of vertical construction and assign it to either one of the 1903 02:53:18,780 --> 02:53:23,760 propositions that we choose yes because the calculation is off of vertical 1904 02:53:23,760 --> 02:53:28,200 construction now where it gets allocated is purely up to the committee and then 1905 02:53:28,200 --> 02:53:34,280 the proposition for clarification I think the the way that the non public 1906 02:53:34,280 --> 02:53:38,680 safety proposition is written it includes parks and open space so if it 1907 02:53:38,680 --> 02:53:42,280 were included in that resolution would it have the ability to be spent by a 1908 02:53:42,280 --> 02:53:48,520 parks department in spaces so again it all depends on on what projects certainly 1909 02:53:48,520 --> 02:53:51,960 if there is going to be an open space component to this program likely there 1910 02:53:51,960 --> 02:53:55,640 will be a separate proposition right that's that's related to park 1911 02:53:55,640 --> 02:53:59,960 improvements it wouldn't be necessarily part of the streets or public safety so 1912 02:53:59,960 --> 02:54:03,880 there could be a component of public art that could go into that open space 1913 02:54:03,880 --> 02:54:20,320 theoretical proposition well I guess it comes down to is lighting public art or 1914 02:54:20,320 --> 02:54:35,600 not so if that 1.3 million goes into the street proposition then whatever public 1915 02:54:35,600 --> 02:54:41,200 art needs to be their component or tied to some type of street infrastructure 1916 02:54:41,200 --> 02:54:48,040 project it could be some of these calming art pieces it could be part of 1917 02:54:48,040 --> 02:54:52,000 retreat a retaining wall there's a number of things that the public art 1918 02:54:52,000 --> 02:54:57,760 committee could consider but again the tie is it has to be tied to a street or 1919 02:54:57,760 --> 02:55:03,480 transportation infrastructure speaking of lights like in like in Waco when you 1920 02:55:03,480 --> 02:55:07,120 go through Waco they built the bridge there by the McLean Stadium they're lit 1921 02:55:07,120 --> 02:55:10,720 up with lights that they change colors for different times of year fourth of 1922 02:55:10,720 --> 02:55:15,240 July was red white and blue it's green when they have games but is that 1923 02:55:15,240 --> 02:55:19,800 considered public art when you have LED lights and I was saying wouldn't that 1924 02:55:19,800 --> 02:55:22,960 then be something you could put into the street lighting so that you might might 1925 02:55:22,960 --> 02:55:26,520 not be a street but it would be a bridge or whatever is your lighting 1926 02:55:26,520 --> 02:55:33,600 I would just want to suggest I don't know that we need to be doing the public 1927 02:55:33,600 --> 02:55:38,600 arts committee's job in this yeah determining what is and isn't public 1928 02:55:38,600 --> 02:55:43,200 art I do think it gives us some options to be able to consider putting this in 1929 02:55:43,200 --> 02:55:51,960 into the second proposition I I would like to see us not request the 2% I 1930 02:55:51,960 --> 02:55:58,800 would like to see us request a variation in the policy and not have the 2% go to 1931 02:55:58,800 --> 02:56:02,800 public art in this bond election because we have needs that are so much more 1932 02:56:02,800 --> 02:56:05,920 critical right now 1933 02:56:09,280 --> 02:56:15,600 I'm sorry the last thing in the world you do is tell art teacher that we don't 1934 02:56:15,600 --> 02:56:21,280 want public art we live here in Denton we need to have a quality of life that's 1935 02:56:21,280 --> 02:56:27,600 attached to whatever it is we do whether it's public safety or the beauty of our 1936 02:56:27,600 --> 02:56:32,600 trees or whatever so I really appreciate what Tony said because I think that's a 1937 02:56:32,600 --> 02:56:39,600 wonderful use of that money is to put it into you know our streets and by the way 1938 02:56:39,600 --> 02:56:48,680 there are cities yes I research that do have contests for street lights I'd like 1939 02:56:48,680 --> 02:56:55,800 to make a motion all right can can we move that that million free be divided 1940 02:56:55,800 --> 02:57:03,320 proportionately between the police and public safety proposal and the streets 1941 02:57:03,320 --> 02:57:10,480 and based on not just well it's computed based on vertical but that it be 1942 02:57:10,480 --> 02:57:17,920 allocated to both the police and the street propositions based on their 1943 02:57:17,920 --> 02:57:26,240 percentage dollars well hang on so you let's just clarify you're making a 1944 02:57:26,240 --> 02:57:33,760 motion to spread the the 2% out over the two propositions that's correct and is 1945 02:57:33,760 --> 02:57:49,720 there a second no because we're still this this motion is still at 2% okay okay 1946 02:57:49,720 --> 02:57:56,280 so did I think Queen Queen's Queen got her hand up first as a as the second on 1947 02:57:56,280 --> 02:58:03,800 this okay this is not a motion to reconsider this is a motion for how to 1948 02:58:03,800 --> 02:58:10,600 spread the 2% out and so we have a motion and a second now discussion pay 1949 02:58:10,600 --> 02:58:20,760 just what I said I think our streets I know it's only 2% but 2% can you know 1950 02:58:20,760 --> 02:58:27,640 that's a million dollars effectively or more and that's real money and it can be 1951 02:58:27,640 --> 02:58:33,480 put to better use in this particular bond election at this particular time in 1952 02:58:33,480 --> 02:58:38,640 either streets or the vertical construction Patty would you have a 1953 02:58:38,640 --> 02:58:42,160 suggestion for a compromise amount perhaps it seems like there's several 1954 02:58:42,160 --> 02:58:46,840 members of the committee who are staunch advocates of public art money and others 1955 02:58:46,840 --> 02:58:51,360 who think that this bond package is pretty large already I wonder what you 1956 02:58:51,360 --> 02:58:55,520 would say to that well I think we have a motion on the floor right now so I think 1957 02:58:55,520 --> 02:59:00,680 we have to deal with it first this motion does not change the 2% 1958 02:59:07,160 --> 02:59:22,840 that's part of my problem again it is you know by being by being tied to 1959 02:59:22,840 --> 02:59:28,040 streets it can be in lots of different places where there would be traffic that 1960 02:59:28,040 --> 02:59:37,920 would see that it could be in multiple places around the city there's not it's 1961 02:59:37,920 --> 02:59:41,880 not limiting to that to these construction projects so that people can 1962 02:59:41,880 --> 02:59:48,960 see it it was proportionately based on the number of dollars in the in the 1963 02:59:48,960 --> 02:59:57,400 proposition so it would not say so you got 40 60 million out of the 230 so 1964 02:59:57,400 --> 03:00:04,680 sixty two hundred and thirties times 1.3 would go to the first pop to first 1965 03:00:04,680 --> 03:00:11,400 proposition I just have to ask how many public safety buildings are buildings 1966 03:00:11,400 --> 03:00:15,640 that the public generally goes to 1967 03:00:27,400 --> 03:00:35,520 that happens to be the police station when you go to the court 1968 03:00:35,520 --> 03:00:43,320 thinking of are you pretty much drive by it there's not really a lot of walking 1969 03:00:43,320 --> 03:00:48,200 traffic so it's harder for people to really stop and appreciate it you're 1970 03:00:48,200 --> 03:00:52,480 going too fast to really notice it so I just feel like there'd be maybe more 1971 03:00:52,480 --> 03:00:55,960 enjoyment if it were you know closer to the street or because I know a lot of 1972 03:00:55,960 --> 03:01:02,680 the safety facilities are little have a bit of a setback in a lot of cases let 1973 03:01:02,680 --> 03:01:06,840 me tell you where I think we are on this I think that that we can continue to 1974 03:01:06,840 --> 03:01:11,320 talk conceptually about it but I think we need to if you are if you have a 1975 03:01:11,320 --> 03:01:14,920 speech you want to make against the motion or a speech you want to make in 1976 03:01:14,920 --> 03:01:19,480 favor of it we need to we need to focus in on that area right now because we do 1977 03:01:19,480 --> 03:01:24,880 have a motion on the floor so I would go to if there is a speech in favor if 1978 03:01:24,880 --> 03:01:28,480 anybody would like to make that at this point or if there is a speech in 1979 03:01:28,480 --> 03:01:33,160 opposition to the motion can I ask a clarifying question about rules of 1980 03:01:33,160 --> 03:01:40,920 order okay what would be the proper procedural method to to seek an 1981 03:01:40,920 --> 03:01:46,840 amendment of the public art policy at this point well that's currently not on 1982 03:01:46,840 --> 03:01:51,840 the floor I understand and so to do that would require another motion a separate 1983 03:01:51,840 --> 03:01:56,280 motion and could that motion be made at this time or does it have to wait we 1984 03:01:56,280 --> 03:02:01,160 have to deal with this motion that's on the floor first question on the 1985 03:02:01,160 --> 03:02:08,200 structure of the proposition so if if you had public art based upon vertical 1986 03:02:08,200 --> 03:02:15,440 structures at 2% how would those be divided within the propositions just 1987 03:02:15,440 --> 03:02:23,040 however the committee because I recall the vote we had before straw poll or we 1988 03:02:23,040 --> 03:02:28,360 don't call it was was more about where where would public art be in a 1989 03:02:28,360 --> 03:02:32,960 proposition should be a separate proposition or should it be within the 1990 03:02:32,960 --> 03:02:39,160 in the public safety proposition and that's how we vote I don't I don't know 1991 03:02:39,160 --> 03:02:47,200 that it was what could be what I'm saying is there was a vote whether we 1992 03:02:47,200 --> 03:02:54,200 have it as a separate proposition and I know this is kind of getting off-subject 1993 03:02:54,200 --> 03:03:02,000 tail but it has a little bit of bearing on how I'm looking at it it's a it's a 1994 03:03:02,000 --> 03:03:09,120 much larger I'm all for public art but I don't it's a much larger number than we 1995 03:03:09,120 --> 03:03:18,480 have ever looked at from a public art standpoint and so being that much it 1996 03:03:18,480 --> 03:03:25,260 would be I'd be more comfortable if the voters decided that we wanted to have 1997 03:03:25,260 --> 03:03:31,400 the public art so you're proposing it be a separate line yeah but that's that's 1998 03:03:31,400 --> 03:03:35,680 that goes that has to we have to deal with the motions on the floor now 1999 03:03:35,680 --> 03:03:41,280 basically we'd have to vote motion down and then make another motion right I 2000 03:03:41,280 --> 03:03:49,400 would be okay withdraw yeah and then make another motion with this motion we 2001 03:03:49,400 --> 03:03:54,960 don't have to ask the City Council to change the policy right and we can 2002 03:03:54,960 --> 03:04:04,200 allocate it in other ways other than I have no problem with asking the City 2003 03:04:04,200 --> 03:04:13,400 Council to change policy they can do is say no on the 27th David I think it was 2004 03:04:13,400 --> 03:04:20,640 on the 27th so proportionally the what the motion you made is about 30% of this 2005 03:04:20,640 --> 03:04:25,760 would be spent on public safety facilities and about 70% on the second 2006 03:04:25,760 --> 03:04:35,680 proposition and I think on if we do 230 million that's what about 345,000 on 2007 03:04:35,680 --> 03:04:44,420 public safety yeah go down yeah but I need to see what the recommendation was 2008 03:04:44,420 --> 03:04:49,600 the paragraph Smith asked on the direction to include the following of 2009 03:04:49,600 --> 03:04:56,320 potential recommendation funding and be included in public safety facilities so 2010 03:04:56,320 --> 03:05:00,560 we'd have to we can't even have this conversation we can't have this vote 2011 03:05:00,560 --> 03:05:07,360 without doing a revision to that one I think the way I'm not a minute I think 2012 03:05:07,360 --> 03:05:12,560 the way this reads would be Pat made this motion but then Tim made a second 2013 03:05:12,560 --> 03:05:23,000 motion that just said 2% but it says calculated from vertical structure 2014 03:05:23,000 --> 03:05:29,240 construction has stipulated in the current policy and public safety 2015 03:05:29,240 --> 03:05:39,600 facilities proposition without it being on the agenda as an action item it is 2016 03:05:39,600 --> 03:05:44,760 not a binding vote and I think I call the point of order on this for that very 2017 03:05:44,760 --> 03:05:56,880 reason I would recommend that take whatever whatever we need to do to 2018 03:05:56,880 --> 03:05:59,880 preface it and just take a moat make a motion on whatever the committee 2019 03:05:59,880 --> 03:06:04,800 desires at this time and we can just as you start the motion say superseding any 2020 03:06:04,800 --> 03:06:12,260 previous motion this now takes effect okay we could go that route and that 2021 03:06:12,260 --> 03:06:15,080 would require the maker of the motion to withdraw the motion the maker of the 2022 03:06:15,080 --> 03:06:28,200 second to say okay I withdraw my motion and are you okay with that you know what 2023 03:06:28,200 --> 03:06:34,480 y'all have to excuse me because this is my first time so yeah I second the 2024 03:06:34,480 --> 03:06:45,560 motion to withdraw correct you're just agree to that motion oh okay okay now is 2025 03:06:45,560 --> 03:06:52,640 there is there a new motion that someone would like to put on the floor I move 2026 03:06:52,640 --> 03:06:57,480 that we ask the City Council to revise the policy or make an exception to the 2027 03:06:57,480 --> 03:07:03,880 policy so that the 2% that has been previously applied to public art in 2028 03:07:03,880 --> 03:07:08,320 vertical construction on bond elections not be applied to vertical construction 2029 03:07:08,320 --> 03:07:17,960 but to go into the the bond to the vertical construction itself or be 2030 03:07:17,960 --> 03:07:28,240 divided between that in streets I think your motion is a little vague right now 2031 03:07:28,240 --> 03:07:32,800 let's let's see if we can if we can find a way to tighten that up a little bit 2032 03:07:32,800 --> 03:07:36,400 let me see if I find well go ahead 2033 03:07:36,400 --> 03:07:51,960 in this election we have too many streets that need too much repair okay 2034 03:07:51,960 --> 03:08:01,680 so that is not what we had talked about having the motion to be so I think so if 2035 03:08:01,680 --> 03:08:06,360 I may what I'm hearing is potentially there would be some compromise if the 2036 03:08:06,360 --> 03:08:12,060 amount were reduced from 2% but that would require council action to make an 2037 03:08:12,060 --> 03:08:19,360 exception or modify the policy and then the choice of whether we assign it to 2038 03:08:19,360 --> 03:08:29,480 one or the other proposition or would be up to us but if we wanted to as sorry 2039 03:08:29,480 --> 03:08:37,800 sorry just past you yes no not just past Janet okay Randy as Randy suggested 2040 03:08:37,800 --> 03:08:43,760 potentially again reconsidering having it as a third proposition that would 2041 03:08:43,760 --> 03:08:49,960 also require an amendment to the policy is that accurate okay so I would like to 2042 03:08:49,960 --> 03:08:58,960 move that we I'd like to move that we ask council to amend the policy either 2043 03:08:58,960 --> 03:09:06,760 temporarily or permanently so that we could consider a value down to 1% and 2044 03:09:06,760 --> 03:09:16,200 that we would have the freedom to assign it to an individual bond item sorry 2045 03:09:16,200 --> 03:09:22,600 proposal if that's what the committee decides we already have that freedom we 2046 03:09:22,600 --> 03:09:26,480 can we can say we want it to be a standalone proposition okay then then 2047 03:09:26,480 --> 03:09:32,320 just strike the last clause of that and just say that I move to ask council to 2048 03:09:32,320 --> 03:09:37,960 make a an amendment to the to the proposal so that we could consider an 2049 03:09:37,960 --> 03:09:44,660 amount down to 1% just the the change would be to the policy itself not to the 2050 03:09:44,660 --> 03:09:49,400 establishing resolution of the committee yes so it's oh I think to do that you 2051 03:09:49,400 --> 03:09:53,240 would need to have a percent because right now says two to four so yeah okay 2052 03:09:53,240 --> 03:10:00,000 thank you so I move thank you for your patience I move that we ask council to 2053 03:10:00,000 --> 03:10:07,400 change the policy so that an amount for public art can be considered from the 2054 03:10:07,400 --> 03:10:11,200 range of one to four percent as opposed to two to four percent which is the 2055 03:10:11,200 --> 03:10:18,620 current policy would you be willing to make that a standalone item so that the 2056 03:10:18,620 --> 03:10:22,800 voters can decide that's an option that's before the committee already this 2057 03:10:22,800 --> 03:10:27,520 yeah we're just asking that we're asking the the count the council to change a 2058 03:10:27,520 --> 03:10:34,360 policy it where his motion is to change the policy to as low as 1% the 2059 03:10:34,360 --> 03:10:42,160 standalone proposition is something that's still at our discretion just a 2060 03:10:42,160 --> 03:10:48,080 very quick comment you know certainly the committee has a limited time so in 2061 03:10:48,080 --> 03:10:51,720 order for do kind of what you're saying we can certainly do that I think the 2062 03:10:51,720 --> 03:10:55,400 easiest way would be that if the committee is really wanting to consider 2063 03:10:55,400 --> 03:11:00,520 1% that part of your proposal back to the council along with amending that 2064 03:11:00,520 --> 03:11:06,840 policy is that you've submitted to them a 1% of public art to go into one of 2065 03:11:06,840 --> 03:11:10,960 these propositions or a standalone proposition and I think that that would 2066 03:11:10,960 --> 03:11:15,560 cover you and it would avoid us having to go to the council next week have this 2067 03:11:15,560 --> 03:11:19,240 conversation and that way it's all just packaged together so I think I think 2068 03:11:19,240 --> 03:11:24,580 your your recommendation is a valid one I would just encourage you to if it's 2069 03:11:24,580 --> 03:11:29,040 gonna be 1% where would you want that in which proposition or would it be a 2070 03:11:29,040 --> 03:11:33,480 standalone that does that make sense yes it's a bit it sounds like your 2071 03:11:33,480 --> 03:11:37,480 suggestion is that we don't need to ask for the policy to be amended we can just 2072 03:11:37,480 --> 03:11:40,600 decide what we'd like to do and then make that as part of our final proposal 2073 03:11:40,600 --> 03:11:44,600 certainly and if the council does not want to amend the public art proposition 2074 03:11:44,600 --> 03:11:49,160 then either council just drops public art entirely or the council could come 2075 03:11:49,160 --> 03:12:00,080 up with a different allocation okay okay so I think I think we needed we we need 2076 03:12:00,080 --> 03:12:05,880 a motion that that addresses that and I think your motion is your motion would 2077 03:12:05,880 --> 03:12:16,040 be that that we suggest that there were that you would move a 1% rather than 2% 2078 03:12:16,040 --> 03:12:21,400 yes and and my primary reasoning for that is that I was more comfortable with 2079 03:12:21,400 --> 03:12:26,240 2% when the vertical construction total was around 40 million and now it's up to 2080 03:12:26,240 --> 03:12:33,520 60 million so so is there a second 2081 03:12:42,520 --> 03:12:45,680 so I think the right I think the right way to start that off is that you're 2082 03:12:45,680 --> 03:12:51,280 moving to include in our final recommendation insert whatever it is 2083 03:12:51,280 --> 03:12:56,240 that you would like to have in final recommendation then we all vote on that 2084 03:12:56,240 --> 03:13:11,600 okay so so so I'll move to include for public art a total of 1% for vertical 2085 03:13:11,600 --> 03:13:18,560 construction but distribute that between the well I'm sorry I withdraw my motion 2086 03:13:18,560 --> 03:13:23,160 I don't feel like we've finished the discussion about how we would want to 2087 03:13:23,160 --> 03:13:27,520 allocate this I've heard several different ideas 2088 03:13:27,520 --> 03:13:32,920 why don't we shift the focus of our conversation why don't we table public 2089 03:13:32,920 --> 03:13:35,880 art for now because we're not making much progress on that let's get to some 2090 03:13:35,880 --> 03:13:41,120 of the other not to say that they're more important but the more higher dollar 2091 03:13:41,120 --> 03:13:56,200 value items on our plate at this moment so we can get through all this I think 2092 03:13:56,200 --> 03:14:00,320 I think ultimately when we come back next week obviously we're gonna be trying 2093 03:14:00,320 --> 03:14:04,360 to get to a decision so we're gonna come in with with three or four action items 2094 03:14:04,360 --> 03:14:08,720 of let's decide public art let's decide the total amount dollar amount let's 2095 03:14:08,720 --> 03:14:12,440 decide the projects and then make that ultimate recommendation so we could just 2096 03:14:12,440 --> 03:14:15,840 roll that into that I think this is obviously a good conversation in advance 2097 03:14:15,840 --> 03:14:19,760 of that and that way we don't have to do a motion that you've got to try to figure 2098 03:14:19,760 --> 03:14:24,080 out what what what it is we mean we expect the best motion that any of us 2099 03:14:24,080 --> 03:14:40,880 have seen an entire committee next time my hope was we were going to get to the 2100 03:14:40,880 --> 03:14:58,880 prioritization list and how late do you all want to stay and I know for many 2101 03:14:58,880 --> 03:15:07,200 others as well and it's yeah my day is not over yet can I actually make a 2102 03:15:07,200 --> 03:15:11,600 motion yes and it's gonna be crazy y'all are gonna think I just want us in this 2103 03:15:11,600 --> 03:15:15,960 thing but I'm gonna make a motion that this bond committee recommends to the 2104 03:15:15,960 --> 03:15:22,400 City Council items 1 through 10 the police station the fire station the 2105 03:15:22,400 --> 03:15:26,560 substation the street we have added the rehab program of 70 million Bonnie break 2106 03:15:26,560 --> 03:15:31,960 Hickory Creek right at 34 million sidewalks at 12 mean street lights at 2107 03:15:31,960 --> 03:15:38,280 13.8 million actually and Ryan road right at he's making a motion yes Ryan 2108 03:15:38,280 --> 03:15:45,080 road at 4 million and Robinson road at 12.3 that's exactly 235 million dollars 2109 03:15:45,080 --> 03:15:49,560 with no funding for public art 2110 03:15:49,560 --> 03:15:58,320 was that the bad one okay retractable no funding public art but if the public 2111 03:15:58,320 --> 03:16:04,400 art has to be taken out of that number then it's still one through ten and it's 2112 03:16:04,400 --> 03:16:07,800 still one through ten but maybe maybe the street lighting or the sidewalk 2113 03:16:07,800 --> 03:16:14,600 problem has to be addressed all right there's a motion is there a second 2114 03:16:18,840 --> 03:16:29,400 I think that motion is gonna die second I had to try I like the way you're 2115 03:16:29,400 --> 03:16:35,960 thinking I would like to make a motion that we make a recommendation of items 2116 03:16:35,960 --> 03:16:48,480 1 through 6 1 through 6 exactly as presented and then we're gonna have to 2117 03:16:48,480 --> 03:16:52,080 discuss about the rest of it I don't know how to put that into my motion 2118 03:16:52,080 --> 03:16:57,920 though but I would like to have a at least that we can agree and not have to 2119 03:16:57,920 --> 03:17:03,160 sit here and go a line by line by line by line so my motion is to first make a 2120 03:17:03,160 --> 03:17:08,360 recommendation of 1 through 6 those be included that those definitely be 2121 03:17:08,360 --> 03:17:15,320 included no discussion we're done let's go there's a second for that motion I'd 2122 03:17:15,320 --> 03:17:19,440 like to offer a friendly amendment is it possible after the second you know 2123 03:17:19,440 --> 03:17:24,360 according to Roberts rules there's no such thing as a friendly amendment so 2124 03:17:24,360 --> 03:17:30,360 what do you want to do I think there's probably more disagreement on Hickory 2125 03:17:30,360 --> 03:17:34,380 Creek than the other five projects so would you be willing to just say one 2126 03:17:34,380 --> 03:17:42,200 through five for now and then then have that discussion for the conversation yes 2127 03:17:42,200 --> 03:17:49,720 I will change my motion to one to five and I will agree to that to be included 2128 03:17:49,720 --> 03:18:02,480 in our final recommendation all right there is a motion there is a second is 2129 03:18:02,480 --> 03:18:08,480 there any further discussion so let me ask question if we if we approve this 2130 03:18:08,480 --> 03:18:14,720 motion 1 through 5 is there any change that can be done on the first five not 2131 03:18:14,720 --> 03:18:19,480 taking them out for reducing but increasing yeah it's like Tim said so the 2132 03:18:19,480 --> 03:18:23,640 someone who originally votes on this in the future would have to come back and 2133 03:18:23,640 --> 03:18:36,720 make a motion okay any any other discussion seeing none all in favor of 2134 03:18:36,720 --> 03:18:41,800 the motion to make one through five part of this bond package would you please 2135 03:18:41,800 --> 03:18:59,520 raise your right hand opposed did you get it or not what okay all right so 2136 03:18:59,520 --> 03:19:09,760 that motion does pass the we can go on or we can take up the rest of it next 2137 03:19:09,760 --> 03:19:17,640 week what's your preference can I just make one note about next week next week 2138 03:19:17,640 --> 03:19:22,240 that I think the intent of next week will will be to just kind of jump 2139 03:19:22,240 --> 03:19:25,760 straight into this conversation and the public conversation if you have questions 2140 03:19:25,760 --> 03:19:29,240 on projects we can answer if we answer them but there won't be a formal 2141 03:19:29,240 --> 03:19:32,640 presentation on on any other projects we're just kind of getting straight to 2142 03:19:32,640 --> 03:19:36,920 this so that we can get that action because last next Thursday is really our 2143 03:19:36,920 --> 03:19:42,720 firm deadline okay David when we come back can we also have it was on an 2144 03:19:42,720 --> 03:19:49,120 early presentation I think it's in the first or second meeting of what the 2145 03:19:49,120 --> 03:19:57,000 leverage factor is on the rest of these let me just suggest maybe that on the 2146 03:19:57,000 --> 03:20:02,320 spreadsheet to sort of show that as a separate column that way we need to have 2147 03:20:02,320 --> 03:20:05,640 a presentation or discussion about it just to see that yeah just put the 2148 03:20:05,640 --> 03:20:12,200 visual up there is a motion to adjourn is there a second all in favor 2149 03:20:12,200 --> 03:20:18,960 opposed that motion is carried